Mark Armstrong

<html><body>
First home buyers are fighting with a 100 pound gorilla with one arm tied behind their backs as they compete with investors who have the luxury of negative gearing and superannuation funds.
I believe the answer to improving affordability lies in rethinking superannuation laws and first home buyer grants.
Historically the family home has been the corner stone of ones wealth but this is in danger of being lost. Superannuation was implemented to help people self fund their own retirement and compliment the wealth in their family homes. I believe that allowing first home buyers to access their super and assist them in laying that foundation keeps within the spirit of superannuation.
A worker who earns the average Australian income of $50,000 a year will have around $36,000 in super by the time they are 30 not including any return on their investments. As a couple that is $72,000! They also have the benefit of diverting more of their income into a tax-sheltered environment. It would not be unreasonable for a first home buying couple to have in excess of $100,000 in super by the time they want to purchase their first home.
A large deposit like this would mean first home buyers have more equity in their home and as a result in a more stable financial position. It would also save a significant amount in interest. For example if a first home buyer had a $100,000 deposit they would only need to borrow around 80% of the property value rather than 90% or more. On a $500,000 home that would save them $2,500 to $3,000 per annum in interest.
They would also avoid paying a hefty mortgage insurance bill of around $5,000 to $10,000 in most cases.
Buying a property is only the first step to home ownership. Keeping up with the mortgage payments is where the real pain starts to bite. If governments really want to help with home ownership they should look at providing ongoing assistance and review first home buyer grants.
First home buyer grants have evolved over the years but on average they provide first home buyers with around $10,000 cash or stamp duty saving benefits. Rather than paying first home buyers a lump sum payment that is usually paid to the banks for mortgage insurance, I believe annual payments will be more effective and a better use of taxpayer money. An annual payment of $2,000 a year for the first five years would help first home buyers establish themselves in the market.
While the devil is in the detail the points outlined above provide a win-win outcome. The government wins as it helps solve first home buyer affordability at no extra cost. The economy wins, as more money will flow into the important building industry. First home buyers win as they will enter the market without paying mortgage insurance and save around $5,000 per annum in holding costs for the first five years.
There is a potential downside in that it would place further pressure on property prices. However this is already happening even without first home buyers and these ideas will go a long way to levelling the playing field between first home buyers and investors.
They would help young Australians into the market and start the process of building wealth in one of our most powerful tax-free investments – our home.
MARK ARMSTRONG is a director of <a href="https://ratemyagent.com.au/" target="_blank">ratemyagent.com.au</a>, Australia’s number one real estate agent rating website.
This article was originally published on Property Observer in October 2013.
</body></html>

marmstrong-sd3emVLPPb

Allowing first home buyers access to super is the answer to the affordability dilemma

<html><body>
First home buyers are fighting with a 100 pound gorilla with one arm tied behind their backs as they compete with investors who have the luxury of negative gearing and superannuation funds.
But laws around negative gearing and super are unlikely to change so it’s time to revisit the issue.
I believe the answer lies in rethinking superannuation laws and first home buyer grants.
Historically the family home has been the corner stone of ones wealth but this is in danger of being lost. Superannuation was implemented to help people self fund their own retirement and compliment the wealth in their family homes. I believe that allowing first home buyers to access their super and assist them in laying that foundation keeps within the spirit of superannuation.
 A worker who earns the average Australian income of $50,000 a year will have around $36,000 in super by the time they are 30 not including any return on their investments. As a couple that is $72,000! They also have the benefit of diverting more of their income into a tax-sheltered environment. It would not be unreasonable for a first home buying couple to have in excess of $100,000 in super by the time they want to purchase their first home.
<blockquote>
Buying a property is only the first step to home ownership. Keeping up with the mortgage payments is where the real pain starts to bite.
</blockquote>
A large deposit like this would mean first home buyers have more equity in their home and as a result in a more stable financial position. It would also save a significant amount in interest. For example if a first homebuyer had a $100,000 deposit they would only need to borrow around 80% of the property value rather than 90% or more. On a $500,000 home that would save them $2,500 to $3,000 per annum in interest.
They would also avoid paying a hefty mortgage insurance bill of around $5,000 to $10,000 in most cases.
Buying a property is only the first step to home ownership. Keeping up with the mortgage payments is where the real pain starts to bite. If governments really want to help with home ownership they should look at providing ongoing assistance and review first home buyer grants.
First home buyer grants have evolved over the years but on average they provide first home buyers with around $10,000 cash or stamp duty saving benefits. Rather than paying first home buyers a lump sum payment that is usually paid to the banks for mortgage insurance, I believe annual payments will be more effective and a better use of taxpayer money. An annual payment of $2,000 a year for the first five years would help first home buyers establish themselves in the market.
While the devil is in the detail the points outlined above provide a win-win outcome. The government wins as it helps solve first home buyer affordability at no extra cost. The economy wins, as more money will flow into the important building industry. First home buyers win as they will enter the market without paying mortgage insurance and save around $5,000 per annum in holding costs for the first five years.
There is a potential downside in that it would place further pressure on property prices. However this is already happening even without first home buyers and these ideas will go a long way to levelling the playing field between first home buyers and investors.
They would help young Australians into the market and start the process of building wealth in one of our most powerful tax-free investments – our home.
Mark Armstrong is a director of <a href="https://www.ipropertyplan.com.au/">iProperty Plan</a>, which provides independent analysis and tailored advice to investors and home buyers.
This article was first published on Property Observer in October, 2013.
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE TO READ:
<a href="/expert-insights/buying/31501-exclusive-first-home-buyer-picks-from-the-experts" target="_blank" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/finding/residential-investment/1st-home-buyer/31501-exclusive-first-home-buyer-picks-from-the-experts.html&amp;sa=U&amp;ei=4lSOU9OGBoLh8AWz04LoBw&amp;ved=0CAoQFjAC&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;usg=AFQjCNEsLTG_yhrdXMWc6K0tUs4ExH4zkg" data-ctorig="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/finding/residential-investment/1st-home-buyer/31501-exclusive-first-home-buyer-picks-from-the-experts.html">Exclusive: First home buyer picks from the experts</a>
<a href="/expert-insights/buying/65-first-home-buyers/31872-how-will-rising-student-debt-affect-first-home-buyers" target="_blank" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/forward-planning/investment-strategy/65-first-home-buyers/31872-how-will-rising-student-debt-affect-first-home-buyers.html&amp;sa=U&amp;ei=4lSOU9OGBoLh8AWz04LoBw&amp;ved=0CBYQFjAI&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;usg=AFQjCNGpdo7JW0MfB1BezFddwp63td8zaA" data-ctorig="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/forward-planning/investment-strategy/65-first-home-buyers/31872-how-will-rising-student-debt-affect-first-home-buyers.html">How will rising student debt affect first home buyers?</a>
<a href="/expert-insights/buying/31603-the-national-guide-to-first-home-buyer-grants" target="_blank" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/finding/residential-investment/1st-home-buyer/31603-the-national-guide-to-first-home-buyer-grants.html&amp;sa=U&amp;ei=B1WOU4udC5Pf8AXF_YDYDg&amp;ved=0CAYQFjAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;usg=AFQjCNFHQorVTsJrTVRgPVX0IFEiP5Ph8w" data-ctorig="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/finding/residential-investment/1st-home-buyer/31603-the-national-guide-to-first-home-buyer-grants.html">The national guide to first home buyer grants</a>
</body></html>

It's time to re-think first home buyer grants

<html><body>
When you’re buying residential property, you’re understandably focused on what to buy, where to buy it, and how much you’ll have to spend.
In the effort to get the ‘what’, ‘where’ and ‘how’ right, it’s easy to overlook the ‘who’—that is, the name that will appear on the title as the property’s legally recognised owner.  
There are four forms of ownership: personal name, company, trust and self-managed super fund (SMSF). Each one has different implications for your property’s security and tax effectiveness. It’s important to determine the appropriate form of ownership before you buy, because by changing it afterwards, you could be up for thousands in additional stamp duty and/or capital gains tax (CGT).  
Each form of ownership suits different personal circumstances, and has a range of pros and cons. Let’s look at each in turn.  
Personal name
Under this form of ownership, you as an individual, or with other individuals, appear on the title to the property. Generally speaking, personal name ownership is suitable for the vast majority of residential property owners. This includes people who are buying a home to live in, because personal name ownership enables them to claim a full CGT exemption. It also includes people on high salaried incomes who are buying an investment property and want to use negative gearing benefits to reduce their tax bill.  
On the flipside, owning a residential investment property in your personal name means that when the property becomes positively geared or is sold, you must pay tax in your name at your marginal rate.  
Company
A company is a separate legal entity. It can own assets, must pay tax on them, and lodge tax returns. However, company ownership is not appropriate for owner occupiers, because companies aren’t eligible for a full CGT exemption. Nor is it suitable for residential property investors, because companies can’t get the 50% CGT discount applicable to property held for more than 12 months.  
In some cases, company ownership may be suitable for commercial properties; for example, for businesses who want to own their premises. This is a complex area, so it’s important to seek advice.  
Trust
Unlike an individual or company, a trust is not a separate legal entity. It’s a vehicle to hold assets on behalf of nominated beneficiaries (that is, the individuals or companies whom you wish to receive income or capital gains from the trust’s assets).  
It’s difficult for creditors to get hold of assets in a trust because they are not owned by the beneficiaries. Trusts also enable you to minimise the tax liability from rental income and capital gains by distributing them amongst a multiple beneficiaries with the lowest marginal tax rate.
On the downside, trusts can only distribute profits, not losses. This makes them unsuitable for most residential property investors, who rely on negative gearing benefits to hold their assets.  
SMSF
Most Australians have their super in a fund managed by a third party. However, a growing number are running their own funds.The main reason to buy residential property in an SMSF is because of the concessional tax rate: 15% on monies held in the fund and zero when they are withdrawn upon retirement.  
SMSFs aren’t appropriate for owner occupied property or holiday homes, because assets in the fund cannot be used for personal use, even if it’s only for a week or two each year. And they are better suited to people who already have a sizeable amount of money in an SMSF, because lenders generally require a higher percentage deposit from borrowers. There may also be higher loan setup costs and higher interest rates. What’s more, complying with SMSF regulations can be complex and costly, so it’s not for the faint hearted.  
The form of ownership has a significant impact on the security and tax effectiveness of your residential property portfolio. What’s more, this impact can change in accordance with your circumstances, so it’s vital to seek advice from your tax adviser or solicitor.  
 
MARK ARMSTRONG is a director of <a href="https://ratemyagent.com.au/" target="_blank">ratemyagent.com.au</a>, Australia’s number one real estate agent rating website.
This article was originally published on Property Observer in November 2013.
</body></html>

Four forms of legal ownership: Which name should you put on your property's title?

<html><body>
A sharp lift in supply and the opportunity to lock in rates for an extended period means this spring will be a great time to buy.  
There’s a certain rhythm and flow to Melbourne’s social, sporting and cultural life and this is reflected in our residential property market.
Activity levels, auction clearance rates and price growth are influenced by what pre-occupies vendors and purchasers at various times of the year.  
These factors are so deeply ingrained that you can pretty much set your calendar by them.
The trick is to understand that the behaviour of vendors and purchasers is influenced by different things, so the two groups don’t move in synch. This means there are better times of the year to buy, and better times to sell—but they’re the opposite of what you may think.  
Melbourne’s property market calendar kicks off in January–February, when people have time to down tools, take stock and set goals for the coming year.
During this time, many Melburnians make a New Year’s resolution to upgrade or downsize their family home, or to buy an investment property. They begin entering the market in large numbers, hoping to get their purchase out of the way relatively quickly and avoid months of disheartening house-hunting.  
When they start searching, they find that there isn’t much to choose from. This is because would-be vendors are pre-occupied with re-establishing back-to-school and work routines.
They’re reluctant to take on the added burden of preparing and presenting their home for sale.
The resulting mismatch between purchaser and vendor behaviour creates an undersupply of property relative to demand.  
From March through to May, vendors are well into the swing of the year and are ready to put their homes on the market. The level of supply increases and becomes pretty much even with the level of demand from purchasers who couldn’t find what they wanted earlier in the year.  
Then comes winter.
From June to August, the level of demand stays consistent as purchasers continue their search.
However, the level of supply drops significantly, because vendors stay out of the market in the mistaken belief that people don’t want to buy in winter. In the inner and middle suburbs, where auctions make up a substantial proportion of property transactions, supply can fall by as much as 50%.
Buyers who have been in the market since early in the year become increasingly frustrated.
When an opportunity presents itself from amongst the limited choices available, they are inclined to pay more to secure a property they really like, or to buy a home they’re not overly keen on, simply because they’re tired of looking.  
As a consequence, property prices rise—meaning that vendors who are savvy enough to go against the wider convention and put their homes on the market during winter stand a good chance of achieving a strong result.  
Once spring rolls around, the behaviour of purchasers and vendors shifts again, and so does the balance between supply and demand.
With warmer weather and the ability to show off blooming gardens, vendors believe more buyers will be searching. They reason that it’s a better time to sell, so the level of supply increases.
In reality, demand from buyers doesn’t increase significantly. Yes, some purchasers begin searching in the warmer weather. However, many are pre-occupied by their children’s school exams, major sporting events and the like, so most enter the market at the beginning of the year.  
At this point, supply and demand become more evenly matched once again, and price growth tends to moderate. In the coming weeks auction levels will increase dramatically and we will see some weekends where over 1,000 properties go under the hammer.  
Purchasers will not only have the luxury of choice this spring but they will also be able to lock in their interest rate at incredibly low levels.
Spring is only four weeks away so now is the time to get prepared so you are in a position to move when the right opportunity when it presents it’s self.  
MARK ARMSTRONG is a director of <a href="https://ratemyagent.com.au/" target="_blank">ratemyagent.com.au</a>, Australia’s number one real estate agent rating website.
This article was originally published on Property Observer in July 2013.
 
 
</body></html>

This spring will be a great time to buy

<html><body>
When owner-occupiers and investors enter the market they want to achieve different things. 
Owner-occupiers want to buy a property they like and that suits their lifestyle requirements, while investors buy property to make money.  
The problem for many investors is they enter the property market as an investor but they make decisions as a home buyer. They develop an investment strategy based on what they like and let their heart take over the decision-making when it really should be the head that’s in control.  
Unfortunately the location and features that appeal to you on an emotional or lifestyle level may not be those that stack up on an investment level. Here are a few tips to help you make clear-headed decisions.
<ol>
<li>
Don’t buy near your own home  Many investors buy close to where they live because they like driving past the property, admiring their investment and keeping an eye on it. The problem is that many investors live in areas with strong demand from owner-occupiers, but little demand from tenants.   What’s more, owner-occupier strongholds are often some distance from the infrastructure tenants look for, such as public transport, shopping and entertainment precincts.   
</li>
<li>
Don’t fit out the property according to your own tastes  Too many investors buy a property and renovate it according to their personal tastes. For example, installing granite bench tops and expensive appliances in the kitchen, or putting a spa in the bathroom. This is fine if it’s your own home, but it’s a potential waste of money for an investment property.   Tenants rent for primarily for location, proximity to infrastructure, and price. There’s little point spending thousands on items that tenants don’t need — particularly when those items are depreciable and will lose value over the time you own the property. Instead of focusing on expensive fittings and fixtures, focus on buying a property with strong capital growth potential, located in an area where land values are driven by strong ongoing demand from owner-occupiers and investors alike.   
</li>
<li>
Don’t buy where you like to holiday It’s one thing to fall in love with a holiday spot, but quite another to buy there and expect it to perform like a prime investment location. Most holiday homes are owned by people who don’t live there full-time. When finances are tight, many owners will sacrifice their holiday home so they can hold onto their family home.   If you’re forced to sell, you may not be the only one. The more properties for sale in a particular area, the harder it will be for you to achieve your desired price. Worse still, you may be unable to sell at all.   
</li>
<li>
Don’t pay an emotional premium  When you fall in love with a property, you may be prepared to pay more than its true market value, to be sure of securing it. If it’s going to be your family home, overpaying may be justified, because you’re buying for lifestyle reasons.   If it’s going to be an investment property, however, overpaying doesn’t make sense. Not only will you have to take out a bigger loan and pay more interest, but you’re eating into the profit you’ll make when you eventually sell. That’s not an investment; that’s a millstone around your neck. Research the market before throwing your hat in the ring, then set a limit and stick to it.
</li>
</ol>
MARK ARMSTRONG is a director of <a href="https://ratemyagent.com.au/" target="_blank">ratemyagent.com.au</a>, Australia’s number one real estate agent rating website.
This article was originally published on Property Observer in September 2013.
</body></html>

Use you head, not your heart: Four tips for buying the right investment property

<html><body>
When conducting due diligence into property, most people think getting the contract checked by their solicitor is enough to cover their legal backsides, but the reality can be painful.
I recently inspected a property in Melbourne’s eastern suburbs and thought it was a good piece of real estate that needed further investigation.
My main concern was that the neighbouring property was on a substantial parcel of land with an old, rundown house on it. When I took a closer look I noticed the back fence that led to a laneway had completely fallen over and there was no sign of it being fixed.
Alarm bells started to ring as I thought this property could be a potential development site.
I asked my solicitor to review the section 32 to determine if there were any planning permits in place that may affect the property and was informed that nothing was disclosed in the paperwork.
In most cases if there is no disclosure in the section 32 then you can rest easy. However, a quick five-minute check on the local council website was all I needed to discover that there was, in fact, a permit in place that had been issued last year and this had not been fully disclosed.  If the vendor is aware of a planning permit that will have a material impact on the property, they have a legal obligation to disclose this information.
The local council was able to email me the full plans of the neighbouring development within a matter of minutes and I was able to determine that this new development will have a detrimental impact on the property I was looking at.
The discovery of this information does not necessarily mean the property should not be purchased, however it can – and in this case did – have a dramatic impact on the value of the property. This information is vital, as it will influence how much you should be prepared to pay for the property.
So, what happens if you sign a contract to buy a property and then discover some mandatory information was not fully disclosed?
If you discover the omission prior to settlement then you are standing on reasonably solid legal ground. If it is determined that the non-disclosure will have a material impact on the property you can notify your solicitor and instruct them to rescind the contract on the grounds that the section 32 did not make all mandatory disclosures. You are then in a position to re-negotiate the contract taking into account the new information or walk away from the property completely and get your deposit back.
However, if you settle on the property and then realise there is a non-disclosure issue, the solution will not be so straightforward. Given the property has already settled, the onus comes back onto you to enforce your legal rights. This means although you do have a legal recourse to sue the vendor, the cost of taking this action could well exceed the financial benefit. Also, working your way through the legal system is very time consuming and not something in which you really want to get bogged down.
For most people, buying property is the biggest financial commitment of their lives, so it pays to take the time to do that extra bit of research. As with most things in life, preventing a problem is much better than trying to find the cure.
MARK ARMSTRONG is a director of <a href="https://ratemyagent.com.au/" target="_blank">ratemyagent.com.au</a>, Australia’s number one real estate agent rating website.
This article was originally published on Property Observer in April 2013.
</body></html>

Thorough research is critical to dodging property purchase problems

<html><body>
Interest rates have already fallen to a point where investors are being enticed to act, and when investors come out, so do the property marketers ready to sell.
But when you’re leafing through the glossy brochures and touring the display suites, remember that today’s financial benefits could be tomorrow’s financial headaches. These benefits are nothing new to the market as they are rolled out each time investors get active. Here are the most common ones to look out for.
Depreciation benefits
Buildings and their contents depreciate (decrease) in value, while land appreciates (increases). When you buy a new property, the tax office will enable you to defray part of the purchase price by allowing you to claim depreciation on certain items. This can be helpful in increasing your cashflow, particularly during the early years when the property is likely to be negatively geared.
However, the downside is that most of the depreciation you can claim comes from fittings and fixtures like the oven, air-conditioner, blinds and carpets, which fully depreciate in five to 10 years. Furthermore, depending on the way you calculate your depreciation allowance, the amount you can claim may decrease each year. This means it will cost you more to hold the property as each year goes by.
Claiming depreciation can also have a hidden tax consequence because it will also increase the amount of capital gains tax you pay when you sell. I’m not saying you shouldn’t claim depreciation – but you should be aware that it may have financial consequences later down the track.
Stamp duty savings 
When you buy property off the plan in Victoria, you will only be liable to pay stamp duty on the property’s value on the date of purchase. If construction is partially completed, you’ll only pay stamp duty on that portion of the building, plus the land value. If construction hasn’t begun, you’ll only pay stamp duty on the land value.
Whilst this can help considerably when you first buy a property, it’s only a one-off saving that won’t help you after the loan has settled and you have to make repayments. What’s more, when you come to sell the property, potential buyers won’t have the same benefit of a stamp duty reduction, so there’s less incentive for them to buy it.
Rental guarantees.
When you buy a property new or off the plan, the developer will often undertake to provide a guaranteed level of rent each week for the first year or two that you hold the property. This kind of guarantee generally applies even when the property isn’t tenanted, because the developer picks up the tab.
Although it is reassuring to have certainty of rental income during the early stages of holding an investment property, there are two significant downsides. First, you’ll pay a premium to secure the rental guarantee; the developer will build it in to the sale price. Second, in accepting a guaranteed rent level, you’re insulated from market forces. Once the guarantee expires, the amount of rent your property can command will depend on a range of factors including supply and demand.
As newer properties come on to the market and tenants have a wider choice of places to live, the market rent for your property could fall. This is a particular risk in areas like the CBD and Docklands, where there’s likely to be a substantial amount of new construction.
Remember also that when you’re no longer protected by the rental guarantee, you’ll have to have sufficient cashflow to hold the property during periods when your property is not tenanted.
In summary, don’t let short-term benefits hold too much sway when you’re choosing an investment property. Focus instead on the long-term factors that will influence capital growth and rental demand: land values, demographic trends and the balance of supply versus demand. If these factors don’t add up, move on to another property.
Mark Armstrong is a director of <a href="https://www.ipropertyplan.com.au/" target="_blank">iProperty Plan</a>, which provides independent analysis and tailored advice to investors and home buyers.
This article first appeared on Property Observer in May, 2013.
</body></html>

Don't buy an investment property based on short-term benefits

<html><body>
When you look at the two properties below what differences do you see?
<img src="/images/2014/07/02/south%20yarra%20jul%201%20one.jpg" alt="">
<img src="/images/2014/07/02/hawthorn%20july1%20%20one.jpg" alt="">
On the surface they are obvious in that one is brand new in a highrise building while the other is old and in a smaller block.
However from a property investors point of view the major differences are not the physical attributes of the properties but more in the way they are marketed and sold.
During the last investor fuelled property boom incentives such as stamp duty savings, depreciation benefits and rental guarantees were the main marketing tools used to help sell property. However this time around many investors have woken up to these tactics so the marketing has become more imaginative.
Property investors are being lured into buying apartments in the first property with<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/victoria/vespa-offer-to-entice-buyers-to-south-yarra-one-bedroom-apartments/2013071662673" target="_blank"> the offer of a free Vespa</a> or Mini. But these things are not free as they will be paid for in the over all purchase price.
I saw another ad that <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/news/melbourne-units-sell-with-bonus-qantas-frequent-flyer-points-enough-for-three-return-first-class-flights-to-singapore/2013082864650" target="_blank">offered buyers one Qantas frequent flyer point for every dollar they spent</a> on the property. So if you paid $500,000 on an apartment you would receive 500,000 frequent flyer points, enough to get a couple of people around the world.  For the record you could buy a couple of around the world tickets for around $5,000.
While receiving a Vespa or a holiday sounds great the problem with these incentives are they add no ongoing value to the property.
By contrast the Hawthorn property is sold in a completely different way. All the agent had to do was tell people it was available and the market did the rest. When this property went to auction, four bidders attempted to buy it and it sold under the hammer.
The property sold itself because of what it was and where it was and the agents did not have to dress it up with marketing hype.
Alarm bells should be ringing for property investors when they see these kinds of incentives on offer. The value of good investment property is underpinned by psychical attributes such as location, land size, land value and property style.
When looking for an investment it is vital to focus on the things that do not change over time. You cannot lift a house and land up and drop in in a more desirable or handy location a few years after you buy it. Further you cannot change the orientation of the land, the position in the block of apartments or what surrounds the property. Finally you have no control over the supply of new property coming onto the market around you.
Good investment property is often very hard to buy because you are put in a competitive environment, while risky investments are often easy to buy.
My advice? Buy a good property and pay for the toys and holidays yourself.
Mark Armstrong is a director of <a href="https://ratemyagent.com.au/" target="_blank">ratemyagent.com.au</a>, Australia’s number one real estate agent rating website.
This article was originally published on Property Observer in September 2013.
</body></html>

Investors need to be wary of the new breed of property marketing incentives

<html><body>
The federal budget certainly sent shock waves through the economy, but according to the ANZ-Roy Morgan consumer confidence index it appears to be recovering.
Consumer confidence has improved a further 2.4% over the past week, bringing the total improvement in confidence to 6% over the past month.
Also helping investors feel comfortable is the fact ME Bank are still offering a three year fixed rate at 4.69%, which gives investors more confidence about the future.
Property investors have already begun to re-enter the property market, but these two events are only going to add to the momentum. They will begin to change their thinking from ‘if’ they should buy property to ‘what’ they should buy and will be torn between the logic of two radically different investment strategies.
One says it’s always best to buy property that’s positively geared. This means that holding costs like council rates, insurance, maintenance and interest on the loan are less than the rental income received.
The second argument says it’s better to buy property that’s negatively geared, meaning that holding costs are greater than the rental income received. You fund the shortfall from your own pocket, giving you a ‘negative income’ which you then claim as a tax deduction.
In reality, these arguments are doomed to go around in circles. There’s no one right or wrong answer that applies to every investor. Each purchasing strategy has its upside and downside; both of which should be considered before making a decision.
Let’s start by looking at positively geared property. Generally speaking, the high-buy in price of most properties in capital cities means that to buy a positively geared asset, you must purchase in a regional or rural area where prices are lower. This may leave you with a relatively modest mortgage, making it easier to enter the property market, and easier to fund the holding costs from rental income alone.
The downside, however, is that positively geared property may have a lower capital growth rate. Every property’s value is determined by the ratio of two components: the land and the building. Land appreciates, or grows in value; whilst buildings depreciate or fall in value.
In regional and rural areas, land values per square metre tend to be low because there’s plenty of land available compared with the level of buyer demand. This means the building accounts for most of the asset’s value. The building may lose value faster than the land can gain value—hampering long-term capital growth.
Let’s compare this with buying negatively geared property. When the buy-in price is high, the land value probably is. This is the upside of negative gearing; you’re more likely to have purchased in an area with a limited supply of land relative to buyer demand. The land component makes up a higher proportion of the property’s overall value, giving the asset strong capital growth potential.
On the downside, buying a negatively geared asset means that whilst your long-term risk may be lower, your short-term risk may be higher because you have to find a way to fund the difference between holding costs and rental income from your own pocket. This can create cash flow pressure, particularly if you incur an unexpected expense such as an interest rate rise or urgent repair.
In short, it’s a case of short-term gain and possible long-term pain (positively geared property) versus short-term pain for possible long-term gain (negatively geared property). To decide which is right for you, it’s important to assess your financial circumstances.
First, consider your level of disposable income. If you have spare cash to cover the difference between your holding costs and rental income, buying a negatively geared property may be appropriate. On the other hand, if your budget is tight, negative gearing may be too hard an ask, and a positively geared property may be a better way to go. The capital growth won’t be as strong, but at least you’ll be in the market.
Second, consider how long you’ll be earning a good income. To ride out market fluctuations and recoup purchasing costs, property should be viewed as a long-term investment; at least seven to 10 years. If you’re close to retirement and a substantial drop in income isn’t far away, adopting a negatively geared strategy may not be viable. In this case, you should consider investment options that don’t require you to contribute funds from your own pocket. By contrast, if you’re many years away from retirement, you may have enough income over the long-term to fund the shortfall from your wage or salary. 
Whichever gearing strategy you choose, go into it with your eyes open.
Mark Armstrong is a director of <a href="https://ratemyagent.com.au/" target="_blank">ratemyagent.com.au</a>, Australia’s number one real estate agent rating website.
</body></html>

Mark Armstrong

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Mark Armstrong

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News