If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
so property investors owning and renting to students is another essential and growing part of the nz economy that should be encouraged
the list goes on
Judy Kraidy lost her job teaching foreign students because she refused to pass those who didn't learn anything.
The experienced South African-born teacher was replaced when she failed 20 out of the 24 Chinese students in her accountancy class at the now-defunct New Zealand Institute of Commerce in central Auckland.
Mrs Kraidy said she made no apology for refusing to pass students who paid about $15,000 to $20,000 for a course but did not learn anything.
"When you're at tertiary level accountancy ... you can't just give them a qualification because you feel sorry for them.
They have to meet a standard and even the absolute minimum standard they couldn't come close to."
She said many students treated guaranteed-pass courses as a short cut to permanent residency, which made her angry as an immigrant who had worked hard to get into New Zealand legitimately.
. In case you missed the video link I posted above entitled "No sex please, we're Japanese", it's about what happens in a first world country when the birth rate falls too low.
I have told the property manager I feel the rent should be increased by $50 per week. I'm overseas just now so I've told him to negotiate on my behalf.
He has said he will do a full credit check on the younger people when/if they decide to take over the tenancy.
I read this morning that property investors want to pay less tax. I'm sure they do, don't we all?
They claim it's not very lucrative. Then why are they doing it? Residential property investor lobby groups have spun this BS line for years...
I also read the government spends 3 to 1 on the revenue, providing subsidies to rental investors. Have the right wing beneficary bashing sort worked out what would happen to their income if this golden goose was withdrawn?
Yes very sad.
All we want are the same tax laws that any other business can operate under.
Preferably businesses like Google/Microsoft/Facebook/Apple - cause it's just "Fair".
The three most harmful addictions are heroin, carbohydrates and a monthly salary - Fred Wilson.
I read this morning that property investors want to pay less tax. I'm sure they do, don't we all?
They claim it's not very lucrative. Then why are they doing it? Residential property investor lobby groups have spun this BS line for years...
I also read the government spends 3 to 1 on the revenue, providing subsidies to rental investors. Have the right wing beneficary bashing sort worked out what would happen to their income if this golden goose was withdrawn?
Yes but I challenge you to find a health worker who does not think it fair that they have to pay taxes. You should lie back and listen to my oral surgeon. He recently ripped a tooth out of my mouth and a bigger hole in my pocket. We talked about mutual loves of property, neighbours, hiking in the mountains, and what ever. For a change I could not reply with much to laugh about.
I did a little study last year. I discovered that the extra tax being paid by property investors due to changes in depreciation and ring fencing was greater than the accommodation subsidy increases. There is scary amount of money being paid out on accommodation subsidies but the scarier thing is the income related rent subsidies being paid to Housing NZ. HNZ only have 70000 in the portfolio comapred with 450000 in the private sector. In other words the government is throwing good money after bad to keep their housing company afloat. Public housing is sucking the marrow out of our society and breeding gangs of criminals.
Public housing is sucking the marrow out of our society and breeding gangs of criminals.
What a load of.... prejudice.
You are referring to a small number of people. Anyway, you think there's an issue now? Plenty of 'normal' people might decide to pursue a life of crime (or alternative enterprise) if that's what they have to do to pay the bills. If you have to be so ungrateful at least try and view whatever tax you do pay (if any) as protection money.
You know full well property is a tax angle. That's why property investors everywhere were setting up LAQC's. The only purpose of a LAQC is to lose money. Normal business people who expect to actually make a profit wouldn't in their right mind use a LAQC due to the disadvantage* of these...
*Shareholder liability for company tax debts.
ps: I am aware LAQC's have been replaced by LTC. I'm not sure of exactly what the difference is but this is about a tax point and business philosophy (lose money) not the exact specifics of company law.
You are referring to a small number of people. Anyway, you think there's an issue now? Plenty of 'normal' people might decide to pursue a life of crime (or alternative enterprise) if that's what they have to do to pay the bills. If you have to be so ungrateful at least try and view whatever tax you do pay (if any) as protection money.
You know full well property is a tax angle. That's why property investors everywhere were setting up LAQC's. The only purpose of a LAQC is to lose money. Normal business people who expect to actually make a profit wouldn't in their right mind use a LAQC due to the disadvantage* of these...
*Shareholder liability for company tax debts.
ps: I am aware LAQC's have been replaced by LTC. I'm not sure of exactly what the difference is but this is about a tax point and business philosophy (lose money) not the exact specifics of company law.
Some investors have a day job and invest a small bit in housing.
Housing is my full time job. Seven days a week. I often get called out in the middle of the night to attend to emergencies.
I pay just the normal percentage of tax that others pay?
Part time farmers, part time mechanical engineers, part time food manufactures do pay less percentage tax than professional operators. This is in part due to the scale and the fact that they can offset expenses in their start up companies against their day job incomes.
LAQCs were introduced at the demand of IRD. They no long exist.
The losses in Trusts are locked in and can not be offset against other income.
I have never made a loss. I have only ever made a profit. I have paid tax on unintentional capital gains caused by a private sale I could not avoid.
It is true many investors have sought to be clever making a loss to gain a tax refund. I laugh at those people because they are dreamers.
There is never any future in working and not being paid (a loss) unless you are helping someone for free.
To bring the subject back to the heading. I had an interesting call this week. I manage two large houses destined for demolition and redevelopment as commercial. I have high risk difficult tenants in the houses. By that I mean I turn a blind eye to goings on there. No excuse re non payment of rent and broken windows are a no no but anything else is ok. They are across the road from the fire and ambulance depots so nice and handy for all the emergency services. In return for my great understanding landlording they do pay a premium rent.
So early in the week the owner rings. Hey I have a really large water account. How much? Oh $550 for 6 months. Oh I quickly retort that is $20 per week. Yes that equates to lots 40 metres of water a month. Yes no problem. They pay that all back to you. The money goes into your account every month. Now this is four times the average householders usage. Later in week a call by to fix a blocked sink. They had been putting up with it without telling me. There were people everywhere. Clean and well organised but hey they must have had perhaps 15 people in the large cold old house. They were all smiling and very polite to me.
So Michael and others. What do you make of this state of affairs.
Would it be better to charge less and have a different family there that uses less water so the poor innocent owner would not have to fret about how much water gets used.
Comment