Author Topic: Australian Investing Thread  (Read 2595166 times)

Wadiman

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3450 on: September 01, 2017, 04:05:07 PM »
Peering into my imaginary crystal ball I would say that for a 23 year old there will be better times in the next 20 years to buy a home in Sydney or Melbourne than today.

Back in 2004 we had made a killing on property between 1995 and 2004, so we took out a massive mortgage and bought a nice place on Sydney's northern beaches.

That place was worth less than what we paid for it for the next 5 years, and when we sold it in 2010 it was worth only 10% more than what we purchased it for, a gain of about 1.5% per year, or a real loss of about 1.5% per year.

Buying property at the top of a cycle is a bad idea.

If you are patient, and invest in stocks while you bide your time, you will see property prices stall and maybe even retreat a little. This will happen soon enough. Either this year or next..

When this stalling happens keep waiting. Your stocks will go up in value as money moves from property to stocks. Interest rates will rise, and more money will move out of property. Keep waiting.

After a few years, or several years you will note that auction clearance rates will start rising for the first time in years, and the number of people at open house will start increasing.

This is the time to revisit whether you really want to own a home in Sydney.

By this time you will have a solid deposit, and will be less at risk of mortgage stress if interest rates rise after you buy.

It is a time for exercising patience.

Great advice there IF!

lush

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3451 on: September 01, 2017, 06:38:24 PM »
Hi All, in trying to reach FIRE we are cutting back everywhere. We are now looking at our private health insurance ( just a couple no kids) and just want basic hospital cover. Any recommendations from this clever crowd? Thanks

Everyone's circumstances are different so I'd suggest looking at the non-commission comparison sites:

http://www.privatehealth.gov.au/dynamic/search

If you keep an eye on Ozbargain they tend to share the occasional incentivised switch by companies like iSelect.  If you don't mind giving up your contact details for a bit of communication it's an expensive way to earn a $200 gift voucher.

For what its worth, I've been with Frank and NIB.  But only paid very basic private hospital because I was earning enough to have to pay the surcharge, and buying basic private was  cheaper than the Medicare Surcharge.  But do read the terms and conditions carefully if you actually plan on relying on the insurance.  I went with these insurers assuming I'd still go public if something bad happened.  I have been in a shared public ward for a minor op. It's not like a private cabin in a cruise ship but there are worse experiences.

I've since left private insurance as I won't be earning anything for a bit. As you may know you have to pay a loading if you don't get it before the age of 30. They do give you 3 years off without resetting your loading, but its not well publicised.

The value of buying private health insurance if you don't earn above the threshold where the surcharge kicks in is debatable.

Here's an article about some of the maths involved in paying insurance, and what's advantageous in certain circumstances.

https://www.choice.com.au/money/insurance/health/articles/how-to-pay-the-lifetime-health-cover-loading-and-save

Thanks MisterHorsey! Has really opened my eyes as to what is not publicised!

niknah

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3452 on: September 01, 2017, 10:41:36 PM »
VAS mytax prefill?  Last year the statements came around 20th of july it hadn't prefilled by then so I entered it by hand on the 20th this was the last info I was waiting for.

Does anyone know if it does prefill into Mytax?

thanks. Koala.

I just had mytax prefill the VAS distributions and they were not correct.  They had added the unfranked dividends into the franked dividends number.  Best check with the annual statement, don't presume the prefill will be correct.


GT

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3031
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3453 on: September 01, 2017, 11:02:39 PM »
My questions are:
1. Should I make extra super contributions to make up for the my lost super?
2. Once I hit 15k savings, I plan to save 20k to invest in ETFs (VAS = 50%, VGS 50%) in 2x 10k transactions with Commsec. Continuing to invest quarterly as I can afford. Is this a sound strategy for my current position?
3. I plan to move to London with my S/O in 3-5 years time for 12 months or so (hence the join savings account for the move). Is there anything I should consider in terms of ETFs when living overseas/not earning AUD income? I saw it was mentioned in regards to US, does anyone have any UK specific information?
4. Lastly, I do have some concerns about the property market in Syd/Melb. I can see our population growth won't be slowing down anytime soon, and even though I don't have a crystal ball, I don't expect prices to drop but perhaps stagnate temporarily. I've discussed with S/O and have agreed for the next 5-10 years renting is definitely the better option (we plan to move around due to job changes/looking for a good place to settle long term). While we are happy to rent and invest in ETFs, I can't help but wonder if we are setting ourselves up to fail down the road if we do decide to buy a PPOR. Any tips/insights for things to consider?

Hi melfire.

It would have already been covered in your 69 pages of reading as we originally nutted it out in this thread, but here it is again, the investment order for Australians.  https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/investor-alley/investment-order/msg1333550/#msg1333550

As you've not provided your annual income (which is perfectly fine), Point 4 in the investment order may be relevant to your Q1.  I may be taking advantage of this option in June of next year if I continue #daddydaycare through til then, as I'd definately be under the cutoff.

Wadiman

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3454 on: September 02, 2017, 03:45:52 PM »
Anyone looked at https://www.brickx.com/?

Very interesting P2P concept for Aus property


deborah

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16041
  • Age: 14
  • Location: Australia or another awesome area
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3455 on: September 02, 2017, 04:17:13 PM »
Anyone looked at https://www.brickx.com/?

Very interesting P2P concept for Aus property


It was written up in Fairfax a little while ago http://www.smh.com.au/money/investing/brickx-offers-fractional-ownership-of-residential-property-for-investors-20160911-gre0eg.html - like a lot of journalism these days, it is little more than an ad.

Luckyvik

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3456 on: September 02, 2017, 09:54:14 PM »
Anyone looked at https://www.brickx.com/?

Very interesting P2P concept for Aus property


It was written up in Fairfax a little while ago http://www.smh.com.au/money/investing/brickx-offers-fractional-ownership-of-residential-property-for-investors-20160911-gre0eg.html - like a lot of journalism these days, it is little more than an ad.
Seems to me the fees are high.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7372
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3457 on: September 03, 2017, 03:24:43 AM »
Anyone looked at https://www.brickx.com/?

Very interesting P2P concept for Aus property


It was written up in Fairfax a little while ago http://www.smh.com.au/money/investing/brickx-offers-fractional-ownership-of-residential-property-for-investors-20160911-gre0eg.html - like a lot of journalism these days, it is little more than an ad.
Seems to me the fees are high.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah very high fees. The only people who will make money out of this are the promoters.

misterhorsey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 382
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3458 on: September 03, 2017, 10:00:56 PM »
The value of buying private health insurance if you don't earn above the threshold where the surcharge kicks in is debatable.

Here's an article about some of the maths involved in paying insurance, and what's advantageous in certain circumstances.

https://www.choice.com.au/money/insurance/health/articles/how-to-pay-the-lifetime-health-cover-loading-and-save

Thanks MisterHorsey! Has really opened my eyes as to what is not publicised!

No worries. Even Failfax press recently did an article on some of the hidden surprises of private health insurance.

http://www.smh.com.au/money/planning/is-private-health-insurance-worth-it-20170831-gy7uvq.html

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7372
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3459 on: September 04, 2017, 03:04:31 PM »
The value of buying private health insurance if you don't earn above the threshold where the surcharge kicks in is debatable.

Here's an article about some of the maths involved in paying insurance, and what's advantageous in certain circumstances.

https://www.choice.com.au/money/insurance/health/articles/how-to-pay-the-lifetime-health-cover-loading-and-save

Thanks MisterHorsey! Has really opened my eyes as to what is not publicised!

No worries. Even Failfax press recently did an article on some of the hidden surprises of private health insurance.

http://www.smh.com.au/money/planning/is-private-health-insurance-worth-it-20170831-gy7uvq.html

Appreciate your contributions misterhorsey, but that's a silly swipe that doesn't belong here.

NotSure

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3460 on: September 04, 2017, 10:18:28 PM »
Anyone with SunSuper, how do you check performance of your investments on their website, can't find anything. :(

I've my wife's super in AustralianSuper and it's super simple.

PDM

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
  • Location: Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3461 on: September 04, 2017, 11:26:15 PM »
The value of buying private health insurance if you don't earn above the threshold where the surcharge kicks in is debatable.

Here's an article about some of the maths involved in paying insurance, and what's advantageous in certain circumstances.

https://www.choice.com.au/money/insurance/health/articles/how-to-pay-the-lifetime-health-cover-loading-and-save

Thanks MisterHorsey! Has really opened my eyes as to what is not publicised!

No worries. Even Failfax press recently did an article on some of the hidden surprises of private health insurance.

http://www.smh.com.au/money/planning/is-private-health-insurance-worth-it-20170831-gy7uvq.html

Appreciate your contributions misterhorsey, but that's a silly swipe that doesn't belong here.

I would say it is fair. Mainstream media has 100% captured by the realestate industry and the average newspaper is little more than an excuse to publish all the realestate content. Fairfax Media is basically Domian Property and little else with all journalistic content skewed to supporting it.
Former SHM reader can't stand it now.

Same applies to News Limited and Realestate.com. Property firms with formerly reliable and trustworthy newspapers.

gsp

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3462 on: September 04, 2017, 11:29:38 PM »
Hi All
Thank you all for sharing your financial wisdom.
I have 300k in Super. I want to SMSF with 200k on property and 100K on Vanguard ETF.
1. Which one is better Vanguard ETF or Super fund  for that 100k ?
2.If Vanguard ETF then is hedged or unhedged better ?

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1928
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3463 on: September 05, 2017, 02:10:43 AM »
Hi All
Thank you all for sharing your financial wisdom.
I have 300k in Super. I want to SMSF with 200k on property and 100K on Vanguard ETF.
1. Which one is better Vanguard ETF or Super fund  for that 100k ?
2.If Vanguard ETF then is hedged or unhedged better ?

Maybe I'm not understanding the question correctly so I'll play it back to you. Do you want to get a SMSF ? If so then my understanding is that you could buy a Vanguard ETF within your super fund. You can also get a variety of super funds (not a SMSF) and invest in whatever options are available within those super funds. I think some super funds do offer up Vanguard ETF options.

mymatenate

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3464 on: September 05, 2017, 04:04:55 AM »
I just wanted to bump my post on farmland investing once and see if anyone wanted to discuss it further. I answered the questions which were asked (page 69) but no one has followed up. Before we depart the topic if anyone has any other thoughts to share, say even why they don't think it sounds like a good investment. I'm happy to answer any further questions...

Guys - what's your thoughts on investing in Australian farm land?

I've been running the numbers and chatting to my farmer friends and it doesn't seem all that bad

For example-

Good, flat arable land suitable for cropping and grazing in fairly reliable rainfall area for $2000 per acre.
Can lease easily for $60 per acre per year
Rates approx $8 per acre per year

Renter pays insurance.

Could buy a couple a hundred acres of flat productive land, without a house, so easy to manage and little in the way of other costs besides maintaining the boundary fences.

say, 200 acres x 2000 = $400,000 capital
200  x 60 = $12000 / year less $1600 rates = $10400
2.6% return

I know 2.6% is quite low, but you would expect the land will rise in value at least alongside inflation (over the long term), so 3% + 2.6% = 5.6%. Or looking at it another way, 2.6% that you can safely "withdraw" and spend.

Thoughts?

« Last Edit: September 05, 2017, 02:03:45 PM by mymatenate »

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7372
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3465 on: September 05, 2017, 05:13:10 AM »
Hi All
Thank you all for sharing your financial wisdom.
I have 300k in Super. I want to SMSF with 200k on property and 100K on Vanguard ETF.
1. Which one is better Vanguard ETF or Super fund  for that 100k ?
2.If Vanguard ETF then is hedged or unhedged better ?

It doesn't sound to me like you currently have the financial knowledge and capacity to run a SMSF.

$200k is not going to get you far in terms of buying a property when you can only gear to max 70%, and need to set aside funds for stamps and legals, as well as having a buffer in place.

Have you got a plan or an idea of what sort of property to buy? Have you talked to your accountant or advisor about it?

bigchrisb

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3466 on: September 05, 2017, 06:52:20 PM »
What you have described is an illiquid asset with a low yield income stream that should increase with inflation.  Its probably reasonably uncorrelated with equities or bonds. 

However, if you look at other illiquid assets with inflation hedged income streams, are you any better or worse?  The obvious comparisons would be commercial property, where 5-10 year lease terms are not uncommon, along with net leases (tenant pays costs).  Rent reviews are usually either a fixed rate or CPI.  Those sorts of assets are usually running 4-8% yield. 

I'd also suggest that the dividend from equities usually increases as fast or faster than inflation, but again with a higher starting point (5.5% gross for AU equities or 3% for world equities, using VGS as a quick metric).  I'd be asking what I'm getting for having my money tied up in an illiquid asset, and if its better or worse than my alternates.

It sounds like you have done well from farmland so far, and are comfortable with it.  I don't know enough about what the risks of this type of asset are - do you lose your tenant with extended drought?  Are you exposed to soft commodities prices with farmers wanting to lease the land?  Are you able to contest the land between multiple parties to create competition, or are you stuck leasing to the neighbor?  What happens in the event of fire/flood/disaster?  I don't know the answer to those questions, and the risk may well be low.  But I suspect its not zero, and I'd want to be adequately compensated for my risks, along with a return on my capital at least equal to the risk free rate.

But, if you are comfortable with the returns, your idea of spending the income as a swr on this land seems reasonable, as long as you are provisioning for any long term costs, such as fencing.

Thanks for bringing it up too - I'd like to see more asset classes discussed on here than just stocks, bonds and resi property.

I just wanted to bump my post on farmland investing once and see if anyone wanted to discuss it further. I answered the questions which were asked (page 69) but no one has followed up. Before we depart the topic if anyone has any other thoughts to share, say even why they don't think it sounds like a good investment. I'm happy to answer any further questions...

nora

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 215
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3467 on: September 05, 2017, 08:19:15 PM »
Hi All, in trying to reach FIRE we are cutting back everywhere. We are now looking at our private health insurance ( just a couple no kids) and just want basic hospital cover. Any recommendations from this clever crowd? Thanks

HIF was the cheapest when I looked into this a few years back. Only got it to avoid mls. Otherwise would have just stuck with public.

misterhorsey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 382
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3468 on: September 05, 2017, 08:33:44 PM »
The value of buying private health insurance if you don't earn above the threshold where the surcharge kicks in is debatable.

Here's an article about some of the maths involved in paying insurance, and what's advantageous in certain circumstances.

https://www.choice.com.au/money/insurance/health/articles/how-to-pay-the-lifetime-health-cover-loading-and-save

Thanks MisterHorsey! Has really opened my eyes as to what is not publicised!

No worries. Even Failfax press recently did an article on some of the hidden surprises of private health insurance.

http://www.smh.com.au/money/planning/is-private-health-insurance-worth-it-20170831-gy7uvq.html

Appreciate your contributions misterhorsey, but that's a silly swipe that doesn't belong here.

It was a 'swipe', yes. And it was 'silly', indeed.

But it's not without reason.

The aforementioned news publishing company misjudged the disrupted advent of the interwebs very badly - as many incumbent news orgs did across the world - and as a result is struggling. The Sydney Morning Herald was my beloved quality broadsheet when I was growing up. I'm afraid it is no more. The Age in my adopted home seemed to be marginally better, but I wouldn't say that anymore.

A vibrant democracy needs a robust press to critique power and keep it accountable, to provide a public record, to report the news but also provide a forum for critical and often uncomfortable debate. I don't believe Fairfax Media Limited are providing it. There are a few bright sparks remaining that I admire (Ross Gittins, John Silvester, Ruby Hamad, Nicole Pederson McKinnon in particular are worth a read). However, it seems to me that the online versions pander to celebrity gossip click bait, middle class status anxieties (private schools, fine dining), diet and nutrition neuroses, Apple product launches and of course Real Estate - home renos and all manner of real estate investment pumping.  It's like Buzz Feed for anxious, aspirational, materialistic, high consumption bourgeoisie. I did have a friend who worked on their online section - they do actively court clickthroughs on the online version, which at time was run separately from the print version. So maybe us online readers who aren't willing to pay for anything are to blame?

Either way, it's not the fault of the journos, but management.  You can't provide quality and comprehensive news coverage, opinion and analysis if you keep on sacking everyone.

I don't necessarily endorse MEAA's strategy, but their campaign page on Fairfax cuts is an interesting take on the decline of some once venerable mastheads.

https://www.meaa.org/campaigns/fair-go-fairfax/

I don't know what a sustainable commercial strategy is to provide decent quality coverage of local and national events. There are better out there that come to mind (The Guardian (Aus + UK), Washington Post) and there are worse (Daily Mail), but it's sad to see once quality print journalism in Australia engage in a race to the bottom.  It's not going to work.

Thanks for the opportunity to explain myself. Anyway, totally off topic. I shall say no more.

nora

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 215
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3469 on: September 05, 2017, 11:25:20 PM »
Anyone with SunSuper, how do you check performance of your investments on their website, can't find anything. :(

I've my wife's super in AustralianSuper and it's super simple.

Sunsupers is in a pdf file somewhere on their site

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7372
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3470 on: September 06, 2017, 04:36:30 AM »
The value of buying private health insurance if you don't earn above the threshold where the surcharge kicks in is debatable.

Here's an article about some of the maths involved in paying insurance, and what's advantageous in certain circumstances.

https://www.choice.com.au/money/insurance/health/articles/how-to-pay-the-lifetime-health-cover-loading-and-save

Thanks MisterHorsey! Has really opened my eyes as to what is not publicised!

No worries. Even Failfax press recently did an article on some of the hidden surprises of private health insurance.

http://www.smh.com.au/money/planning/is-private-health-insurance-worth-it-20170831-gy7uvq.html

Appreciate your contributions misterhorsey, but that's a silly swipe that doesn't belong here.

It was a 'swipe', yes. And it was 'silly', indeed.

But it's not without reason.

The aforementioned news publishing company misjudged the disrupted advent of the interwebs very badly - as many incumbent news orgs did across the world - and as a result is struggling. The Sydney Morning Herald was my beloved quality broadsheet when I was growing up. I'm afraid it is no more. The Age in my adopted home seemed to be marginally better, but I wouldn't say that anymore.

A vibrant democracy needs a robust press to critique power and keep it accountable, to provide a public record, to report the news but also provide a forum for critical and often uncomfortable debate. I don't believe Fairfax Media Limited are providing it. There are a few bright sparks remaining that I admire (Ross Gittins, John Silvester, Ruby Hamad, Nicole Pederson McKinnon in particular are worth a read). However, it seems to me that the online versions pander to celebrity gossip click bait, middle class status anxieties (private schools, fine dining), diet and nutrition neuroses, Apple product launches and of course Real Estate - home renos and all manner of real estate investment pumping.  It's like Buzz Feed for anxious, aspirational, materialistic, high consumption bourgeoisie. I did have a friend who worked on their online section - they do actively court clickthroughs on the online version, which at time was run separately from the print version. So maybe us online readers who aren't willing to pay for anything are to blame?

Either way, it's not the fault of the journos, but management.  You can't provide quality and comprehensive news coverage, opinion and analysis if you keep on sacking everyone.

I don't necessarily endorse MEAA's strategy, but their campaign page on Fairfax cuts is an interesting take on the decline of some once venerable mastheads.

https://www.meaa.org/campaigns/fair-go-fairfax/

I don't know what a sustainable commercial strategy is to provide decent quality coverage of local and national events. There are better out there that come to mind (The Guardian (Aus + UK), Washington Post) and there are worse (Daily Mail), but it's sad to see once quality print journalism in Australia engage in a race to the bottom.  It's not going to work.

Thanks for the opportunity to explain myself. Anyway, totally off topic. I shall say no more.

No no, that's ok... I thought you were saying it in the context of how those rabid conservatives like to describe anything that isn't to the right of Cory Bernardi.

I agree with the sentiments, I too am upset by what has happened to the SMH. There's simply not enough content anymore :(

In addition to those you mentioned I used to always read Hugh Mackay, Alan Ramsay (in his day), Michael West and Adele Horin. And the double spread of letters pages. News Review was a good 20 pages long, now cut to a pamphlet. The sports section is gutted, along with Good Weekend. Adele Ferguson seems to be keeping the business section going (what would she do without CBA?)

Fail is probably right... kodak moment might be an apt way to describe it :(

mjr

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 490
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Brisbane, Qld
  • Retired at 52
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3471 on: September 06, 2017, 11:22:28 AM »
So it's ok to say Failfax if you denigrate the content as vapid clickbait and real estate ads but if you denigrate it for climate change extremism or left-wing social justice and economics content then you're a rabid conservative and it's not ok.

For the record, I don't agree with cheap shots like failfax or fauxfacts and I think news.com.au and co are mindless drivel.

mymatenate

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3472 on: September 06, 2017, 02:19:44 PM »
What you have described is an illiquid asset with a low yield income stream that should increase with inflation.  Its probably reasonably uncorrelated with equities or bonds. 

However, if you look at other illiquid assets with inflation hedged income streams, are you any better or worse?  The obvious comparisons would be commercial property, where 5-10 year lease terms are not uncommon, along with net leases (tenant pays costs).  Rent reviews are usually either a fixed rate or CPI.  Those sorts of assets are usually running 4-8% yield. 

I'd also suggest that the dividend from equities usually increases as fast or faster than inflation, but again with a higher starting point (5.5% gross for AU equities or 3% for world equities, using VGS as a quick metric).  I'd be asking what I'm getting for having my money tied up in an illiquid asset, and if its better or worse than my alternates.

It sounds like you have done well from farmland so far, and are comfortable with it.  I don't know enough about what the risks of this type of asset are - do you lose your tenant with extended drought?  Are you exposed to soft commodities prices with farmers wanting to lease the land?  Are you able to contest the land between multiple parties to create competition, or are you stuck leasing to the neighbor?  What happens in the event of fire/flood/disaster?  I don't know the answer to those questions, and the risk may well be low.  But I suspect its not zero, and I'd want to be adequately compensated for my risks, along with a return on my capital at least equal to the risk free rate.

But, if you are comfortable with the returns, your idea of spending the income as a swr on this land seems reasonable, as long as you are provisioning for any long term costs, such as fencing.

Thanks for bringing it up too - I'd like to see more asset classes discussed on here than just stocks, bonds and resi property.

I just wanted to bump my post on farmland investing once and see if anyone wanted to discuss it further. I answered the questions which were asked (page 69) but no one has followed up. Before we depart the topic if anyone has any other thoughts to share, say even why they don't think it sounds like a good investment. I'm happy to answer any further questions...

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Chris!

Yes you are right, an extended drought could certainly affect your ability to find a tenant. Prolonged low commodity prices will affect the leasing rates. In many cases you are not restricted to just a neighbor for leasing - In some of the areas I am familiar with, farmers quite commonly farm land all over town. Or you sometimes will see a grazier from another area, perhaps further west, want to lease a "finishing block", i.e. to grow say lucerne and then run their sheep to fatten them for market.

You've given me some food for thought. With such a modest yield, it's a fair point to question whether one is being adequately compensated for the risks.

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2404
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3473 on: September 06, 2017, 02:30:28 PM »
The value of buying private health insurance if you don't earn above the threshold where the surcharge kicks in is debatable.

Here's an article about some of the maths involved in paying insurance, and what's advantageous in certain circumstances.

https://www.choice.com.au/money/insurance/health/articles/how-to-pay-the-lifetime-health-cover-loading-and-save

Thanks MisterHorsey! Has really opened my eyes as to what is not publicised!

No worries. Even Failfax press recently did an article on some of the hidden surprises of private health insurance.

http://www.smh.com.au/money/planning/is-private-health-insurance-worth-it-20170831-gy7uvq.html

Appreciate your contributions misterhorsey, but that's a silly swipe that doesn't belong here.

It was a 'swipe', yes. And it was 'silly', indeed.

But it's not without reason.

The aforementioned news publishing company misjudged the disrupted advent of the interwebs very badly - as many incumbent news orgs did across the world - and as a result is struggling. The Sydney Morning Herald was my beloved quality broadsheet when I was growing up. I'm afraid it is no more. The Age in my adopted home seemed to be marginally better, but I wouldn't say that anymore.

A vibrant democracy needs a robust press to critique power and keep it accountable, to provide a public record, to report the news but also provide a forum for critical and often uncomfortable debate. I don't believe Fairfax Media Limited are providing it. There are a few bright sparks remaining that I admire (Ross Gittins, John Silvester, Ruby Hamad, Nicole Pederson McKinnon in particular are worth a read). However, it seems to me that the online versions pander to celebrity gossip click bait, middle class status anxieties (private schools, fine dining), diet and nutrition neuroses, Apple product launches and of course Real Estate - home renos and all manner of real estate investment pumping.  It's like Buzz Feed for anxious, aspirational, materialistic, high consumption bourgeoisie. I did have a friend who worked on their online section - they do actively court clickthroughs on the online version, which at time was run separately from the print version. So maybe us online readers who aren't willing to pay for anything are to blame?

Either way, it's not the fault of the journos, but management.  You can't provide quality and comprehensive news coverage, opinion and analysis if you keep on sacking everyone.

I don't necessarily endorse MEAA's strategy, but their campaign page on Fairfax cuts is an interesting take on the decline of some once venerable mastheads.

https://www.meaa.org/campaigns/fair-go-fairfax/

I don't know what a sustainable commercial strategy is to provide decent quality coverage of local and national events. There are better out there that come to mind (The Guardian (Aus + UK), Washington Post) and there are worse (Daily Mail), but it's sad to see once quality print journalism in Australia engage in a race to the bottom.  It's not going to work.

Thanks for the opportunity to explain myself. Anyway, totally off topic. I shall say no more.

No no, that's ok... I thought you were saying it in the context of how those rabid conservatives like to describe anything that isn't to the right of Cory Bernardi.

I agree with the sentiments, I too am upset by what has happened to the SMH. There's simply not enough content anymore :(

In addition to those you mentioned I used to always read Hugh Mackay, Alan Ramsay (in his day), Michael West and Adele Horin. And the double spread of letters pages. News Review was a good 20 pages long, now cut to a pamphlet. The sports section is gutted, along with Good Weekend. Adele Ferguson seems to be keeping the business section going (what would she do without CBA?)

Fail is probably right... kodak moment might be an apt way to describe it :(

My response to this is simple: pay for your content. Subscribe.

If you want journalism that is better than the clickbait you get on other sites, the money has to come from somewhere, and the rivers of gold from advertising dried up long ago.

lush

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3474 on: September 10, 2017, 06:00:39 PM »
I have been trying to work out my first tax statement from Vanguard. At the moment I am re-investing all distributions and hope to be able to continue this for at least 2 more years…. so don’t really know what the amount would have been if the funds had gone straight into my bank account. In other words, is this information available on the tax statement? Is it Net Cash Distributions?

Vanguard do not want to answer this question. Which does not make much sense to me at all. Shouldn’t they be able to identify this? And my accountant also is reluctant to speak on behalf of Vanguard and has asked me to ask them. It’s all a bit crazy.

I need this information to determine if I was dependent on these funds to live off what that would have been, rather than the re-investing the distributions.

Thanks!

Rowellen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3475 on: September 10, 2017, 07:21:06 PM »
I have been trying to work out my first tax statement from Vanguard. At the moment I am re-investing all distributions and hope to be able to continue this for at least 2 more years…. so don’t really know what the amount would have been if the funds had gone straight into my bank account. In other words, is this information available on the tax statement? Is it Net Cash Distributions?

Vanguard do not want to answer this question. Which does not make much sense to me at all. Shouldn’t they be able to identify this? And my accountant also is reluctant to speak on behalf of Vanguard and has asked me to ask them. It’s all a bit crazy.

I need this information to determine if I was dependent on these funds to live off what that would have been, rather than the re-investing the distributions.

Thanks!


Generally net cash distributions would be cash received/reinvested. I don't have a Vanguard statement in front of me to check but I see a lot of tax statements in my work and this is usually the case.

Rowellen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3476 on: September 10, 2017, 07:22:14 PM »
Also you can log in to the share registry and see there, if it's for ETFs.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7372
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3477 on: September 11, 2017, 05:48:56 AM »
Add up all the extra shares you got allocated through DRPs and multiply by $70 (I think that was about the average DRP price for the year for VAS).

Ozstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Oztralia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3478 on: September 11, 2017, 03:59:33 PM »
I have been trying to work out my first tax statement from Vanguard. At the moment I am re-investing all distributions and hope to be able to continue this for at least 2 more years…. so don’t really know what the amount would have been if the funds had gone straight into my bank account. In other words, is this information available on the tax statement? Is it Net Cash Distributions?

I just checked mine and the Net Cash Distributions amount is within 1 share value of the amounts I have recorded as DRP purchases for last tax year, so yes. This is within tolerance because there is rarely, if ever, the exact amount in a dividend payment to buy an exact number of DRP shares, so there is a kitty of up to 1 share value that is yet to be reinvested at any given time. 

lush

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3479 on: September 11, 2017, 09:34:31 PM »
Thanks everyone for responding to my question about my Vanguard Tax Statement.  I now have confidence that it’s Net Distributions.

yleeinvest

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3480 on: September 13, 2017, 12:13:41 AM »
Im an American who just recently moved to Australia. Before I moved to Aussie I had a plan to get to FIRE mostly involving maxing out my 401k, Roth IRA, and investing in index funds by opening a brokerage account.  Now that I'm in Aussie this plan I had is obsolete esp with 401k and Roth IRA being replaced with a SUPER that cant be touched until 65. 

People of Aussie, need your help getting this American with a better understanding of investing in Australia for FIRE. I am leaning away from investing in real estate because I feel the housing market will decrease in value in the near future. In my opinion it is a matter of time before the highs of the housing market reverses.

Thanks in advance

MajorTom

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3481 on: September 13, 2017, 04:58:39 AM »
Now that I'm in Aussie this plan I had is obsolete esp with 401k and Roth IRA being replaced with a SUPER that cant be touched until 65. 

Anyone born after 1960 can access their super at 60.


yleeinvest

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3482 on: September 13, 2017, 05:08:59 AM »
Now that I'm in Aussie this plan I had is obsolete esp with 401k and Roth IRA being replaced with a SUPER that cant be touched until 65. 

Anyone born after 1960 can access their super at 60.

There is a heavy penalty involved if you access it before 65 right?

Ozstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Oztralia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3483 on: September 13, 2017, 05:33:11 AM »
Now that I'm in Aussie this plan I had is obsolete esp with 401k and Roth IRA being replaced with a SUPER that cant be touched until 65. 

Anyone born after 1960 can access their super at 60.

There is a heavy penalty involved if you access it before 65 right?

No, as long as you have reached preservation age (60) and are retired, there is no penalty for accessing your super. See https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/superannuation-and-retirement/how-super-works/getting-your-super for more details.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7372
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3484 on: September 13, 2017, 05:41:35 AM »
CBA is bouncing back, might have been a bit of a short squeeze at $73.

VAS has held up really well through the CBA plunge from $80+ down, considering that Bank is over 10% of the market.

Again, shows the benefits of diversification, happier to be holding the market as opposed to too much in single stocks.

cakie

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 142
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3485 on: September 13, 2017, 02:16:15 PM »
Now that I'm in Aussie this plan I had is obsolete esp with 401k and Roth IRA being replaced with a SUPER that cant be touched until 65. 

Anyone born after 1960 can access their super at 60.

There is a heavy penalty involved if you access it before 65 right?

No, as long as you have reached preservation age (60) and are retired, there is no penalty for accessing your super. See https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/superannuation-and-retirement/how-super-works/getting-your-super for more details.
Also, if you leave the country permanently, you can take your super with you...

itchyfeet

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 985
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3486 on: September 13, 2017, 09:57:29 PM »
CBA is bouncing back, might have been a bit of a short squeeze at $73.

VAS has held up really well through the CBA plunge from $80+ down, considering that Bank is over 10% of the market.

Again, shows the benefits of diversification, happier to be holding the market as opposed to too much in single stocks.

I just wish the ASX 200 would hurry up and crack 5,800 and get on it's merry way upwards from there.

bigchrisb

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3487 on: September 13, 2017, 10:23:38 PM »
CBA is bouncing back, might have been a bit of a short squeeze at $73.

VAS has held up really well through the CBA plunge from $80+ down, considering that Bank is over 10% of the market.

Again, shows the benefits of diversification, happier to be holding the market as opposed to too much in single stocks.

I just wish the ASX 200 would hurry up and crack 5,800 and get on it's merry way upwards from there.

Why?  I want earnings to grow (and am somewhat indifferent as to them being paid out as dividends or re-invested), but personally I'm quite happy with prices tracking sideways or indeed declining.  Rising stock prices just mean I get less for my money, either from new funds being deployed or from re-investment. 

I'd be quite content if things just tracked sideways, with a 4.35% net (6.2% gross) dividend yield, increasing with real GDP (say 2.5% real).  Or, look at earnings ratios, with about 6.3% earnings (PE of 15.3), again likely to increase with real GDP.  That's 8.7% above inflation pre tax - which I'd be more than happy to take in perpetuity!

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7372
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3488 on: September 14, 2017, 05:49:01 AM »
CBA is bouncing back, might have been a bit of a short squeeze at $73.

VAS has held up really well through the CBA plunge from $80+ down, considering that Bank is over 10% of the market.

Again, shows the benefits of diversification, happier to be holding the market as opposed to too much in single stocks.

I just wish the ASX 200 would hurry up and crack 5,800 and get on it's merry way upwards from there.

I'm happy for it to stay low while I still accumulate!

Dropped another $25k on VAS today 340 @ $73.99

Have a feeling a huge distribution is coming soon in October too...all the big fat juicy dividends from ANZ, WBC, NAB and MQG from the start of July, then BHP, RIO, FMG, AMP, SUN, WOW, WES and TLS from Aug/Sep, rounding it off with CBA at the end of September.

Should be a over $1 a unit when it finally goes ex.

potm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 554
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3489 on: September 14, 2017, 09:44:16 PM »
The media has been full of doom and gloom as always but the recent figures look very good for growth in Australia. Population growth is strong, jobs growth is strong, business investment has been rebounding, tourism and education are booming. There is a question of whether all this growth is actually raising living standards but there's no doubt it helps the earnings of Australian companies.
We're nearly at 10 years since the peak of the ASX and we're no where close to it. Baring a large property crash and recession, I think we can expect some decent returns in the next 10 to 20 years.
There will be a lot of worries and panics along the way but the rapidly rising middle class in developing countries provides a massive tailwind for growth. 

one piece at a time

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 100
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3490 on: September 14, 2017, 09:55:37 PM »
CBA is bouncing back, might have been a bit of a short squeeze at $73.

VAS has held up really well through the CBA plunge from $80+ down, considering that Bank is over 10% of the market.

Again, shows the benefits of diversification, happier to be holding the market as opposed to too much in single stocks.

I just wish the ASX 200 would hurry up and crack 5,800 and get on it's merry way upwards from there.

I'm happy for it to stay low while I still accumulate!

Dropped another $25k on VAS today 340 @ $73.99

Have a feeling a huge distribution is coming soon in October too...all the big fat juicy dividends from ANZ, WBC, NAB and MQG from the start of July, then BHP, RIO, FMG, AMP, SUN, WOW, WES and TLS from Aug/Sep, rounding it off with CBA at the end of September.

Should be a over $1 a unit when it finally goes ex.

You could probably make a good estimate on the dividend by tracking ARG, AFI, MLT etc. They all invest in pretty much the same stuff. Shouldn't take long to download 10 years of data and get a correlation going.

bigchrisb

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3491 on: September 14, 2017, 11:05:42 PM »

You could probably make a good estimate on the dividend by tracking ARG, AFI, MLT etc. They all invest in pretty much the same stuff. Shouldn't take long to download 10 years of data and get a correlation going.

Except VAS is structured as a trust, so distributes all income each period, where as the LICs are companies, with their dividends determined by their board.  The LICs tend to smooth income over time, where as the ETFs are more volatile tracking actual underlying distributions.

one piece at a time

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 100
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3492 on: September 17, 2017, 03:49:57 PM »
ah ok then, the VAS dividend could be a good leading indicator for the others

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7372
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3493 on: September 18, 2017, 02:47:49 AM »
Won't have long to wait to find out... should know in 2 weeks.

_____________

In other news, I hear the big banks have been cutting fixed rates again to investors. Trying to cash in and generate a positive vibe for a spring auction season which appears to be spluttering to shuddering halt

lush

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3494 on: September 18, 2017, 08:45:40 PM »
Today in the SMH Markets Live page this : "There will be $15.5 billion worth of dividend cheques in the mail this month from ASX 200 companies, Morgan Stanley analysts estimate, with a third of the bounty to be paid on a single day: the 29th of September."

My queston is I own VAS and wondering if this will be taken into account for the September distributions, or just that little bit too late. I just threw some more into VAS yesterday in the hope that the dividends will flow on. Thanks

Rowellen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Location: Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3495 on: September 18, 2017, 08:58:09 PM »
Today in the SMH Markets Live page this : "There will be $15.5 billion worth of dividend cheques in the mail this month from ASX 200 companies, Morgan Stanley analysts estimate, with a third of the bounty to be paid on a single day: the 29th of September."


I have no idea about your question but I can't help but wonder how much will be paid via direct credit as opposed to by cheques in the mail. Or is smh stuck in 1995?

Sorry bad joke. I'll go now.

bigchrisb

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3496 on: September 18, 2017, 09:16:29 PM »
VEU distribution has been announced.  Up 16.8% on last year in USD terms.  Currencies have moved around a bit, so taking a depreciating USD out of the equation, its up 10.3% in AUD terms.  I'm expecting to see announcements from VTS and VAS soon. 

mjr

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 490
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Brisbane, Qld
  • Retired at 52
VAS/VAP tax statement and pre-fill info
« Reply #3497 on: September 21, 2017, 02:08:07 PM »
I filled out my tax return on myTax a month ago, but have been waiting for the pre-fill for VAS and VAP to become available before submitting it.

I've found a difference in the 2 amounts.  Specifically with "Other net foreign source income".

On my tax statements, 20E and 20M are the same.

On the pre-fill, 20M is different, specially by the amount of the foreign income tax offset, 20O.

The pre-fill makes more sense to me and as this is what Vanguard has reported to the ATO is what I will be submitting.  But where do Vanguard get off supplying tax statements that are different to what they tell the ATO ?

Anyone else notice this ?

Eucalyptus

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
  • Location: South Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3498 on: September 24, 2017, 12:58:26 AM »
Super question:

I'm currently with UniSuper, which is a relatively good fund, and the fees aren't too high. They don't give pure index fund options but the options aren't too bad and they perform well.

I'm considering a job change, to SA Gov. My understanding is that SA Gov employees can't choose their super fund, and must go with one of the existing funds, like Statewide Super, or Triple S.

The performance of these funds, looks a bit mediocre, and the fees are scary-ish, especially compared to normal index funds.

I see it mentioned though that they are under different tax rules to other Super funds, being "untaxed". Any idea what this means, and the effect in reality? Does it mean that the normal 15% tax on inputs into the fund don't apply? If so, does anyone think that would make up for the funds otherwise being not all that great?

Not that I'd have a choice, and this isn't going to to really affect my decision to change jobs, but peace of mind would be great, haha.

Luckyvik

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Australian Investing Thread
« Reply #3499 on: September 24, 2017, 04:59:44 PM »
Super question:

I'm currently with UniSuper, which is a relatively good fund, and the fees aren't too high. They don't give pure index fund options but the options aren't too bad and they perform well.

I'm considering a job change, to SA Gov. My understanding is that SA Gov employees can't choose their super fund, and must go with one of the existing funds, like Statewide Super, or Triple S.

The performance of these funds, looks a bit mediocre, and the fees are scary-ish, especially compared to normal index funds.

I see it mentioned though that they are under different tax rules to other Super funds, being "untaxed". Any idea what this means, and the effect in reality? Does it mean that the normal 15% tax on inputs into the fund don't apply? If so, does anyone think that would make up for the funds otherwise being not all that great?

Not that I'd have a choice, and this isn't going to to really affect my decision to change jobs, but peace of mind would be great, haha.
Sounds like it might be a Defined Benefit fund where you get a defined benefit at retirement age worked out by a formula (google defined benefit Super) these have to be at least equal to the super guarantee rate of 9.5%.
Untaxed means the money going in doesn't get taxed at 15% going so that extra money is growing for you but you pay a higher % of tax when you take the money out at retirement. You might have to wait to get your contract before knowing for sure and the HR person should be able to provide more info.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Wow, a phone plan for fifteen bucks!