Don’t let the title fool you, even if you are not a Millennial you may benefit from these fantastic apps. These tools could help you save for your first home, new car or your next holiday adventure. But most importantly, they can help you build your wealth which seems to be an area that millennials are struggling with the most.
GoodBudget is a budgeting app that allows the user to create a budget that is easy to stick to, making saving money a lot easier. GoodBudget uses a virtual form of the old envelope system where you put your money into an envelope for each expense and when an envelope is empty to stop spending. You start with a savings envelope then allocate funds to your expenses. You have planned your savings before your expenses so you don’t overspend.
GoodBudget comes with a free plan that includes 10 regular envelopes and can be used on 2 devices.
The perceived high costs involved with running your own fund can sometimes be the determinant factor for many people, especially when considering if having an SMSF is right for them. In addition to this, the first question I get asked from prospective clients is “what are your fees?”. It’s a legitimate question and is usually the catalyst for trustees to change administration providers, that and the lack of perceived value they are receiving for that cost.
Being in this industry for quite a while now I have come across many different fee structures. Traditionally the fees to run an SMSF are higher than your industry or retail fund, however the opportunities afforded to you with control and flexibility need to be weighed up in terms of the value they provide you in reaching your retirement goals. In 2014 Rice Warner Actuaries conducted research on the SMSF operating costs across the country and have come up with a scaled view demonstrating the variance in costs.
*In 2014 Rice Warner Actuaries
This table is based on a fund in accumulation mode and doesn’t take in the extra costs firms are charging for pension set ups,
On issuance of the Practical Guidance in June this year for related party borrowings, the ATO acknowledged that further information was needed.
Recently, the ATO released Tax Determination 2016/16 which dealt with the subject of when a limited recourse borrowing arrangement has not been entered into on arm’s length terms.
The core principal at the heart of the release of the information from the ATO is that all dealings between a related party of the SMSF and the SMSF must be on ‘commercial terms’, or ‘arm’s length’. The meaning of commercial terms or arm’s length in relation to obtaining a loan in an SMSF, is that the terms of the loan, ie the interest rate, amount borrowed and term of the loan, must reflect what can be obtained from a third party such as a banking institution.
An example taken directly from the ATO tax determination compares a non arm’s length LRBA and an Arm’s Length LRBA, provides the following example:
The SMSF purchased a commercial property;