Dose

Fairfax: The Yellow Peril is upon us

512 posts in this topic

MB: Judgement day arrives for illegal foreign buyers

 

 

...including:

  • Criminal penalty of $135,000 or 3 years imprisonment; or
  • Civil penalty of the capital gain made on divestment of the property or 25% of the purchase price or market value of the property (whichever is greater).

For the first time, third parties that knowingly assist foreigners to illegally purchase Australian homes will also face penalties of $45,000 individually or $225,000 for a company....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The effects of the hot money! Attached are median prices based on actual sales as of 30/6/2015, for 3 Sydney suburbs with a high concentrations of Chinese immigrants.

post-148-0-11344800-1449827884_thumb.jpg

post-148-0-12483100-1449827888_thumb.jpg

post-148-0-06412300-1449827892_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The effects of the hot money! Attached are median prices based on actual sales as of 30/6/2015, for 3 Sydney suburbs with a high concentrations of Chinese immigrants.

Prices look almost parabolic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prices look almost parabolic.

 

Which would be consistent with Armstrong's call for peak RE this year. Gravity will not allow those prices to go to the moon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NEWS: Northern beaches property wins surge in interest from Chinese buyers, according to Juwai.com

 

 

So what happens if the temporary visa does not become permanent?

 

 

...Foreign nationals are generally restricted by the Foreign Investment Review Board to buying only from new housing stock, unless they hold a temporary visa, which allows them to purchase one existing property....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This "little" witchhunt is also going to expose those who have been errantly claiming negative gearing losses as well.

I would imagine a few baby boomers might be getting a little nervous, given this investigation is going back 32 years. (I've been working for 38yrs)

When I first started renting (in a small country town) the landlord collected the rent in cash. (Came to the door) It was rumoured he owned 30 properties and earned income which he never paid any tax on. He's dead now, but I wonder whether there are any others still using his avoidance system.

The hunt for extra money must be well and truly on in the Government.

We are in serious trouble..... but no ones going to admit it. (Might lose the election!!)

I do wonder though, with that list of items, what else the ATO might kick over in the process.

I can't remember what I put in my tax return 5 years ago, let alone 32 yrs ago.

Heaven help us all if they start looking for tax avoidance beyond the 7yr limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wonder though, with that list of items, what else the ATO might kick over in the process.

I can't remember what I put in my tax return 5 years ago, let alone 32 yrs ago.

Heaven help us all if they start looking for tax avoidance beyond the 7yr limit.

If it makes you feel any better the ATO would need to prove any claim against you, not the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure about that? An awful lot of what I have read is that the ATO gets to do what they like. I am specifically aware that a ruling for someone else in the exact same situation cannot be used by yourself...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure about that? An awful lot of what I have read is that the ATO gets to do what they like. I am specifically aware that a ruling for someone else in the exact same situation cannot be used by yourself...

He who makes a claim wears the burden of proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure about that? An awful lot of what I have read is that the ATO gets to do what they like. I am specifically aware that a ruling for someone else in the exact same situation cannot be used by yourself...

There are plenty of internal avenues for review of ATO decisions. But in the end if they make an assessment of your taxable income, stand firm and you disagree it's off to court. That's going to cost a bundle and won't be worth it for almost anyone. 

 

I think you are referring to a private binding ruling (PBR). Anyone can apply for a PBR and it is binding even if it is later found that it erred in tax law. It is only binding on the applicant as you stated and doesn't directly apply to other tax payers.

 

There are other types of rulings too. A tax determination is a general ruling on an issue and is binding even if it is later found that the ATO erred. Sometimes a TD is issued by the ATO after it loses a court case to clear the issue up and make it a bit more general.

 

This is made up for simplicity:

The ATO may lose a court case about the deductibility of travel expenses. Of course the case is specific to the applicant.

The ATO then issues a TD around allowable travel that is broader. Let's say it says travel between first and second job is deductible.

A taxpayer may seek a PBR where their travel is not exactly covered by the TD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that is kind of what I meant.

 

Normal law specifies what is illegal.

The ATO specifies what is legal.

 

If you do something which normal law has not specified is illegal you are probably okay, e.g. designer drugs.

If you do something which is not exactly meeting the ATO rules for legal then you need your own ruling or you are probably screwed (and no one else can use that ruling).

 

To me it seems a reversal of the normal way I think of legal systems working (outside of constitutional law of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the falls in the Chinese stocks force an increased capital flight and bolster the property market?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the falls in the Chinese stocks force an increased capital flight and bolster the property market?

Ask Socrates. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Aahh, that Lin!

 

How did a 27-year-old university graduate buy this Vaucluse trophy home?

 

 

...Jin Lin’s mother Yunhui Lin reportedly set a new record for the suburb of Waverton, on Sydney’s north shore, when she paid $8.5 million for a property there in 2010.

Back then, the family’s commercial ambitions in this country remained shrouded in mystery.
The Lins made headlines in 2011 as significant donors to the federal Labor Party, when Jin Lin told Fairfax he and his mother counted politics as “a personal hobby”
Donations totalling $200,000 by the Lins and Shenglong in 2009-10 were scrutinised after the required paperwork was late in being submitted to the Australian Electoral Commission, as required by law...
...It is not clear whether the Lins are now Australian citizens, but Jin Lin was said to have permanent residency in 2011, and Villa Igiea sold without the need for approval by the Foreign Investment Review Board...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now