"The North Carolina Senate voted along party lines Wednesday to ban anyone from wearing masks in public for health reasons, following an emotional debate about the wisdom of the proposal
House Bill 237 would ban everyone, not just protesters, from wearing masks in public for medical reasons if it becomes law. It passed 30-15, with every Republican in favor and every Democrat opposed."
www.wral.com/story/nc-senate-votes-to-ban-people-from-wearing-masks-in-public-for-health-reasons/21433199/
Digital bill passed in Australia
Digital Tyranny Another Step Closer As Digital ID Bill Is Passed! (youtube.com)
Thats all good Pete, just be like me and use 5 different VPN's at the same time and leach of a neighbors WIFI 
Even I don't know what I'm doing half the time and the times when I do I'm confused as to what I am doing
I love elmo
And i havent taken my helmet off in 5 years
But seriously when you live in your car cause landlords be lording you just need to drive around rich suburbs and park where ever you get the best wifi connection
If a landlord does the kind thing and keeps rent low to help a person in difficult circumstances, the tax office will tax the landlord's income at the market rate for rent. So the landlord has to pay to lose money.
Select to expand quoteremery said..
If a landlord does the kind thing and keeps rent low to help a person in difficult circumstances, the tax office will tax the landlord's income at the market rate for rent. So the landlord has to pay to lose money.
Is this really a thing? I know that if the tax office finds out/figures out that its below market rent, they will question it. I presume that they could then deem the rent to be higher or limit how much they can deduct against it. Similarly if you hold a rental property and you use it for the peak holiday periods yourself or don't make it generally available, they will limit what you can deduct.
But if you are renting it out at below market rent, or using it yourself, as long as you aren't claiming deductions for it, the government doesn't care.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said.
But if you are renting it out at below market rent, or using it yourself, as long as you aren't claiming deductions for it, the government doesn't care.
Unfortunately the government does care. Ask me how I know :(
Select to expand quoteremery said..FormulaNova said.
But if you are renting it out at below market rent, or using it yourself, as long as you aren't claiming deductions for it, the government doesn't care.
Unfortunately the government does care. Ask me how I know :(
I am not sure I am going to feel too much sympathy for you unfortunately Unless it was a genuine mistake or helping someone out hard on their luck. I know I dropped the rent for someone during Covid, but I am guessing that is different.
I have had someone tell me, probably more than one I think, that they bought an investment property and rented it out to their son or daughter at a decent discount from market rate. I warned them that the ATO doesn't like that.
But again, if you are not claiming deductions against the property, the government shouldn't care as far as I know. Of course the deductions include interest payments, rates, and anything else that you try and claw back.
If you bought a place and renting it to your Nan for $5 a week and claimed no deductions, what can they do about it?
I am intrigued about what your situation was if it doesn't fit into this.
I also remember someone from Canberra telling me that they were going to by an investment property in Jindabyne, live in it during snow season and then rent it out for the rest of the year. The ATO do not like this. It is meant to be an investment, so they will argue that you are excluding it from the primary part of the year, so its not really an investment. Whether they let you apportion some of the costs on a pro-rata basis I don't know.
It was pretty much renting a property to a down-and-out relative. We started with standard rent less property manager fees. We didn't put the rent up for many years because their Centrelink hadn't changed. The deduction were minimal because it was funded through an interest only loan. The relative never complained about anything so there were negligible deductions for upkeep and so on. The ATO only screwed us when rents almost doubled and we didn't change.
FN - what about work premises for business and of course putting in rent as a business expense? Finding a good deal is maybe dangerous....?
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..
FN - what about work premises for business and of course putting in rent as a business expense? Finding a good deal is maybe dangerous....?
What's the question? The ATO only really care that businesses or investments are really businesses or investments.
If you set up a business to rent windsurfing gear (to yourself and almost no one else) and wrote off the cost of boards each year, I suspect it wouldn't survive an audit.
A good deal is fine, as long as you can justify it. If you found a place where the owner has not been able to get a tenant, and then gets one at a certain price, then you can say that this is the real market rate. It always helps if its at arm's length, and through an agent would help as it shows there is no direct connection.
I suspect that Remery might have gotten away with it if it was argued that there was something wrong with the place and the rent was reduced accordingly, and it was through an agent.
But in reality, these investment properties are only allowed to claim costs if they are genuine, and this means renting them at market rates. If they are not available most of the time, or no effort is really made to rent them out, then the ATO will see it that you are just trying to write off the costs and not make money from it... which is what an investment is meant to be.
I have an investment property now that is rented out. Before it was rented out I had to renovate it. I won't be able to claim the costs of the property at that point because it wasn't available for rent. I think you can get away with repairing it inbetween lettings, but if you buy a place and then spend a significant time fixing it up and it is not available for rent because of this, you shouldn't be claiming interest costs and other operating costs.
Select to expand quoteremery said..
It was pretty much renting a property to a down-and-out relative. We started with standard rent less property manager fees. We didn't put the rent up for many years because their Centrelink hadn't changed. The deduction were minimal because it was funded through an interest only loan. The relative never complained about anything so there were negligible deductions for upkeep and so on. The ATO only screwed us when rents almost doubled and we didn't change.
I'm a bit surprised that they even noticed. I wonder if they do an overall calculation to see what a similar place in an area gets as rent and use this as a benchmark, and then offset this against typical interest costs? I think they have been automating a lot of stuff, so I wouldn't be surprised if this happens.
There also seems to be a push with data sharing where they see more information from different sources.
It sucks though doesn't it. You are trying to help someone out, but in the eyes of the ATO that's not their problem. It sort of puts people into a problematic situation at the moment. The huge demand from migration has pushed rents up and if you have a good tenant that has been there for years, you wouldn't feel the need to put the rent up as you risk losing a good tenant. But because a lot of ruthless investors have put it up as much as they can get away with, it's almost like you are obliged to follow.
When I was discussing it with the ATO I pointed out that I could kick the relative out and put the rent up for someone else. The relative would go into government-funded veterans housing. They didn't care.
Select to expand quoteremery said..
When I was discussing it with the ATO I pointed out that I could kick the relative out and put the rent up for someone else. The relative would go into government-funded veterans housing. They didn't care.
That's quite bizarre. I have experience with something similar. Council placed environmental audit overlay on my mothers investment property that she's owned for over 25 years, with very flakey justification. Found out when I was asked to sell it. Property has lost more than half it's value, with zero compensation, rates/land tax were not adjusted. Its like theft. I've been working on trying to resolve issue for three years and still haven't managed to get answers or have a clear path forward.
Select to expand quoteremery said..
When I was discussing it with the ATO I pointed out that I could kick the relative out and put the rent up for someone else. The relative would go into government-funded veterans housing. They didn't care.
Ahh, welcome to the real world! 
I say this a bit cynically, but this is the reality of modern life.
In government and big business, no one give a damn about the overall result. They just care that they look good to their manager. I think this is leading to a workplace full of idiots that just care about themselves, but I think I am wrong, and its not leading that way; it has always been that way. The overall aims are lost, and broken up into individual little empires.
One of my wittier ex-colleagues used to use the phrase 'SEP' all the time, and I think this is where it applies. Someone else's problem. The person you told about the situation would be thinking 'don't care, it's not my problem. My problem is to do this crap'.
I have seen this a bit and I initially thought it was dumb, but then realised that these groups/departments are effectively rewarding people for the stupid responses that they are measured by. "Good stuff" is for someone else.
Next time, paint the ceiling green, rip up the carpet, go through an agent (initially) and keep a bit closer to the market rent. Maybe a regular rise every now and then to show it is at least going up? - These are all guesses of course.
