A sharp rate on a poorly structured portfolio costs more than a slightly higher rate on a well-built one. How your loans are arranged determines whether you can buy again, or whether your last purchase quietly blocked your next.
Most people buy their first investment property without much difficulty. The problems appear at the second or third, when the way the first was arranged either supports the next purchase or prevents it.
When a lender uses two of your properties as security for one loan, they are cross-collateralised, or tied together. Lenders favour the arrangement because it reduces their risk. It rarely works in your favour.
Tied properties mean you cannot sell one without the lender reassessing the whole arrangement, you cannot easily move a single loan elsewhere, and releasing equity from one property requires revaluing all of them. Most people discover this years later, when they are trying to do something about it.
Keeping securities separate, with one property to one standalone loan, preserves your flexibility. It occasionally costs slightly more at the outset, and is almost always worth it.
If you already own an investment property, it is worth establishing whether it is cross-collateralised with your home. Many people are, without knowing. It can usually be unwound, and it is considerably easier to address before you next need to borrow.
Most portfolios grow on equity rather than new savings. As a property rises in value and the loan reduces, the difference becomes usable, released as a separate loan and applied as the deposit on the next purchase.
Two things govern how far that goes: your equity, and your serviceability, meaning whether your income supports the total debt at assessment rates. Investors usually reach the serviceability limit before the equity one, and lenders differ considerably in how they assess rental income, negative gearing and existing debt. Which lender you use, and in what order, materially affects how many properties you can hold.
Interest-only means paying only the interest for a set period, commonly five years, so repayments are lower and the balance does not reduce. For investors this can improve cash flow and, because investment interest is generally deductible while principal is not, it can be tax-efficient.
It is not free. Rates are usually higher, you are not reducing the balance, and repayments step up sharply when the period ends. It is a legitimate tool when chosen deliberately, and a costly default when it is not.
We arrange finance. We do not provide tax advice, and we are not licensed to advise on which property to buy or whether property is the right asset class for you. On gearing, depreciation and ownership structures, your accountant is the appropriate adviser, and we are glad to work alongside them.
Some investors hold property through a trust or company for asset protection or tax reasons. It is legitimate and common, but it narrows the field of available lenders, usually requires personal guarantees, and involves more documentation. If your accountant has recommended a structure, involve us early: some lenders handle these arrangements well and many do not.
Commonly 10-20%, though many investors use equity from an existing property rather than cash. Lenders generally apply tighter criteria to investment lending than to owner-occupied, and the rate is usually slightly higher.
Yes, but not all of it. Most apply a shading of around 20% to allow for vacancy and holding costs, so $500 a week of rent may be assessed as $400. How a lender treats rental income, and how it handles negative gearing, varies significantly. It is one of the main reasons lender selection matters for investors.
Very commonly, yes. The important part is structuring it as a separate split or loan rather than simply increasing your home loan, so the investment borrowing remains clearly identifiable. That distinction matters at tax time.
It means the costs of holding the property, including interest, rates and maintenance, exceed the rent, so the property runs at a loss. That loss can generally be offset against your other income to reduce tax. It is a genuine benefit, but it remains a loss. A property should be worth owning on its own merits, not only for the deduction.
This is changing. Negative gearing on established homes is ending. If you owned the property before 12 May 2026, nothing changes for you. If you buy one after that, it ends on 1 July 2027. From then, rental losses can only come off rental income, not your salary. New builds are not affected. See the ATO's guidance, or ask your accountant how it applies to you.
Yes, and it is one of the more useful things we do. We map what is secured against what, identify any cross-collateralisation, and set out what is limiting your next purchase. Even if you change nothing, it is worth understanding the structure you hold.
Usually it is structure or serviceability. One of those is often quicker to address than people expect.