Residential rental property assets—list of assets and proposed effective lives

ATO has moved the goalposts again! Checked my QS reports against their new amended list. Lots of changes. Have to go through having my QS reports amended yet again. Went through this last year after the Woodward case. My guess is that depreciation is costing the Government in lost revenue with the rise in property investors over the last couple of years and this will help to slow it down a bit!

The ATO list: http://www.ato.gov.au/large/content.asp?doc=/content/42604.htm

Depro comment:​

A recent posting on the ATO web site entitled Effective Life Review – Residential Rental Property invited public comment during the week ending 24 March. Well into the third paragraph it is revealed that “as part of the review a list has been prepared of those items which are considered to be depreciating assets and for which deductions may be available.” Most of the general public would not know of or be privy to this document and those who are would not be fully aware of the consequences.
Over the past few years the Government has gradually whittled away at the depreciation returns available on residential investment property and with the latest amendment it is evident that the ATO has been instructed to reduce the amount of allowance to investors even further.
Investors lose $2.4 billion next year in property allowances.
The effects of the ATO changes will result in a massive $2.4 billion per annum loss to residential property investors. The changes which class certain assets as structural, not plant, result in a lower depreciation allowance and in the case of older properties a complete loss as they do not qualify for building allowance. Investors who have purchased off the plan and have utilised depreciation to assist their cash flow to generate an acceptable yield will be disappointed at the prospect of the ATO changes.

With the latest housing boom all Governments at the state level have made tidy profits on the stamp duty revenue collected. It would seem that the Federal Government now wants their piece of the pie by taking back incentives that have been in place for decades.
 
Hi Fester
It seems that the ATO's new depreciation ruling is effecting the new market more than the existing or older properties, at least for the short term.
Kind regards
Simon
 
Here is an article related to the subject a friend sent me yesterday.(Ithink it was from the FR.
Depreciation gains to diminish for investors
By Peter Weekes
March 27, 2004

Negative gearing may be a sacred cow, but it seems depreciation is not. While home owners are now sleeping easier knowing that another interest rate rise is unlikely, potential property investors who don't buy soon are in for a rude shock.

From July 1 the cashflow generated by depreciation will dry up. This is significant as it has helped to sustain the residential investment market as vacancy rates rise and yields sag.

This week the Australian Tax Office circulated a proposed determination that will change the effective life of many items in an investment property. This alters the rate of depreciation investors can claim as a tax deduction. The changes will be in place for the next financial year and will apply only to properties purchased after July 1.

Depreciation experts say the move will reduce the deductions available to investors by as much as 25 per cent. Smaller deductions reduce the cashflow most investors use to help finance the property.

Nicola Woodward, a director of tax depreciation consultancy Apex Property Consulting, predicts the changes could wipe off as much as 1 per cent from residential yields, which are already lower than other forms of investments such as shares.

In the 2000-01 financial year, Australia's 1.3 million property investors told the ATO that expenditure exceeded income generated from their investments by about $700 million.

Australia is one of the few countries in the world that allows investors to offset the cost of investments against their taxable income through both negative gearing and depreciation. That is, all taxpayers subsidise the nation's property investors.

Depreciation was introduced as a pay-off by the Keating government when it introduced capital gains tax in 1985.

There are two depreciation schedules. One relates to the building itself and includes items such as lifts and swimming pools, while the other covers fixtures like carpeting and lighting.

Experts say the move will reduce the deductions available to investors by as much as 25 per cent.

For contracts exchanged after July 1, the effective life of items like the pool filtration system will be extended, while the life of other items is reduced.

Both Apex Property's Nicola Woodward and Scott Brunsdon of Depreciator.com welcome the changes as they remove the "grey areas", but Brunsdon warns there will be losers in the short term.

"If someone buys an apartment off the plan after July 1, they are probably going to be disadvantaged," Brunsdon said.

"They will find there is less depreciation available compared with if they bought today.

"People who buy a five-year-old house are going to find they can claim more depreciation because things like ovens and washing machines now depreciate a lot more quickly."

Crunching the numbers, he said an investor who owns an older-style house in Burwood can claim $11,432 in depreciation under the new rules against $10,584 under the current rules, an 8.01 per cent increase in the first year.

However for someone who buys a new two-bedroom apartment in the Docklands, the amount they can claim will fall by 7.51 per cent to $14,128 in the first year and by 4.96 per cent in the fourth year.

Still, over 40 years, the investors will break-even, Brunsdon said.

"They still get it back in the end but only if they hang around for 40 years."
 
Thanks Simon. Thats a different slant. For properties purchased after July 1st 2004. That is better for me anyway!!
 
I think it may be a ploy by government to push new investors back into the share market. Trying to create a balance on things.
Kind regards
Simon
 
Brenda, I find it does the same to me sometimes! Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
Get this error:
An error has occurred
Source : Content; DocumentIndexFile.ReadFile ; DocumentIndex.ReadIndex ; DocumentIndex.Index ; ContentRenderer.DocumentVPath[Let]
Number : 62
Description : Input past end of file

Whatever that is!
 
Back
Top