How to Gift a Property with Lowest Cost?

My two nieces have been staying in my apartment for many years. Now that I'm retired, I'd like to give the apartment to them instead of leaving it to them in my will. The market price for the apartment is around $485k. I have put the question to ChatGPT and it told me the followings:

  • Market value (gift value): $485,000
  • Original purchase price: $110,000

Location: Victoria

Assumption: It’s not a main residence, so Capital Gains Tax applies

Gift is made for no money, but stamp duty and CGT are based on market value

🔹 1. Receiver’s Cost (Stamp Duty)
Stamp duty on $485,000 in Victoria:

 Estimated Stamp Duty = $25,070
 (Using general rates from State Revenue Office Victoria)

🔹 2. Giver’s Cost (Capital Gains Tax)
Capital Gain:
$485,000 − $110,000 = $375,000

CGT Discount:
50% discount applies if held for more than 12 months

Taxable gain = $187,500

Tax Payable (by marginal rate): 
Marginal Tax Rate   CGT Payable (Estimate)
32.5%   $60,938
37% $69,375
45% $84,375

Let’s use 37% as a middle scenario:

CGT Payable = $69,375

🔹 3. Total Estimated Cost Summary
Party Cost Type Estimated Amount
Receiver Stamp Duty $25,070
Giver Capital Gains Tax $69,375
Total Combined $94,445

Is the calculated Total combined figure of roughly $100k correct?

Is there any way to keep the Total combined figure down?

Comments

  • +21

    i think if you give it to them in your will theres no CGT and no stamp duty payable

      • +7

        Gifting something and leaving it to them in your will are not the same thing.

        • +8

          Yes, but he's pointing out that this is a far better option.

    • CGT is still payable but only when they sell the apartment. If they'll be using it as an investment property, then there's not much else to consider, but if they'll be using it as their principal place of residence (PPOR), then depending on circumstances, they may be worse off.

  • +15

    I was looking at something similar last year. Transferring property titles and that of other family members into a single family trust.
    The cost of stamp duties ended up being so expensive that it was just easier to create / update wills. There is no way around these government fees.

    • +1

      Transferring property titles and that of other family members into a single family trust… There is no way around these government fees.

      Obviously. If it were possible, every seller would transfer assets into family trusts of buyers and pay no CGT/buyer no stamp duty.

      • The trick is to set the family trust up before the purchase.

        • +2

          can it be willed into a family trust? (provided you're going to wait till they die)

        • How is that a trick? There's still CGT and/or stamp duty on the transfers? And because it's in a trust it's not eligible to get main residence exemptions on CGT/land tax?

          Do you actually know anything about this or are you just LARPing as a tax bro again

  • I assume you are not on or planning to apply for a means-tested or Centrelink benefit as the gifting rule would apply.

    But as you are gifting a property close to half a million, I would expect your asset (and/or income) would exceed any maximum limit for those said benefit.

    • +5

      No, I am not planning to apply for any means-tested or Centrelink benefits. I'm not wealthy, but I own my home and have no children. My superannuation and share investments should be enough to support me for the rest of my life.

      The apartment (on the fringe of the CBD) was originally intended as an investment property. Since my nieces moved in, I've asked them to set aside $800 a month to cover council rates, utility bills (water, gas, electricity), and maintenance costs. This arrangement has been working well so far, but I'm starting to feel a bit tired of dealing with the Owners Corporation, bills, council rates, and the need to forward everything to my nieces to manage.

      That's why I'm considering transferring the apartment to them.

      • +8

        Go overseas or disappear for 12 years and let the nieces claim squatters' rights (they are effectively doing all of this now, but they need to pay the outgoings directly). Check with your lawyer if this saves on CGT/stamp duty before you embark on this journey.

        • +1

          You have to prove that you lived there without the owners permission to claim adverse possession, which is a pretty high bar

      • +3

        Get the owners corp to change your email to a new address that they control, teach them to forge your signature, put gas and elec bills in their name, water bill and rates have to be in your name but can be sent to their email.

    • +22

      The drawback in this strategy is the time required.

      And the fraud.
      And it also means that OPs actual PPOR may be subject to cgt if they later sell.
      And making it PPOR doesn’t remove the historical capital gain.

    • +2

      ATO has entered the chat.

      This is so flawed its funny.

  • +16

    Let your will do it for free

    • It wont be for free, at least not to the nieces, as it is an investment property it is doesnt qualify for primary residence exemption. At least i assume from the way it is written he is not living in the apartment as well.

  • +25

    Just tell them that the house is theirs, treat it as if they own it, make sure your will is updated and let it pass to them when “that times” comes. It doesn’t really matter who’s name is on the title if you are letting them live there like they own it.

    • +1

      This is actually the second option I put forward to my nieces. As in my answer above to TheMindsetTraveller, I am a bit tired of being the legal owner who needs to deal with matters related to the apartment.

      • +2

        The risk with doing this is that if there are other interested parties wills can easily be contested for a variety of reasons, that may not seem fair to you, and end up in a result that you didn't want. So you can't always rely on a will. Just need to make sure that you research this before going down this path.
        I am speaking from personal experience here in my family where a will was contested

        • +1

          Once you're dead you won't can't care and won't have an opinion about it being fair or not.

          • +9

            @tenpercent: Even though I am not going to be around, I would not want to leave something valuable to someone I care for, and then have it end up in the hands of somebody else completely undeserving.

        • +3

          Yeah there's a s#itstorm of possibilities where boyfriend moves into the 'free' house, turns it into a party house, drug den, incurring all sorts of damages, and nieces walk away, leaving you with a smouldering ruin.

          What if you offered it to the nieces as joint tenants or one as sole proprietor, IF they pay out your costs like CGT/Stamp Duty of $95K or whatever - that would still look like a bargain surely for a $485K property

          I'd reckon most young people would jump at the chance to pay $95K for a property worth over 5 times that !

          You doing all the work for something they might not feel grateful for if they get it handed to them on a plate, doesn't feel fair, and you know people only appreciate stuff that they worked to earn.

          Quid Pro Quo - they pay your costs, they get a gift of nearly $400K - you're already Way Generous there !

          And surely if they claim poor, they could lean on their parents to 'lend' (ha - gift!) them the $95K - and once they've realised they have to work for stuff, they won't be blaming you for lumping them with bills - a little life lesson for them to take responsibility for stuff …

      • I am a bit tired of being the legal owner who needs to deal with matters related to the apartment.

        Surely they can take on responsibility for this? There is very little you would actually need to do.

        Would also be much cheaper for to pay a third party to take care of these matters for you, than to actually transfer ownership. (which is going to cost >$100k)

      • Transfer eg. 5% of share of property to your nieces instead? They will have more or less the same legal rights & responsibilities regardless of their share of the property as part of "tenant in common".

        • You would have to pay CGT and also stamp duty.

  • +1

    In the will /thread

  • -5

    Where do you plan to live once they become the owners?

  • -5

    I got a real estate agent to provide a letter with a low-ish appraial, and then used that as market value calculation.

    With the purchase price, make sure you add on the original stamp duty paid, the original conveyancing costs and any other capital improvement items.

    So included AC, carpet, painting etc.

    Capital Gains is unavoidable, but I was able to reduce my amount by a fair amount.

    • -2

      I got a real estate agent to provide a letter with a low-ish appraial, and then used that as market value calculation.

      So fraud is your answer?

      • +13

        I thought it was best practise in that industry.

    • +1

      What you did their is basically fraud. The valuation is supposed to be an independent valuer/appraiser.

      • +1

        Would it also be fraud to shit on the floor, leave the yard over grown, do random (water based) graffiti all over the house (because you felt like it that week?) and do a burnout out the front while the valuer is walking through?
        ..

        Gotta do what you gotta do sometimes.

  • +1

    My two nieces have been staying in my apartment for many years. Now that I'm retired, I'd like to give the apartment to them instead of leaving it to them in my will.

    That is lovely of you, but why do you want to do it now rather than let you will take care of it?

    Doing it now, you'll trigger a tax event

    Transferring now or in the will means no change for them, unless they plan to sell it or you planned to get some money somehow from the transfer?

    Is there any way to keep the Total combined figure down?

    Do nothing, let the will do it.

    • Could it be contested in a will? E.g. OP's own children would claim it's theirs?

      • -1

        Could it be contested in a will?

        Look they can contest it if they want. But that doesn't mean they'll win.

        OP's own children would claim it's theirs?

        On what grounds? Just because you are their children, doesn't mean you instantly get everything. You can't just say it was my dads I want it.

        At the end of the day you don't have to leave anything for your kids if you don't want to.

        • The OP has said he doesn't have kids but our family has recent personal real lived experience that demonstrates you don't know much about wills and children.

          Even with a careful and specific will that provided a modest sum for an only child that hadn't spoken to the parent in 20 years, that child challenged the will and received most of the deceased estate. And in the case of my FiL, his lawyer also specifically advised to treat all children equally in the will as siblings can easily challenge.

          Wills are not particularly binding when it comes to a child who feels inadequately provided for, no matter what the circumstances of the relationship.

  • +2

    I am doing this ATM and have had my accountant and lawyer / Conveyancer involved. The will doesn't prevent CGT, stamp duty and Conveyancers fees unfortunately. We used the Governor Generals appraisal from the council rates and had a real estate agent do a valuation to show the profit gain to work out CGT.

    • Thanks for sharing your experience. I didn’t realise that a will doesn’t avoid capital gains tax. Does the beneficiary actually have to pay for the CGT in order to receive the property?

      • -3

        They are talking crap….. There is no CGT on property left via a will.

        • Yes there is if it is an investment property

          • @gromit: No there isn't, if a IP is left to someone via a will, there is no CGT paid by the receiver or the person who passed.

            https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals-and-families/investments-…

            • @JimmyF: From the link that you posted:
              Generally, capital gains tax (CGT) does not apply when you inherit an asset.

              When you sell an asset you have inherited, and the asset is:

              not a property, the normal rules apply for calculating your CGT,

              a property, such as a house, it may qualify for the main residence exemption from CGT,

              a collectable or personal use asset, the normal rules apply – that is, the asset is subject to CGT unless it was acquired for less than the thresholds for these types of assets.

              • @Scet106:

                When you sell an asset you have inherited, and the asset is:
                not a property, the normal rules apply for calculating your CGT,

                But it is a property….. So normal rules don't apply.

                Generally, capital gains tax (CGT) does not apply when you inherit an asset.

                Correct, we are talking about the OP transferring a property asset to their nieces. So if they do that now while alive, the OP will have a CGT event. If the OP lets the will do it, there is no CGT for either side at the time of transfer.

                a property, such as a house, it may qualify for the main residence exemption from CGT,

                As they are living it in now, I can't see why it wouldn't become the nieces PPOR once transferred, so exemption for CGT will apply when they sell it assuming they keep it as a PPOR. Otherwise the cost based will be the value of the house at the time they inherited it.

                • @JimmyF:

                  As they are living it in now, I can't see why it wouldn't become the nieces PPOR once transferred, so exemption for CGT will apply when they sell it assuming they keep it as a PPOR. Otherwise the cost based will be the value of the house at the time they inherited it.

                  No the cost base is calculated at the time the deceased acquired it. It doesn't dissolve CGT liability.

          • @gromit: But GCT applies only when it is sold, not at transfer.

        • There most certainly is if its used as an investment property.

          • -1

            @Scet106:

            There most certainly is if its used as an investment property.

            and yet the ATO says otherwise. See comment above.

            • @JimmyF: THe ATO don't say that at all, if it's not a PPOR and is used as an investment you will pay CGT, I'm going through this right now.

              "and yet the ATO says otherwise. See comment above" What comment are you referring to?

    • Yes, it does not prevent CGT.

      It just allows it to rollover.

      If you sell within 2 years within the deceased's date of death, then there is no CGT payable.

      I am not really sure how it works when you have jointly held property either, but I suspect CGT starts to accumulate on half of the property, which means most people will be in this situation……
      ATO Website on Joint Tenancy Rollover

      *It's a federal thing, so it is Australia wide.

    • +3

      You can sell it for $1, but you will still be liable for tax at the market valuation.

    • +3

      You did not need to tell us you weren’t an accountant.

      • +1

        "but the guy at the barbeque sounded so confident when he told me how easy it was and there was nothing the ATO could do about it"

  • +3

    Sell it to them for 20% discount to market value (I recall the ATO allows it) and agree to receive payments spread out over several years to minimise your marginal tax rate and the CGT you end up paying. You can return the payments to them via gifting (keep it under $10k per year so you don't impact aged pension).

    Have you ever lived in the apartment? Were they paying rent or have you ever rented it out for more than 6 years? You may not have to pay CGT.

    • +2

      Wrong approach. Sell say 10% of the property to them each year to minimise CGT.

      • Why?

        • Not arms length (that is, not market value), can go to jail.

          • +2

            @ihbh: You're right, my proposal isn't quite right. But selling gradually over time eg. 10% per year, to minimise CGT could be considered a drip-feed scheme (not allowed).

            Perhaps using an installment sale agreement under Division 240 could achieve the desired outcome of spreading the CGT over several years. Or maybe a buy to rent arrangment at market rates and valuations.

            Couple it with 10k/year tax free gifting to return some of the money back to them. Plus nobody needs to know or will know if you buy another several grand worth of gift cards (@10% discount using deals you see on Ozbargain) and then happen to give the cards to them every year.

      • How do you sell 10% of a property?

        Do you add their 10% of their name to the title deed each time?

        • Consult a solicitor.

          • @tenpercent: You could probably save yourself a consultation fee by gaining a basic knowledge of the underlying rules in the first place :)

            Though of course if you had that, you wouldn't need to LARP

            • @Crow K: Have you heard of tennants in common?

              • @tenpercent: If it's something like the legal concept of "tenants in common" sure, if it's the name of a David Tennant lookalike talent agency, no, I haven't.

                When you are LARPing as someone who knows the rules about these sorts of things, are you aware "tenants in common" is a thing that needs to be stated upfront at the property purchase time and supported by a legal agreement?

                • @Crow K:

                  needs to be stated upfront at the property purchase time

                  Not in QLD and NSW, at least.
                  https://www.ealawyers.com.au/blog/2021/june/add-spouse-to-pr…
                  https://qro.qld.gov.au/duties/transfer-duty/exemptions/home-…
                  https://cjclaw.com.au/sell-half-share-property

                  When you are LARPing as a crow, all you do is ka kaw.

                  • -2

                    @tenpercent: If you think "there's a rule that allows a person who wholly owns a property to transfer exactly half to their spouse to make them equal co-owners" is somehow a solution to "how to transfer 10% of a property to my niece" then I think we may need to hold you back a year.

                    Every single suggestion you have made in this thread (split the cash proceeds of the property over several years, sell 20% of the property at a time etc) has been fundamentally wrong.

                    You know how you didn't know how imputation credits or negative gearing works? It's the same as that. It's another financial/tax subject you know nothing about.

                    I don't know why you are fixated at LARPing at something you have literally no useful information on, but it's not working for you.

                    • @Crow K: Pity OP didn't originally put the property in a unit trust with say 100 units.

                      Still incur stamp duty on sale of any units.

                      Any objections?

                      • @ihbh: Not sure why you would want to miss out on the main residence CGT exemption by doing something weird like that, but if someone wants to pay as much tax as possible, who am I to ruin their plans with an objection?

                        • @Crow K: The apartment is OP's investment property.

                          • @ihbh: Well, it is now (maybe he lived in it originally).

                            Even if he bought it entirely via a unit trust and never intended on claiming that exemption, you now have the annual unit trust compliance costs, the stamp duty transfer costs and the risk of double taxation by triggering CGT event E4 on your units…

                            …what exactly was meant to be the benefit of doing it this way, exactly? This seems like a lot of expense and tax risk to be able to say "I transferred X % of a property to someone without using my will"?

                            Like I said before, who am I to object to someone spending as much money as possible.

                            • @Crow K: I transferred X % of a property to someone without using my will

                              X% … p.a. for 1/X years to minimise annual income and hence total CGT.


                              If you look at my comment (https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/16573436), I'm generally a practical person. These are fringe ideas, that try to make it work for the OP, but fall over ultimately. Maybe I should put /s in my comments.

                    • -1

                      @Crow K: Did you just learn the word "larp" this week? Is that the 'word of the week' in Crow land?

                      It's not just for spouses. And it's not just for exactly 50% splits. Please educate yourself.

                      I did and do know how negative gearing works. However you are very confused about supply and demand dynamics. From recollection you seem to think that removing negative gearing will magically increase the total number of livable dwellings in the country and won't just result in a short-lived game of musical chairs shifting investment properties between different kinds of investors. Removing negative gearing will in no way contribute to solving the housing crisis (including rental unaffordability, house price unaffordability, and the homelessness problem growing by over 10k people per month) with tens of thousands more migrants flow into the country every month.

                      Please resist replying to me henceforth. Your behaviour is borderline stalkerish. Sad really.

                      • -1

                        @tenpercent: I'm not going to refight that battle with you, if you're convinced that negative gearing is a deduction for buying a property then neither I nor the laws of economics are going to convince you otherwise.

                        I don't need moral judgements on online forum posting activity from the guy who made the single most highest number of comments last month, outranking even jv.

                        Clearly this world is precious to you, which is why you spend so much posting time here.

                        It's just a pity you're not better at it.

                        • @Crow K: You'll get soot all over yourself arguing with that blackened pot up there.

      • Wrong approach. Sell say 10% of the property to them each year to minimise CGT.

        This doesn't exist. If ownership changes then CGT will be payable as well as stamp duty.

    • +1

      Why would receiving payments on a sale of a property over several years cause you to have a different tax effect/minimize marginal tax rate?

      Doesn't the entire sale proceeds go into your tax return on the contract date of the sale, regardless of when you receive the cash?

      • The idea is that instead of declaring a $187,500 taxable gain in one financial year which will automatically push OP into the highest tax bracket, they can instead spread it out over a few years and keep their tax bracket down.

        • +1

          I know what the idea is, and I also know the rules don't permit that idea.

          You might as well have the idea that you decide not to write any numbers in your tax return at all while you are at it.

          • -1

            @Crow K: Structure it as a DIV 240 compliant installment sale agreement.

            Which rules specifically don't permit that idea?

            • +1

              @tenpercent: Okay, let's have a read..

              Division 240 is a section of the rules concerning the timing of a hire purchase agreement for the sale of goods/trading stock.

              Um.

              So buying a house isn't a sale of goods, and you don't have a hire purchase agreement in place? This is legislation for people selling large pieces of farm equipment to each other under financing agreements, it's not for private residence sales?

              Did you mean to quote a different bit of law?

              • +1

                @Crow K: Oh, and then sect 240.35 sec2 specifically says that if the sale value of the property is larger than the cost base, the entire amount gets included in the seller's tax return in the year of the sale anyway?

                So uh, all the rules say you can't do this.

                Finance and tax stuff clearly isn't your thing, is it, l'il buddy.

                • -2

                  @Crow K: Ka KAw

                  • @tenpercent: I mean yeah, you do the animal sounds pretty good.

                    Maybe stick to that?

                    Your contribution to the wider tax planning discussion can be "got his animal sounds right". :)

                    • -1

                      @Crow K: Polly want a cracker?

                      • +1

                        @tenpercent: See, that's a parrot, not a crow.

                        Okay, a bit of a setback on being across animal sounds.

                        It's my fault, I set the bar too high.

                        • -1

                          @Crow K:

                          See, that's a parrot, not a crow.

                          I don't care how you or Polly identify

                          • +1

                            @tenpercent: It's sad how quickly we go from "person knows nothing about tax but is full of ideas" to "angriest edgelord who is blowing through his pre-bath screentime"

  • +2

    Step 1 ask ChatGPT

    Step 2 ask Ozbargain to reitterate your confirmation bias

    Step 3 get it all wrong and pay ATO penalty rates at

    Brilliant

    • -1

      Not quite like that.

      Step 2.5: Consult accountant and lawyer / Conveyancer

      Step 3: get it all wrong and pay ATO penalty rates at Pay mininal rates :)

      • -1

        ChatGPT isn't a research tool, it's a LLM - basically a fancy version of your predictive text function on your phone. I'm not sure why you trust it to give you correct financial advice.

        Maybe you need to learn by reading a book on the subject or pay for an accountant/lawyer to give you some actual advice on the matter if you're too lazy to do actual research. LLms and forums are a bad place to go for financial advice. The absolute bes tthing they can offer you is advice on which books to read.

        • Thanks for the advice. I use ChatGPT and this forum to collect some fundamental info before getting professional financial advice. It’s good to have an idea of knowing what I am up against. I did use an accountant to handle my taxes before retirement. Now I’m handling the tax returns myself and I hope to simplify things around me further. “Getting rid” of the apartment is one of them.

          • @BendBridge: Honestly, as uncredited as wikipedia is as a source, it's still a more accurate place to get basic info than an LLM. You literally can't trust a sinlge thing it says, as its algorthym is not tuned for factual accuracy, so much as how closely it would match the tone and structure of a human's answer.

  • +1

    They can pay the $100k, makes for a pretty cheap apartment.

  • +7

    The only way is to marry one of them, and change to be joint tenants. Then divorce, and give her the property.

    In Australia, it is legal for an individual to marry their niece. This is not considered a prohibited relationship under the Marriage Act 1961.

    • +16

      Thinking a little bit too far outside the box here..

    • +7

      Real bargain is always in the comments

Login or Join to leave a comment