6 days ago
18
May 10, 2026 — 5:01am
In 2014, our daughter bought a property for $750,000. We financed $350,000 and were added to the title as security. The property is now worth $2 million.
We want to remove our names from the title, with our daughter assuming the full debt. As this is being treated as a change of ownership, capital gains tax and stamp duty will apply. Is there any way to gift our share and avoid these consequences?
Thanks for your question. Parents helping children into the property market is common today, and a structure similar to what you and your daughter undertook is contemplated by many, so it’s great to have an illustration of how that plays out long term.
I am unaware of any way that you can get around the capital gains tax liability here. As you identified, even if it’s a gift, it’s still classed as a disposal at market value. While your daughter’s share is capital gains tax-exempt as her primary residence, your share is not.
Perhaps you could leave your share of the property to your daughter in your will. This way the CGT is at least deferred until she ultimately sells. Have a chat with your accountant and solicitor.
I have been renting for many years in Sydney. I have a good income and plan to continue working for at least three years and probably longer. I have $800,000 in shares, $3 million in the bank, and $3.2 million in superannuation. Should I now be buying a home given I seem to have used super to its maximum?
Based purely on the numbers presented here, purchasing a home would look to make sense. You have a large amount of money in the bank which is possibly not even keeping pace with inflation.
Were you to put that money into a home, it is likely to increase in value eventually, and of course, you save on paying rent. As an extra bonus, your home is capital gains tax-exempt.
I would be interested to understand why you have not already purchased a home given your balance sheet. Perhaps your priority has been flexibility, and if this remains particularly important to you, that consideration may outweigh any financial rationale.
If you choose not to purchase a home, I would strongly suggest you think about getting some of those funds currently in the bank invested more productively.
I’m 60, semi-retired, with $1 million in super still in accumulation mode. I’m considering moving this to pension phase for tax-free earnings, while opening a separate accumulation account with another provider for diversification and ongoing contributions.
I will contribute to the new fund until my combined super balance reaches the transfer balance cap. Is this a legitimate and effective strategy?
Provided you meet a condition of release, this approach is workable. Rather than open a new accumulation account with a different provider, I would simply have the minimum balance left behind in your existing accumulation account. The large super funds are all investing in the same place, so the diversification benefits of having different providers is not particularly valid.
It is worth being clear on the calculation of the transfer balance cap. With the current limit at $2 million, were you to shift $1 million into a pension, you will have used up 50 per cent of your cap. The cap will increase with inflation in future years and the headroom you have available will always be 50 per cent of whatever the cap is in that given year.
Paul Benson is a Certified Financial Planner at Guidance Financial Services. He hosts the Financial Autonomy podcast. Questions to: [email protected]
- Advice given in this article is general in nature and is not intended to influence readers’ decisions about investing or financial products. They should always seek their own professional advice that takes into account their own personal circumstances before making any financial decisions.
Expert tips on how to save, invest and make the most of your money delivered to your inbox every Sunday. Sign up for our Real Money newsletter.
