Every single day accidents related trucks occur all over the United States. Truck accidents can result in serious injury and even death. Many of these truck accidents are related to driver fatigue, failure to inspect tires and brakes, over loaded, tailgating, drinking and driving, talking on CB or cell phone, etc. These are all considered negligence actions and can result in a civil suit against the truck driver and the company the driver works for. However, due to the size and nature of trucks injuries and damages in a truck accident can be severe if not fatal. Many truck accidents leave victims unable to work and the victims are required to seek compensation via civil lawsuit. How does a injured plaintiff in a truck accident lawsuit support his life financially if he is unable to work? That is a simple answer, a lawsuit settlement loan.
If you were in a truck accident and are in the process of a truck accident civil lawsuit then you already know what kind of time frame you’re looking at till you reach a verdict; it can be months if not years before truck accident lawsuits are settled. This is why a lawsuit settlement loan is an excellent resource for the plaintiff during this time period. A settlement loan is basically a non-recourse loan; this is due to the re-payment requirements explained later in this article. Basically a lawsuit loan provider will borrow you money against your pending lawsuit; your not required to any specific income or credit history as those things play no role in the settlement loan approval process. The approval process is based solely on the merit of your lawsuit and possible compensation.
What makes a lawsuit settlement loan such a great choice is the fact it is a non-recourse debt because a settlement loan only requires you to repay the loan if you receive a favorable verdict in your pending lawsuit. If you lose your pending lawsuit you have no obligation to pay back the monetary loan provided by the lawsuit loan provider. This helps financial secure the plaintiff during their pending lawsuit and prevents them from being in debt at the end of their case if it’s an unfavorable verdict. This is a common occurrence with traditional loans, a plaintiff takes out a home equity loan or personal loan for financial assistance during their pending lawsuit, then they end up losing their lawsuit and then do not have the ability to pay back their initial loan; with a settlement loan you don’t have this problem! If you want to learn more about lawsuit pre-settlement loans then read below.
As discussed in Part I there are many astute property and share investors in Australia who often fail to ensure that the investment loan they take offers the best available features and most tax efficient investment loan structure for them.When considering an investment loan you should ensure that you maximise your investment loan and that the interest rate is competitive (but not necessarily the cheapest – do not sacrifice features for interest rate); you should take the investment loan on an interest only basis and apply any surplus cash you have to the repayment of your non-deductible (your negative gearing benefits are maintained); you should not mix your investment loan with your home loan debt because the Australian Tax Office requires that any additional repayments of principal to such a “mixed” account must be apportioned between the home loan and the investment loan (your negative gearing benefits on your investment loan will reduce as a result).Another feature that all investors should include in their investment loan is a separate capitalising investment line of credit. The line of credit should be for a 10 year term minimum and be interest only. The importance of a capitalising line of credit within your investment loan structure cannot be underestimated. By having such a facility including in the investment loan you protect yourself form unforeseen vacancies and expenses in relation to the upkeep of your investment property. In a recent private ruling issued by the ATO a taxpayer was provided with a favourable outcome when he sought confirmation from the ATO that where he held an investment loan and the rental income did not cover his investment expenses (interest, costs, rates etc) then he could capitalise interest on an investment line of credit where the line of credit was used to meet the shortfall between his investment income and his investment costs (interest on the investment loan being a large portion of this. The taxpayer also had a home loan and advised the ATO in his private ruling application that he did not want to use his personal income to subsidise the shortfall (including the interest on his investment loan) that he was having to meet each month. Rather he sought to draw down on the line of credit within his investment loan facility to meet the shortfall and apply as much of his personal income to the repayment of his personal home loan debt.Under the line of credit he was not required to make any payments to the investment line of credit so the debt increased. The interest also increased with the result that the taxpayer could deduct the simple interest on the investment loan as well as the simple and capitalised interest on the investment line of credit. This delivered additional negative gearing benefits to the taxpayer while also saving him significant dollars on his home loan debt. By applying more of his personal income to repay personal debt he reduced his home loan term by 8 years and saved himself many thousands of dollars in the process.Make sure you include a capitalising line of credit within your investment loan structure – you have both protection (from vacancies, higher interest rates,unexpected costs) as well as the opportunity to increase your negative gearing benefits and reduce your home loan interest! Make your investment loan work for you and improve your investment return.
Keyword terms :
negative gearing line of credit tax ruling