Join our investing community

DIY Super and "Related Parties"

Discussion in 'Superannuation, SMSF & Personal Insurance' started by MrDarcy, 7th Oct, 2006.

  1. MrDarcy

    MrDarcy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13th Sep, 2005
    Posts:
    283
    Location:
    Sydney
    I've searched but can't get a clear picture of exactly what a super fund may or may not invest in using this example.

    Say, the super wishes to purchase, as tenants in common, part of a house. There is no mortgage on the house and the other owner paid the rest. So far OK, but what if the other owner was the mother of one of the super funds beneficiaries, is that allowed or are we investing in the house of a "related party" ? The mother herself is not a beneficiary.
     
  2. TryHard

    TryHard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2005
    Posts:
    863
    Mr Darcy, as long as the terms of the SMSF's Investment Strategy allow that type of investment, and as long as the fund does not borrow money, I am fairly sure what you have suggested is ok. NickM ?

    Cheers
    Carl
     
  3. MrDarcy

    MrDarcy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13th Sep, 2005
    Posts:
    283
    Location:
    Sydney
    The investment strategory should be OK, as this is a long term growth investment which is all I want for super.

    I read some bits that say when otherwise "in-house" assets are purchased as tenants-in-common it's ok (so long as no leased?), but this asset will also be lived in by a relative, and I'm not sure that can be allowed with sole purpose tests or the like.

    Nick ?
     
  4. reidy75

    reidy75 Member

    Joined:
    20th Feb, 2007
    Posts:
    13
    Location:
    Sale, VIC
    Definitely not an option to own residential property in a fund (either 100% or as TIC) and lease that property to a related party.