Hi All,
Not wanting to go into the pros and cons of using trusts for asset protection purposes, as his seems to ahve been done to death in another post, may I please ask how people are generally structuring their IP purposes, nowadays.
It would seem to me that if you purchased in a discretionary trust, this would be OK (notwithstanding costs) if you had income from another source that could be streamed into the trust to soak-up any negatively-geared losses (e.g. own business in a trust which is has excess taxable income to distribute to the IP trust).
I also understand that hybrid trusts appear to be attacked by the loveable ATO and I think any benefits still attached to them currently will only become more "challenged" (from a tax view-point anyway).
I have always been concerned about holding an IP in my own name (notwithstanding the tax benefits) as it is important to me to sleep at night and if something happens and an insurance company deems me to be criminally-negligent in not having done something under the policy, then I could be liable. However, is this really an issue if I don't have any other assets and the only thing a litgant could take me for is the IP and even then the bank has first "dibs" on it.
Any thoughts you have on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Zargor
Not wanting to go into the pros and cons of using trusts for asset protection purposes, as his seems to ahve been done to death in another post, may I please ask how people are generally structuring their IP purposes, nowadays.
It would seem to me that if you purchased in a discretionary trust, this would be OK (notwithstanding costs) if you had income from another source that could be streamed into the trust to soak-up any negatively-geared losses (e.g. own business in a trust which is has excess taxable income to distribute to the IP trust).
I also understand that hybrid trusts appear to be attacked by the loveable ATO and I think any benefits still attached to them currently will only become more "challenged" (from a tax view-point anyway).
I have always been concerned about holding an IP in my own name (notwithstanding the tax benefits) as it is important to me to sleep at night and if something happens and an insurance company deems me to be criminally-negligent in not having done something under the policy, then I could be liable. However, is this really an issue if I don't have any other assets and the only thing a litgant could take me for is the IP and even then the bank has first "dibs" on it.
Any thoughts you have on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Zargor