First of all, I'd like to say thanks to Chris for the information and openness in sharing the results of looking into the HDT issue and getting a result that at least secures past usage.
Whilst my thinking is obvious from the post below, please note that I'm not yet advocating a position as I'd like to understand the issue a little better first.
The questions I'm thinking of are whether the outcome of Chris' work with the ATO (1) changes the functionality of the deed compared to when it was provided to me (early 05), and (2) whether it is right that I should pay to have it fixed to the degree it can.
In relation to (1); I recognise that's a question I have to answer for myself.
In relaiton to (2); I have received a letter from my accountant recently who put me onto HDT's. They have asked for a considerable sum to update the deed as has been discussed in this forum. If I don't update then I'm looking at very large denied interest deductions.
The question that occurs to me is whether there was a change in tax law making the deed 'not work' after the establishment of the deed (in my case early 05 and at a cost of over $2k), or whether the deed has now been shown to never have been compliant.
If it was never compliant, I'm interested in views (either way) on the rationale as to whether it is right for the consumer to pay to fix a product that may now be shown to never have worked as advertised?
Whilst my thinking is obvious from the post below, please note that I'm not yet advocating a position as I'd like to understand the issue a little better first.
The questions I'm thinking of are whether the outcome of Chris' work with the ATO (1) changes the functionality of the deed compared to when it was provided to me (early 05), and (2) whether it is right that I should pay to have it fixed to the degree it can.
In relation to (1); I recognise that's a question I have to answer for myself.
In relaiton to (2); I have received a letter from my accountant recently who put me onto HDT's. They have asked for a considerable sum to update the deed as has been discussed in this forum. If I don't update then I'm looking at very large denied interest deductions.
The question that occurs to me is whether there was a change in tax law making the deed 'not work' after the establishment of the deed (in my case early 05 and at a cost of over $2k), or whether the deed has now been shown to never have been compliant.
If it was never compliant, I'm interested in views (either way) on the rationale as to whether it is right for the consumer to pay to fix a product that may now be shown to never have worked as advertised?