新西兰天维网社区

标题: 小道消息，听说投资房LAQC完全不能退税了，有人能证实吗？ [打印本页]

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 11:03:55 标题: 小道消息，听说投资房LAQC完全不能退税了，有人能证实吗？

昨天的消息，只是 depreciation不能算 expense.
但是今天听我同事忧心忡忡的说，
小道消息说整个房地产投资的亏损都不能退税了。

请知道的童鞋说说哇

作者: quanxinnz9 时间: 2010-5-21 11:12:50

提示: 作者被禁止或删除内容自动屏蔽

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 11:13:34

我觉得就是谣言

作者: xiaolu 时间: 2010-5-21 11:13:49

没这回事……只不过是现在LAQC用高税率退税，低税率缴税的漏洞被堵上了。

另外就是投资房的亏损不计入Working For Family补助的计算当中，相当于一个不甚完整的Ringfencing。

总而言之，这次的budget很大程度上是针对投资房的，我们只需要知道投资房买得越多（从减税的角度来说）就越不合算就对了。

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 11:16:26

请解释一下这句
LAQC用高税率退税，低税率缴税的漏洞

作者: FamilyGuy 时间: 2010-5-21 11:20:14

IRD/Treasury released a statement last night.
Here is the answer/my interpretation:

You will be able to claim LAQC loss to the extent the loss is no more than your share of equity.
A lot of property owning LAQCs have negative equity, and those shareholders won't be able to use the loss to offset against their other income, hence no refund.

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 11:22:03

楼上的能解释一下吗？

作者: FamilyGuy 时间: 2010-5-21 11:27:21

Sorry, I'm too busy today as lots of clients rang up for advice (re the budget).
Just having my morning tea, and saw you post.
Here is the link if you like.
http://taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz/sit ... udget2010-laqcs.pdf

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 11:34:09

Sorry, I'm too busy today as lots of clients rang up for advice (re the budget).
Just having my morning tea, and saw you post.
Here is the link if you like.
http://taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz/sites/defau ...
FamilyGuy 发表于 2010-5-21 10:27

好呀
27页的pdf

作者: a121 时间: 2010-5-21 11:44:16

找会计问问拜~~~~~~~~

作者: xiaolu 时间: 2010-5-21 12:05:35

请解释一下这句
LAQC用高税率退税，低税率缴税的漏洞
taomibaobao 发表于 2010-5-21 10:16

现行制度可以以最高38%的税率退税，但盈利时却按照30%的税率缴税。

作者: xiaolu 时间: 2010-5-21 12:06:49

You will be able to claim LAQC loss to the extent the loss is no more than your share of equity. g9 ?2 f1 ^7 q$ d5 k+ I3 G Z
A lot of property owning LAQCs have negative equity, and those shareholders won't be able to use the loss to offset against their other income, hence no refund.
FamilyGuy 发表于 2010-5-21 10:20

Shit !!!!真的假的？

现在忙着没时间，晚上回去好好研究一下

作者: kei 时间: 2010-5-21 12:10:04

无房一族无忧无虑......

作者: zhihuanxi 时间: 2010-5-21 12:14:33

提示: 作者被禁止或删除内容自动屏蔽

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 12:23:29

将来的事，谁知道哇
但是可以说房地产应该没有什么理由涨了吧。。

作者: zhihuanxi 时间: 2010-5-21 12:26:49

提示: 作者被禁止或删除内容自动屏蔽

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 12:30:20

也不用这么悲观吧。。。

反正你都要一套房子自住的嘛。。。

作者: judyzhu81 时间: 2010-5-21 13:05:33

基本上房地产投资的LAQC是没有退税了。因为这些LAQC基本上都是negative equity。

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 13:06:08

嗯。。。看来的确很大的变动

作者: Lilac 时间: 2010-5-21 13:07:27

Sorry, I'm too busy today as lots of clients rang up for advice (re the budget).
Just having my morning tea, and saw you post.
Here is the link if you like.
http://taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz/sites/defau ...
FamilyGuy 发表于 2010-5-21 10:27

好久不看这些东西，看着真绕口啊。。。

作者: saikit 时间: 2010-5-21 13:09:53

提示: 作者被禁止或删除内容自动屏蔽

作者: Lilac 时间: 2010-5-21 13:19:17

IRD/Treasury released a statement last night.
Here is the answer/my interpretation:

You will be able to claim LAQC loss to the extent the loss is no more than your share of equity.
A lot of prop ...
FamilyGuy 发表于 2010-5-21 10:20

sounds fair。。。 before was too good for these ppl...

作者: judyzhu81 时间: 2010-5-21 13:19:23

对我们打击很大。。。。。。呜呜。。。。。。。。。。

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 13:23:11

对我们打击很大。。。。。。呜呜。。。。。。。。。。
judyzhu81 发表于 2010-5-21 12:19

没关系
下届不要投国家党就成了。。
瓦咔咔

作者: 腿毛菲菲 时间: 2010-5-21 13:35:01

观望~~~~~~~~~~~

作者: d_tsai 时间: 2010-5-21 15:05:35

意思就是說如果你的LAQC是負資產, 因而的虧損就不能抵税??誰幫我解釋...3Q

作者: 超级马力 时间: 2010-5-21 15:26:05

汇率这两天暴跌，应该把人民币换成纽币，房子应该会涨吧，建筑材料的GST都要升的啊

作者: 胡思≮乱想 时间: 2010-5-21 16:03:48

考虑问题太单一了楼上

作者: 阿海 时间: 2010-5-21 17:17:39

2.4 This change will erase the distinction between qualifying companies and
LAQCs, as both entities will be transparent. There will be only one
classification under the new qualifying company rules.

- So no LAQC anymore?? instead be called qualified company??

With partnership tax treatment, both the company’s income and losses would
be passed on to the shareholders, so income would be taxed and losses
deducted at a shareholder’s marginal tax rate.

Marginal tax rate????? at new 10.5%??? sh!!!t

Good news for me as I dont have rental properties in NZ

作者: 阿海 时间: 2010-5-21 17:20:46

我觉得大家（有LAQC的朋友们）还是过1-2星期后找个房地产专业的会计师谈谈吧

这东西太复杂了，还是听专家解说总比自己研究好。

其实政府应该坚决点，像美国Tax Reform Act 1986那样，房地产亏损不能offset personal gross income那才爽呢

作者: 阿海 时间: 2010-5-21 17:29:25

Example of loss limitation
John and Colleen jointly own a company and elect into the new qualifying company rules withapplication from 1 April 2011. John owns 75 percent of the shares.

The total equity investment in thecompany is $100,000. The company earns gross income of $20,000 during the year and distributes$10,000 to John and Colleen in proportion to their interest in the company.

John’s share of the equity investment is therefore $75,000 (75 percent of $100,000). He has a 75percent share of the company’s income and distributions, which equal $15,000 and $7,500 respectively.

John’s membership basis in the qualifying company is calculated as follows:
Original investment $75,000
Income $15,000
Distributions ($7,500)
Deductions taken in previous years ($0)
Disallowed amounts ($0)

John’s membership basis in the qualifying company is therefore $82,500.

In the 2012/13 income year, the qualifying company makes a loss of $120,000. John’s share of the taxloss is $90,000 (75 percent of $120,000).

The proposed loss limitation rules, which will limit theamount of losses allowed as a deduction to the amount of the shareholder’s membership basis, areapplied to John as follows:

Membership basis $82,500
Allocated losses ($90,000)
Allowable tax loss ($82,500)

Therefore, John is allowed a tax loss of $82,500, which can be deducted from his other income.

The proposed loss limitation rules mean that John is disallowed a tax loss to the value of $7,500($90,000 less $82,500). This loss cannot be included in his annual tax calculation for the 2012/13income year as a deduction, and so cannot be offset against his other income.

The disallowed loss can,however, be carried forward by John and used in a subsequent year if John’s membership basis in thequalifying company is sufficient. (The allowable tax loss taken as a deduction in the 2012/13 incomeyear will reduce John’s membership basis for later income years by that amount.)

这样说，如果你的LAQC/QC 的equity是negative的，那你就不能claim loss了！

作者: 照瓢画葫芦 时间: 2010-5-21 18:37:39

如果你用个人名义是没事的～～用公司或者trust名义是不行了

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-21 18:59:06

Example of loss limitation
John and Colleen jointly own a company and elect into the new qualifying company rules withapplication from 1 April 2011. John owns 75 percent of the shares.

The total ...
阿海发表于 2010-5-21 16:29

阿海灰常强大

作者: 牛哥 时间: 2010-5-21 20:43:21

淘米，地主们才会着急的

作者: Lease 时间: 2010-5-21 23:40:05

说实话, 昨天预算出来的时候根本就没有这么说, 只是简单的说LAQC 将flow-through both Loss and profit to shareholders, 可今天又出来这么一个二十多页的document, 看来在房地产投资方面的税务政策依然存在着很大的不确定性.

作者: 5555 时间: 2010-5-22 00:18:56

这个淘米说话语气怎么和以前不大一样

作者: judyzhu81 时间: 2010-5-22 00:31:07

可不可以把LAQC下的房产卖给Shareholders，这是不是逃税？有没有人知道？

作者: taomibaobao 时间: 2010-5-22 01:05:54

这个淘米说话语气怎么和以前不大一样
5555 发表于 2010-5-21 23:18

我还是我。。。
或者说

今天的我比昨天成熟

作者: dot 时间: 2010-5-22 02:36:11

本帖最后由 dot 于 2010-5-23 22:03 编辑

这么改本质上能打击抑制房地产投资啊，不觉得。上有政策下有对策，就搞得大伙跟着瞎折腾。当初推出LAQC的时候怎么不想好啊，现在又来堵漏洞。不用LAQC就不用呗，早说这么改谁用啊。
http://www.landlords.co.nz/read-article.php?article_id=3730
He believes property investors will not want to use LAQC's going forward and that they will use straight forward partnership structures if they expect to have losses.
"LAQC's will be a dead man walking, they'll disappear as the government will find them too difficult and will end up getting rid of LAQC's altogether - that will be a real concern."

download了四大的commentary，继续研究...

作者: dot 时间: 2010-5-22 02:43:08

本帖最后由 dot 于 2010-5-22 12:32 编辑

可不可以把LAQC下的房产卖给Shareholders，这是不是逃税？有没有人知道？
judyzhu81 发表于 2010-5-21 23:31

可以的。基本上视同一般房屋买卖。
要通过律师，一卖一买，
会计两套帐，LAQC卖了，individual买了，
如果严格的话还要valuation，按market value买卖。

就是陪着government折腾...

作者: 阿海 时间: 2010-5-22 10:44:46

Watch this webinar, explains all by property tax expert Matthew Gilligan of GRA.

http://www.propertyteachers.com/budgetresultswebinar.php

LAQC is a gonner.

作者: dot 时间: 2010-5-22 12:40:04

Watch this webinar, explains all by property tax expert Matthew Gilligan of GRA.
http://www.propertyteachers.com/budgetresultswebinar.php
阿海发表于 2010-5-22 09:44

谢谢阿海！

作者: labrador 时间: 2010-5-22 21:42:46

不是完全不能退税，是建筑的贬值不能申报为expenses,而且亏损不计入Working For Family补助的计算当中。还有IRD会对投资房LAQC的审查会更严格。而且LAQC的盈利也需要算入股东的收入，以前是放在公司下，只有亏损用来抵销股东的收入。

作者: judyzhu81 时间: 2010-5-23 00:10:10

不是完全不能退税，是建筑的贬值不能申报为expenses,而且亏损不计入Working For Family补助的计算当中。还有IRD会对投资房LAQC的审查会更严格。而且LAQC的盈利也需要算入股东的收入，以前是放在公司下，只有亏损用来 ...
labrador 发表于 2010-5-22 20:42

有新的limitation，Losses不能大约股东的Equity。

作者: dot 时间: 2010-5-23 00:54:11

算下来，这么一改用LAQC的还赚了。除非再出个限制，再改。整天说变就变的，折腾吧。

作者: 爬爬虫 时间: 2010-5-23 05:28:55

完全看不懂的人飘过。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。

作者: Lease 时间: 2010-5-23 17:56:22

我觉得政府这个文件有些模糊的地方, 在投资版有个贴子叫"Ring-Fencing is on the way, Property Market will sink", 里面这个叫Tiger1的人分析得挺好.

作者: collins 时间: 2010-5-23 22:58:17

路過.........

作者: AllenCheng 时间: 2010-5-24 19:19:44

这个是指投资房每年的折损退税取消了，以前是按照投资房每年会有个固定的折损费，可以用退税的方式补回来一部分，现在没了这部分的钱了

作者: X_Ranger 时间: 2010-5-25 00:21:56

取消的只是commercial property的折旧，暂时只是提到LAQC会被当成Limited Partnership 来看待，所以claim的annual tax loss不能超过你的equity, 但是这看来也算是比较合理的。大家除非是用第一套房抵押做的全额贷款，一般两三年后都还是有equity的，negative equity 是指你的LAQC名下的房贷超过了你的投资房的价值，这还是比较少发生的。我估计政府是想要控制那些高收入又拼命用现有房屋equity做抵押，拼命借款圈地买房然后报损退税的。。。。
新的budget 提了很多东西，各大会计公司网页都已经第一时间出了各自的详细评论和见解，大家可以去参考以下

作者: F14Tomcat 时间: 2010-5-26 09:36:11

还在研究中，貌似对我这种只有一套房，只拿这套房当投资的人没什么影响吧！

作者: shaopu 时间: 2010-5-29 23:25:29

汇率这两天暴跌，应该把人民币换成纽币，房子应该会涨吧，建筑材料的GST都要升的啊
超级马力发表于 2010-5-21 14:26

新房可能成本增加了（GST)，但是旧房价格会因为少人买投资房而有所下降。。（成熟地区和房子基本不会怎么降）。。。而由于新房成本增加了，就会导致很多人不买section建房子从而section应该会降得更多。。。

欢迎光临新西兰天维网社区 (http://bbs.skytrade.co.nz/)