For property bought within 1 year, RPGT is 30% on profit.

Question : if there is no profit made (e.g. S&P price minus all expenses is lower than selling price); is it valid for RPGT=0%?? Agent told me cannot ... must have a minimal profit (if so, what is that min amount) ... otherwise will get into legal problem.

Seeking advise from experts ... if that agent pulling a quick one on me?? If property bought at wrong time, then forever cannot sell.

RPGT - Real Property Gain Tax <- already answer your question...

Sometimes, agent spoke/ shared something without basis...

If there is legal implication, better seek your advise from lawyer

This post has been edited by yiivei: Mar 12 2014, 04:49 PM

Please note that the Tax dept has their own valuation of your prop.... Your valuer may value RM1 mil, Tax dept may value it as RM1.2 mil....

But can't one sell below tax dept valuation value for some reason e.g. urgent need of $???

Why don't u report a lost then claim RPLC (Real Property Loss Claim), claim u sell at loss ask government to compensate 30% to U...lol

What expenses do u mean ? ur selling price base on who valuation ? ur own valuation to escape RPGT. .lol

u can sell.... jus they may think you get paid additional out of S&P price.... everybody trying to avoid paying tax will probably tell the same story isnt it? I dont think Tax dept is a charity house....

This post has been edited by AppreciativeMan: Mar 12 2014, 05:04 PM

Yes, you can. Only thing is you have to go through their scrunity.

Too many undervalue selling/buying will raise red flag too.

Expenses includes property agent commission, property developer administrative charges and lawyers fees ...

RPGT calculate based on your net profit of the amount you earn to tax it.
It's can after deducted lawyer fees, agent commission, only calculate your tax amount.


REAL PROPERTY GAINS TAX FOR 2014 Tax Rates
Personal (citizen & PR) Company
Disposed within 3 years 30% 30%
Disposed in 4th year 20% 20%
Disposed in 5th year 15% 15%
Disposed after 5 years 0% 5%

For non-citizen, disposal within 5 years is subject to a flat RPGT of 30%. Disposal after 5 years, RPGT is at 5%.

If you want to skip for RPGT, the only thing u can do is hold your house until 5 year.

....or no gain mah oso no RPGT. Buy at higher SPA price and pay extra MOT but in the end can "save" some RPGT.

UUU campers will say u bloody liar, now all property price UUU, how come u making loss,

Be a responsible citizen, Just pay the tax lah !

if let said i bought subsale.. 1m one year later.. i sell out.. 1.05m
so i not gain anything.. RPGT 30% 50k ( deducted lawyer fees, agent commission) nothing to gain.. so the RPGT = 0 ??

u shld stay in "4 Critical Signs of a Bubble Market", other thread is simply not suitable for u.... u may cause the thread to move into kopitiam.....

Sometimes it is not about UUU or DDD... Some people might just need the money for emergency hence selling way lower than market value for quick disposal.

So please dont make this an issue of UUU or DDD.

If u claim to have bought a Property and then sold in in less than 1-year (or even within say 5-years) and made no profits, the IRB will look at your case very carefully, in particular:

1) Original Buying and current Selling Price - make sure its genuine and mind you, IRB can arbitrarily set a new selling price based on their own Market Value if they feel that your current selling price is below 'Market Value'

2) Expenses - make sure its only the permitted expenses claimed with proper receipts

3) Identity of the Original Seller and Current Buyer - make sure its not related to you, else, IRB will see it as some sort of scheme to artificially deflate / inflate the selling price

Its possible, actually to sell a property at such a short tenure and make no profit. RPGT is only on profits and who says, u must make profits from property. There are many ppl who make losses due to bad investments. But make sure your deal is above board.

This post has been edited by cfa28: Mar 13 2014, 09:31 AM

last time, each individual is having a right to disposed their property with RPGT exemption once a life time. Is the right still available nowadays?

I thought the one cause 4 CSOBM is the public transport passenger with 2 660K Condo ??
How many dozen of RPGT threads i seen, those admin/staff/mod all keep blind eye, yes lucifah & cherroy i do mean u 2.

How many dozen of DDD threads I seen....... Yrs after yrs..... Till date nothing prove right at all.......

30% is on your sales price, not profit. so if you make no profit, you still have to pay 30% RPGT tax if you buy and sell fast. (rugi)

RGPT = Real Property Gains Tax
Please be sure of your knowledge before sharing.....

Property will always go up , due to land is scarce as a commodity. You cannot create land out of thin air.

price may stagnate a little, and you might get some bargain all the time from people wanting a quick fire sale.

If Malaysians have holding power , how long do you think we can hold off our purchase of home ? Seems to me Malaysians in general have holding power , as we all still have jobs and no mid level heavy retrenchment and jobless.

Speculators are currently holding on their property , hoping that they can outlast the slowing down of property purchasers demand. They are tightening their belts , spending less in the retail markets and paying off their investment dues.

So let's see how long they can continue to scale down their lifestyle , or would they be victorious as buyers cannot wait to own their first home without sacrificing their lifestyle by living further away.

Waa very smart explanation lol...

So u mean if u bought a property for 1 M later sell at 1.2 M but need to pay 360K RPGT, which mean U actually loss 160K ? correct ?

Real Property "GAIN" Tax not Real Property "SALES" Tax, understand ? Tax from the "Gain" not from "Sales" ..

oh...I misinterpreted

means buy at 1m sell at 1.2m have to pay 30% of the 200k?

This post has been edited by Chaud: Mar 14 2014, 10:47 AM

The longer the flipper hold the higher their cost, when their spending getting less economy will get worse, soon economy will be having contraction, people start getting pay cut or retrenchment, the first thing they do is fire sales their extra property, if not they might even loss their own staying house.
Only first house buyer would be desperate, the rest of us can wait for dead chicken. .Muahahahha

government can reclaim lands... tell you only if they can hold longer than 10 years they survive the wave, holding below 10 years especially 5 years and below, see how they burn their hands in this market..

every market so silence di, no worries, they can hold osos no use, new developments coming, their credit locked in old properties one so competition lesser, with current market flippers sure be very careful couple with developers maximum profit means entry price high, this will make them shy away..

sure got ppl firesales one, many actually plan only to sell off upon VP, those times are still here, but the price quoted beats potential buyers...

yes only from gain, but need to include loan penalties, legal fees (sales & purchase & loan), stamp duties (loan & s&p).. when you bought from developer, and then another round of S& P legal fees when you sell...

and also, minus your initial deposit paied say 500k (50K), and any loan that you have service , say you pay 2.2 k monthly, you paid 10 months, that is 22k..

PROVIDED YOU CAN SELL, minus everything you get the nett, then divide by minimum 3 years or 2 years completions dates for new prop landed and high rise..

other than this it rugi kes... every month bleed 2.2k , sumore insurance fire, quit rent and assessment, and havent include MLTA and MRTA another extra RM200 per month, if flipping they wont bother..

all above this, you as an owner will then buy from them the inflated price, your burden will double of them.. good luck choose wisely, if deal is really good grab it..

first hurdle is the bank valuation anyting less tha 80% not worth it at all even 90% also need to kfully see the surroundings..

my 2 cents

but i thought all these legal fees borne by the buyer?

no... as a vendor, these is also legal fees to be bourne. dun believe try selling one..

If i juz bought a subsale unit which only 1 year and sell it still under 30%??
Thanks

Boss, whats tripping you?
The post by @joicechow which you quoted clearly explained its 30%.

Cheers

RPGT has nothing to do with property valuer. Is the taxable amount from nett gain. And nett gain is the amount u sell ( stated in snp) minus amount u buy (also stated in your old snp) and minus all the expenses incurred (such as leal fees, agent fees and renovation to the said property)

Please dont provide misleading information

That is right.. there are ppl who are desperately in need or emergency for money..

btw TS, is it a joint loan and joint ownership? If it is joint ownership.. edyek might come handy..

Ya lor dude must be meaning the adjidication of MOT.. if I m the one committing dat error.. ppl will spam me kao kao..

this is the 2nd incident di.. blatant errors in concept..

Wah...everyone is here...still can see uuu ddd here....

Wei hor. Boss BBW.. Why you always bring up this joint ownership issue?

I provide comments when I like lor. No need you to lick my shoe lor...

Excuse me..... U better speak to your lawyer before saying I'm feeding misleading information.....
If u transact your selling way below market price and declare without profits, TAX dept may impose their own market price as calculation......
Go ask first.....

Smart dude ... your world class work is framed here..I wonder now....tapao me balik pulak..

This post has been edited by bearbearwong: Apr 4 2014, 09:16 PM

So wat is the problem with the statement?
Obviously u don't even understand wat I'm referring......

This post has been edited by AppreciativeMan: Apr 4 2014, 09:27 PM

You dare accussed me dunno diffetentiate when I fact It was you.. linking valuer with RPGT which was correctly pointed out by gunh.. remembrr

I'll repeat.....
If prop bought at 400k.....
Now sold or transact at 300k......
Market valuation is at 700k......
Tax dept MAY NOT accept the 300k the transaction price for calculation of the RPGT..... They may hav or determine the 700k as market value for calculating the RPGT......
So does it consider they hav their own valuation?

There is only 1calculation of RPGT..

Willing buyer willing seller basis
Under declared is illegal but owner has the full right to sell any price tat he/she think is appropriate, authority has no right to question the fair value of the property, separate valuation is carried out for the purpose of stamp duty calculation.
RPGT only refers to old and new SPA price.
Tax dept can only question the undeclared amount (settle in cash) between the Purchaser and Vendor.
Not all the purchaser willing to under declare the selling price.

Tumpang ask....

If prop is bought at 200k, then within 1 year sold with 225k.
After deducting:-
1. legal fees (both buy and sell process)
2. agent com (during sell)
3. 10% or 10k exemption (whichever higher, 10k in this case)

The actual net chargeable RPGT is actually 0. Am I correct?

Assumption:-
1. Prop after 1 year can only (max) valued at 225k.
2. Calc using http://www.vincentyim.com/how-to-calculate...ax-in-malaysia/ as reference.

Not exactly true...... Authority reserve their rights to look into any transaction if they think the prop was not transacted in full value or under declaration to avoid RPGT.....
"Not all" means there are such cases isn't it....... If the purchaser has a long term plan of holding the prop 20-30yrs..... They will consider under declare the transaction where seller may give better discount too........
There are things that hardly happens..... But it doesn't means they do not hav that rights....

I agree on UFO-ET. RPGT is only taxed on OLD and NEW price.

One can sell a property at loss but will be scrutinize by LHDN. However, if one can provide a good reason for selling at loss, then it wont pose a problem.

Unless they got reason to believe and evidence to prove seller underclare the selling price just to avoid RPGT, then screw the seller is. Not only seller needs to pay the difference and penalty but every year kena visit by LHDN if there is any transaction done even legal one. However until then, there is no problem in selling at loss.

Of course, one cannot do this too many times...

This is the fine line which most people tend not to cross. Most of our lawyers or accountants will advice us to sell with some profit to avoid any problem by LHDN in case they query the transaction.

My friend is the other way round. He bought alot of land which he ask the owners to mark down SPA (reason being he declare not enough tax).

So when LHDN query his transaction, which common logic dictates that one cannot have so much luck to purchase ALL land way under value. Hence, he kena screw by LHDN.

So not only selling at loss will alert LHDN but buying something way undervalue will also alert them.

With our fck up gomen, it is best not to try to cross the line.

I may agree with you guys the government is stupid in many areas, but when it comes to taxation, you guys are naive to think the government is as stupid

Guys, please don't argue. The RPGT Act 1976 is the reference

Anti-avoidance provisions

Sec 25 (2)

The Director General, where he has reason to believe that
any transaction has the direct or indirect effect of—
(a) altering the incidence of tax which is payable or suffered
by or which would otherwise have been payable or suffered
by any person;

(b) relieving any person from any liability which has arisen
or which would otherwise have arisen to pay tax or to
make a return;

© evading or avoiding any duty or liability which is imposed
or would otherwise have been imposed on any person by
this Act; or

(d) hindering or preventing the operation of this Act in any
respect, may, without prejudice to such validity as it may have in any other
respect or for any other purpose, disregard or vary the transaction
and make such assessments as he considers just and proper in the
circumstances.

may, without prejudice to such validity as it may have in any other
respect or for any other purpose, disregard or vary the transaction
and make such assessments as he considers just and proper in the
circumstances



Although it is not commonly heard that LHDN go after property disposal which artificially suppress the selling price to reduce/escape RPGT, it doesn't mean you can do it. For those who believe they can out-smart the government, please go ahead to fool the government. Please remember to disclose your identity to me so that I can report you to LHDN. Upon successful recovery of tax avoidance, I will be given by LHDN 15% (or is it 30%) of tax recovered from you, legally

This post has been edited by Showtime747: Apr 5 2014, 10:07 AM

I'm not sure where you got your information substantiate from. I can even sell the house at Rm1 to someone I like and draft the S&P and get it legalised. What make you say I cannot sell the house below market price and Tax dept will come after me? I guess you are the one that should go to speak to your lawyer. You are indeed giving misleading information here.


This post has been edited by gunh: Apr 5 2014, 10:15 AM

Agree with UFO-ET. all this are about an offer and an acceptance or willing buyer and willing seller. Some one make the offer and someone grab it.

that is what i have been saying and referring.. dude is referring s stamp duty model in RPGT calculations and sumore bombard me..

who bombard u?

same dude.. and his herd... i am not BBB, i leave some room for him.. i am not interested in degrading

Sporting!!!

So bearbear, have you read Sec 25(2) ? We still can simply put in RM300k as selling price and LHDN just have to accept ?

Please refer Sec 25(2) of Real Property Gain Tax Act 1976

Have read it. But which specific clauses say I cannot sell at below market value and will get penalise?

You can ask the judge when LHDN takes you to court whether Sec 25(2) will be enough to make you pay the difference in RPGT. The provisions of Sec 25(2) is obvious enough for LHDN to catch people who under pay RPGT.

Don't get me wrong. You can always sell below market value and report RPGT based on S&P price. But if the difference between S&P price and market value is too big, LHDN can also go after you based on the Anti-Avoidance Provision. This provisions give them power to tax people trying to out-smart them. But if your price is around the market price, LHDN won't bother to tax you.

Bro,

I believe the RPGT sec 25(2) is not used or apply in our discussion. Please read the Sec25 in Full. This act is for those who think they are smart. Eg:

The house belong to Husband (Disposer) name purchase 3years ago say at RM300,000.00

Now the house could be worth RM 500,000.00

Husband thought he is smart and transfer the house to his wife (connected person) at year No3 (which is now at market rate say 450,000 to 500,000) and then sell it another potential buyer.

Husband think by doing that, he will have very minimal RPGT but with this RPGT act 25, stated clearly, that the RPGT act shall be from the "Disposer" and not that "Connected Person"

Hope this clarifies.

i think the para posted by 747 has clearly stated that. Penalty at another para? I don't think the LHDN let you go without penalty if they catch you under declare.

before reading paragraph 25(2), please read the full act 25

Section 25. Anti-avoidance provisions.

(1) Where a chargeable asset which is disposed of was previously acquired by the disposer for a consideration wholly or substantially provided by a connected person within the meaning of Schedule 2 (otherwise than as a bona fide loan made in the course of carrying on business as a moneylender), the asset shall be deemed to have been disposed of by that person and not by the disposer:

Provided that, where the asset disposed of was acquired by the disposer from that person, that person shall, for the purpose of computing any gain accruing to or loss suffered by him by the operation of this subsection, be deemed to have acquired the asset at an acquisition price equal to the consideration which, by virtue of paragraph 9 and subparagraph 23 (1) of Schedule 2, he is deemed to have received when the asset was acquired by the disposer.

(2) The Director General, where he has reason to believe that any transaction has the direct or indirect effect of-


(a) altering the incidence of tax which is payable or suffered by or which would otherwise have been payable or suffered by any person;

(b) relieving any person from any liability which has arisen or which would otherwise have arisen to pay tax or to make a return;

© evading or avoiding any duty or liability which is imposed or would otherwise have been imposed on any person by this Act; or

(d) hindering or preventing the operation of this Act in any respect,
may, without prejudice to such validity as it may have in any other respect or for any other purpose, disregard or vary the transaction and make such assessments as he considers just and proper in the circumstances.

(3) In this section "transaction" means any trust, grant, covenant, agreement, arrangement or other disposition or transaction made or entered into (whether before or after the commencement of this Act), and includes a transaction entered into by two or more persons with another person or persons.

Bro,

Sec 25 Anti-avoidance provisions has 2 sections. The example you mention is about Sec 25(1) which is specific to a avoidance scheme. Section 25(2) is a "catch all" provision. Its effect is to allow LHDN to catch all "out-smart" avoidance scheme

If the provisions in Sec 25(2) refer to only Sec 25(1), then section 25(2) should be Sec 25(1)(a), 25(1)(b) and so on. Also, the wording in Sec 25(2) is obvious to be a stand alone section

That should clarifies

Good that you bring up Sec 25(3) which mention "person". The definition of "person" is in Sec 2. It does not limit to connected person eg husband and wife in your example

Let say what you say is correct, 25(1) has not relation with 25(2), but in 25(2) which sentence specifically mentioned if we sell the asset below market value, LHDN will come after us?

That's why I still believe all the clause of 25(1), 25(2) and 25(3) have to be read together as there are co-related and not independent.

It didn't say so because it is a catch all section. But the effect of the wording is obvious enough

For example

Sec 25(2)(a) "altering the incidence of tax" - by understating disposal price intentionally, RPGT is lesser, hence it is "altering the incidence of tax"

Sec 25(2)© "evading and avoiding any duty and liability which is imposed" - by understating disposable price intentionally, RPGT is less, hence you are trying to avoid and evade tax


Bona fide selling at below market price most probably will not be queried by LHDN. If acquisition price is RM400k, market price is RM700k, you sell say RM600k, I think it is still acceptable because of property conditions, facing, renovation etc. But if market price is say RM700k, the S&P price is RM400k, then it should raise LHDN eyebrow. We can play around with the selling price to reduce some RPGT, but not overboard lah. Under Sec 25(2), they can go after elaborated scheme

I can't alter your belief. Not here to convince you. It is up to you to interprete. Next time if you have the chance to talk to your lawyer, do ask him/her this section

Thats the main point for all this discussion.

Again, selling at loss is a line which a sane investor wont cross... Unless got problem

Everyone pls be wise on some people info and advise. Especially on financial

some ppl just like to use name calling and attacking.


https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/3182390/+100

this thread is about rpgt..personal attack thread is somewhere else ?

My understanding of Clause (25) has to be read in conjunction of sub clause 25(1), 25(2) and 25(3).

the explanation of this clause I understand from this article

Section 25 of the RPGT Act contains the general anti-avoidance provisions which allow the tax authorities to disregard transactions, vary transactions or impose taxes that should have been imposed.

The law specifies that this right is available if the transactions had the effect of “altering the incidence of tax”, “relieving a person from tax liability” or “evading or avoiding any liability which would otherwise have been imposed”.

Besides these general anti-tax avoidance measures which are also found in the Income Tax Act to discourage income tax avoidance, Section 25 of the RPGT Act also provides for persons who provide loans to related parties; for example, Mr A providing loans to Company A which is owned by him.

The law provides that if Company A sells a property and the property was financed by a loan provided by Mr A, the disposal may be regarded as a disposal by Mr A and not by Company A.

However, the cost of acquisition to Mr A is the market value of the property when Company A acquired the property from Mr A. If Company A had acquired the property from Mr A at the true market value, this anti-tax avoidance provision of the RPGT Act should not pose any problem.

Source : http://www.thestar.com.my/story.aspx/?file...ness%2f5027956&

Your explanation on 25(2)(a) and 25(2)© are based on your own understanding? Based on the above article, your explanation seems is not correct.

Boss tikaram @ banana is super food, please grow up. If you have any objection/comments on my info and advice, do share here. We dont need your crap talking about name calling and attacking (attack? What attack?) which you felt in the other thread. Keep it professional please.

If you have no comment on the subject at hand, DIAM DIAM LAR....

If you have, SHARE SHARE LAR....

Er, you were mentioning about me right? Because if you were not, I kantoi again...
Dont worry lah boss... Childish act it is...

This person claim only give adive on wat he/she know. But when i point out not the case as only name calling and and attacking only.

So i think it is wise to get tax professional advise rather that the so call expect.

Just go to that thread n check the attaking. And consider info from him with a pinch of salt ya.

jiao is singing

Bro,

The article actually reinforce my interpretation of Sec 25(2). I have highlighted the essence of anti-avoidance provision above. In what way do you think the article contradict my interpretation

err..as far as i know edyek and manut are seasoned taikors in their own right so for me personally, i would say they DO know what they are talking abt ya based on their postings to date.

I know abit out of topic. Since u touch on taikor.

Yes. Me too before this think they are tsikor. But when two of these start the name calling and attacking. Does it sound like taikor?

My answer is nah!

Taikor need attacking in the debate meah? Tailor need to do name calling in the debate meah? Sound like GANGSTER taikor more?

After all the name calling and attacking. Next asked people to grown up and call ppl childish in this thread. They themself not childish when they do name calling ppl first and attacking ppl next.? Hahahaha..

Over there name calling and attacking still continue. Taikor wo?????

Go back to thread topic.

Arent not my opinion of asking TS to take the advise with a pinch of salt and seek tax prifessional help is relevant in this thread?

This post has been edited by tikaram: Apr 5 2014, 02:48 PM

Pls look back who ask uuu to sell buttock. Then case closed. Ngam boh???

I'm just a kindy ll nvr 呈强. If no buy then I dun comment on the particular thread. Unless I wanna explore. I onli comment on wat I know. I onli voice out my real life experiences. But those were the days. Since ddd ask us to stop the facts sharing, any1 can trace back my posts for the past mths. Mostly sembang sembang la. Same applied in rwi. I read but I dun comment cos I know I'm learning.

No worries dudes. Forum nia. No award wan. Readers r smart to know know cheated by putting up a nicely done ddd scenario n hide behind buying.

Boss thanks for the complement. But in real life I'm still learning from edyek gor.

Soli edyek gor for putting u onto altar.

Please go away.

We are not interested with out of topic post!

Out of topic started at 12:13pm. Close closed.

oopsi soli to all. Out of topic. Soli TS.


Attached thumbnail(s)

The article itself explained why there is clause25 and how it works. Not based on what essence which u have highlighted. Clause 25 have to be read in full and not interpreted part by part like what you have said. If u read again the clause and the article, you will find clause 25(1) ,25(2), and 25(3) are inter relate.

i have explained and shared enough. if you still want to maintain your believing, then i cannot stop you. But i will not changed mine.

Bro, inter related or not is not the question. That is technical. The question is we can't simply understate the disposal price for RPGT. LHDN can go after you if you have overdone.

Since when i say cannot sell below market price??

LHDN "MAY" come after, not "WILL"!

I do agree hardly ppl will do such act or challenging the authority..... but if there is such an act taken, u mean the authority got no rights to take any action against both party, jus because both party already signed SPA at an agree price of RM1??

This post has been edited by AppreciativeMan: Apr 5 2014, 04:37 PM

I've made my point. If you read it positively then thats good. But you can always choose to read it negatively.

You hav yet to make it clear..... And u r the who read my point negatively.....

No answer to the above question?

Is not up to you or me to say who read who negatively.



In legally binding contract, there must be an condition or you called it an offer and an acceptance. The RM1 is just an example. When someone made an offer, and another guy accepted it then the transaction will valid as the condition of an legal agreement is met.







this sentence is refer to your post above. "What make you say I cannot sell the house below market price and Tax dept will come after me?"
You may want to argue the word "MAY" and I have use "WILL". Ok, that's my mistake, but the point is noted here and by reading the post as whole and not few words.

Dun cry like a baby, enuf

Out of topic...pls go away. Agent!

Who do you think you are? Funny
Cry somewhere else lah, kid