Offshoreonly.com

Offshoreonly.com (https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/)
-   General Boating Discussion (https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/general-boating-discussion-51/)
-   -   Should we sell waterfront property or keep it? (https://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/general-boating-discussion/169131-should-we-sell-waterfront-property-keep.html)

phughes69 09-19-2007 06:23 PM

Should we sell waterfront property or keep it?
 
My father owns a empty lot ON the St. Clair River in Port Lambton, Ontario, Canada. (He has had this piece of land for almost 40 years.) They also just bought a house in Algonac on a canal 1 house from the St. Clair River. They have been approaced by by a someone ( a Canadian citizen) who is interested in purchasing their property in Canada for a fair price. My dad is talking about taking the money from the sale and reinvesting it for my brother and my future inheritance. The questions is should he sell the property, keep it and possible sell it later when it MAY be worth more, or keep it and will it to my brother and I ?

Payton 09-19-2007 06:42 PM

Keep it. They are not making anymore waterfront property. If you sell it, someday, you'll wish you never had.

jez350 09-19-2007 07:00 PM

Phughes. All the boys are dead right. Keep it, there's nothing more wealth creating than "A" grade property. Anything on the water is "A'" grade.

TexomaPowerboater 09-19-2007 07:30 PM

My family's got a lakehouse so heres my .02

That property will earn just as much as any investment and you will not get taxed on the appreciation. If you guys build a house on it, then the waterfront house will provide 10X as much fun and enjoyment of which money alone can not provide. People have investments so that they can eventually have a lakehouse not the other way around. Its not just an investment its a lifestyle. When you have property like this and your family gets to enjoy it whenever they want..........that makes you the richest man alive in my eyes. There is nothing more valueble than getting to enjoy a lakehouse or beachouse with family and friends. The fun you will have and the memories gained are priceless.

Now for a little reality............the bad thing here is that its you and your brother that will end up with it. I've seen a lot of this kind of stuff willed over and it never works out. It usually creates a lot of bad blood. I've never seen someone effectively share a lakehouse. One person will care for it more than the other and eventually you will either have to buy one out or sell it and split the proceeds. I've seen both sides of it 1) from watching people buy the house and trying to share, and 2) to handling the estate.

If your dad wills it over I suggest he wills it over to just one of you; whoever is willing to take care of it and build on it. That way whoever gets it can still have over the other brother and your guys get to stay friends. Maybe even set it up so that whoever gets it has to split the proceeds allocated to the land if they decide to sell.

lucky strike 09-19-2007 07:52 PM

Keep it....

tanner 09-19-2007 08:04 PM

Easy answer... If the property is not gaining 12-15% a year in value, you need to sell it and invest in any decent Mutual fund. Any fund will gain 15% a year over a period of 7 - 10 years. The waterfront property is not in Florida or California where it will out perfrom averages. So just do the math calculations for yourself.

THEJOKER 09-19-2007 08:07 PM

Sell it and buy a new boat , if you get enough make it an Outerlimits.

BRD 09-19-2007 08:09 PM

Keep It For Now !

dukenrock 09-19-2007 08:10 PM

Have him "sel" it and title it in you and your bothers name now and you won't have to pay inheritance tax on it.

phughes69 09-19-2007 08:25 PM

Just so everyone is clear. My parents have 2 pieces of waterfront property. They have a house on a canal in Algonac, (Algonac house is 1 house away from away from the St. Clair River) , and the other piece is a empty buildable lot ON the St. Clair River

MitchStellin 09-19-2007 08:27 PM

I would keep it, it will appreciate for sure and like said, it is unique and rare. The other problem is your dad has to pay a capital gain, 20%, and if he puts it in a Trust and you inherit it you get a full stepped up basis and you pay no gain if sold right away or the gain on what happens from then on. Although over a 10 yr period the market can earn 10-15% if you have to sell on a down market you can get hurt plus 10 years is a long time and you may do something before then. Keep it, use it when you can and let it sit, you will be very happy if you sell it and if not you will have a nice piece of property. The key is the Trust though and don't put your name on it or the clock starts that day on the appreciation. There is no other way to get a stepped up basis without the Trust, you avoid probate and although joint ownership does too it will cause a gain to occur and that means Taxes. The only other way is a Like Kind Exchange but then you are just buying more property and unless it is a better piece for the same price you are just kissing your sister:cool-smiley-026:

BBB725 09-19-2007 08:47 PM

For taxes and 40 years your fathers basis going to be zero compared to the sale price and taxes will have to be payed, but if he keeps it and you inherit the property you get the step up in basis and could sell it then without the capital gain taxes. Depends on his age and tax situation.

Zudnic 09-19-2007 09:20 PM

Since the lot is in Ontario Canada, you might want to read this article: http://www.crossborder.com/ctf959USEP.html

The nice thing about Ontario is Toronto is Canada's banking center. My bank is not only Canada's largest bank, they've become a leader in offshore type services!!!!!

http://www.rbcinvestments.com/private-banking/ They have worldwide banking branches for a reason! they also have a financial planning plan for pro-athletes, catoring to American players on Canadian teams. They probably have dealt with Americans owning Canadian assets like property, etc and potential unique tax situations, etc. Since they have branches in the U.S, they could be helpful on both sides of the border.

Chris Sunkin 09-19-2007 09:20 PM

It's in Canada. How will the IRS know who owns it?

phughes69 09-19-2007 10:13 PM

My father has told me that he cant not sell the property in Canada to my brother or I. He can only sell it to a canadian citizen. True or not? Also he tells me that if he were to will it to my brother and I we would have to pay a 30% tax on it? Has anybody been in the situation where property that was in Canada was willed to them?

Semper Fi 09-19-2007 10:18 PM

Is anyone starting to build in this area? If so, I would hold out--it should only increase in value in the future.

jafo 09-19-2007 10:48 PM


Originally Posted by phughes69 (Post 2278161)
My father has told me that he cant not sell the property in Canada to my brother or I. He can only sell it to a canadian citizen. True or not? Also he tells me that if he were to will it to my brother and I we would have to pay a 30% tax on it? Has anybody been in the situation where property that was in Canada was willed to them?

Your father can sell the property in Canada to anyone he chooses. To the best of my knowledge, there is no tax on it if willed. My grandfather willed the property he bought in 1957 to my mother and aunt on a life title. He passed away in 1979, and there were no taxes due on the property then, or when the property was sold in 2000.
A previous post by TexomaPowerboater mentioned that joint ownership of vacation property with a sibling or other family member will not work. He is 100% correct. The reason our lodge in Ontario was sold was because of the constant bickering on who was going to get to use it when. It became unbearable for my mother, who wanted to live her summers up there. In order for her to do this, the lodge was sold and she bought a place of her own. There was and still is VERY bad blood between my mother and aunt over the Canadian property- my mother footed a large part of the bills but was told when she could come and go by the 'other' side of the family!
I told my mother to leave her new place to my brother so I could avoid the same mess I had already witnessed. My wife and I bought our own property on the island a few years ago and it has more than tripled in value in this short time. We have yet to build on it, but we will, and we won't have to share it with anyone. My brother will have his place, we will have ours, and we will still get along.
PLEASE read again Texoma's post- it's the best advice anyone could give in your situation- he has seen it and I have lived it.
Jim

Zudnic 09-19-2007 10:49 PM


Originally Posted by phughes69 (Post 2278161)
My father has told me that he cant not sell the property in Canada to my borother or I. He can only sell it to a canadian citizen. True or not? Also he tells me that if he were to will it to my brother and I we would have to pay a 30% tax on it? Has anybody been in the situation where property that was in Canada was willed to them?

quote New York Law Journal

Taxation Upon Death

Part 1: U.S. Persons Who Die Owning Canadian Property. While the U.S. estate tax provides a credit against foreign death taxes paid, this credit is limited to death and inheritance taxes and does not include income taxes. Helpfully, the Treaty provides relief from potential double taxation by providing estate tax credits for Canadian gains taxes on death-related property dispositions. The Protocol provides that income tax paid to Canada on the deemed disposition of Taxable Canadian Property upon the death of a U.S. person, whether or not a Canadian resident, is treated as a foreign death tax and, therefore, the United States must give a credit against the U.S. estate taxes imposed on the Canadian property for income tax paid to Canada.

Canadian tax law also provides for a deferral of tax on property that is transferred to a Canadian surviving spouse or a spousal trust at death. In effect, if an individual bequeaths real property to a surviving spouse who is a resident of Canada, that property is treated as being disposed of at its cost basis, with no recognition of gain or loss at the time of the transfer. As a result, the recognition of gain or loss will be deferred until the earlier of the sale or deemed disposition of the property by the surviving spouse. When an individual owning Canadian property is a resident of the United States immediately before death, the Treaty (as amended by the Protocol) extends this deferral benefit by treating the U.S. resident surviving spouse as a resident of Canada.

Part 2: U.S. Citizens Who Die as Canadian Residents. When a U.S. citizen dies resident in Canada owning U.S. property, Canada is obligated under the Treaty to give a tax credit against the Canadian federal income tax imposed on the deemed disposition of the U.S. property for U.S. estate taxes. However, the amount of this credit is limited to the estate taxes that would have been payable to the United States if the individual were not a U.S. citizen. The concept appears to be that, between this Canadian credit for U.S. estate taxes on the U.S. property and the U.S. credit for Canadian tax on the Canadian property discussed in Part 1, double taxation should effectively be avoided. However, most provinces take the position that the Treaty does not apply to them and the credit may not offset their portion of the tax (which can be as high as one-half of the income tax assessment).

Part 3: Canadian Residents Who Are Not U.S. Citizens and Die Owning U.S. Property. The Treaty (as amended by the Protocol) provides significant benefits to non-U.S. citizen Canadian residents who die owning U.S. property. The Treaty provides that Canadian residents are entitled to a unified credit against U.S. federal estate tax equal to the greater of (i) the unified credit available to estates of non-U.S. persons, which is currently $60,000, and (ii) a pro-rated portion of the unified credit available to estates of U.S. persons based on the value that an individual's gross U.S. estate bears to the value of such individual's worldwide estate. This means that a Canadian resident will not be subject to federal estate tax if the value of his worldwide assets is less than the amount of the unified credit, which is currently $2 million.

The Treaty also provides that, instead of using a QDOT to obtain a marital deduction, the estate of a Canadian decedent can take advantage of a marital credit that is available for U.S. property transferred to a surviving non-U.S. citizen spouse who is either a Canadian or U.S. resident (or to a spousal trust for such person). The amount of this additional credit is limited to the smaller of (i) the amount of the unified credit discussed in the previous paragraph allowable to non-U.S. citizen Canadian residents who die owning U.S. property, and (ii) the amount of additional estate tax that would otherwise be imposed on the property left to the spouse, if such property were subject to U.S. estate tax.

When U.S. federal estate tax is imposed on the estate of a Canadian decedent owning U.S. property, the Treaty provides a credit against any Canadian federal income tax for the U.S. estate tax paid on the U.S. property equal to the smaller of the two taxes. This credit will be useful in situations where the value of the U.S. property is significantly greater than its cost basis immediately prior to the death of the Canadian resident. For most Canadian residents in such a situation, however, there may still be some double taxation because the U.S. estate tax may not offset the provincial component of the Canadian gains tax.

Historically, many Canadian residents who owned U.S. property planned to avoid U.S. estate tax by holding the U.S. property through a Canadian holding company. Canadian law, however, imposes a substantial disincentive to such a strategy by imputing income to the shareholder for the use of property owned by the corporation. An exemption from this treatment for so-called "single-purpose corporations" was abolished in 2005 on the theory that the Protocol eliminated the danger that U.S. property owned by Canadian residents would be subject to double death taxes. However, this Canadian Revenue ruling ignored the fact that, even with the benefit under the Protocol of the credit for U.S. estate tax against the Canadian capital gains tax, the estate of a Canadian resident might be paying a net additional U.S. tax of as much as 30 percent of the value of the U.S. property for the privilege of owning property in the United States instead of in Canada. Canada does not have limited liability companies, which are generally untested as barriers to U.S. estate tax on property owned by non-U.S. persons anyway. Alternative strategies that might be considered include the use of non-recourse debt, life insurance and possibly acquiring U.S. property through partnerships.
The above is if the property was willed. Should be no problem for you and your brother to buy the property. Americans can buy property in Canada and vice versa. The US even has a social security card for non-employment and no social security benifits, sole purpose is for Canadian snowbirds to own property in the US. Canada extends the same courtesy.

Seriously it would be worth sitting down with Royal bank. They are Canada's biggest bank and have their fingers in everything including real estate. Even better they have been buying American banks like crazy and The Caribbean.

recent press release:

RBC Centura Banks, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Royal Bank of Canada (RY on TSX and NYSE), and Birmingham-based Alabama National BanCorporation (NASDAQ: ALAB) today announced the signing of a definitive merger agreement pursuant to which RBC Centura Banks, Inc., will acquire Alabama National BanCorporation (ANB), parent of 11 subsidiary banks and other affiliated businesses in Alabama, Florida and Georgia.
One thing if 9/11 had not occured travel between Canada and US was fast becoming like US state to US state travel. Not advertised but another treaty signed around the same time as above. Let's Canadian's study at US schools without a Visa! American's can do the same..... So I cant see a restriction that your Father has to sell to a Canadian citizen.

TexomaPowerboater 09-19-2007 11:10 PM


Originally Posted by phughes69 (Post 2278161)
My father has told me that he cant not sell the property in Canada to my brother or I. He can only sell it to a canadian citizen. True or not? Also he tells me that if he were to will it to my brother and I we would have to pay a 30% tax on it? Has anybody been in the situation where property that was in Canada was willed to them?

The capital gain tax is 15%, not 20%. Gifts in excess of $12,000 (24,000 MFJ) are also taxable at various rates depending on the size. If the net estate is valued over $2,000,000 the excess is taxed at $46%. You can elect to not pay the gift tax, but the tax owed on the gift is deducted from the lifetime credit that goes towards the $2,000,000 death exclusion. In most the cases I deal with all the taxes owed come from the donor or the estate. As the donee you do get a step up in basis to the FMV.

You should consult your tax advisor. This is the general rule for the gift and estate tax rates only, which is really just the tip of the iceberg.

mpally 09-19-2007 11:40 PM


Originally Posted by tanner (Post 2277986)
Easy answer... If the property is not gaining 12-15% a year in value, you need to sell it and invest in any decent Mutual fund. Any fund will gain 15% a year over a period of 7 - 10 years. The waterfront property is not in Florida or California where it will out perfrom averages. So just do the math calculations for yourself.

This is the bottom line. You have to look at it from your perspective, not everyone's on here. If you are looking at it from just a investement perspective, the above post hits the nail on the head. You look the return on the one investment and compare it to the other alternatives. Go with the highest return. Very, very simple. Its calculating the return on investment where it gets complex.

As for the taxation, you need to sit down with a CPA who knows both US and Canadian tax law. Canada does treat taxation of property and capital gains differently than US tax law, especially when the property will be transferred to a non-Canadian resident. Make sure you are basing your decision on sound advice.

SHAGNASTY 09-20-2007 09:46 AM


Originally Posted by THEJOKER (Post 2277989)
Sell it and buy a new boat , if you get enough make it an Outerlimits.


Now there's a great investment!!!:D

phughes69 09-20-2007 10:39 AM


Originally Posted by Semper Fi (Post 2278170)
Is anyone starting to build in this area? If so, I would hold out--it should only increase in value in the future.

My parents lot is the only vacant lot in the area. All the other lots have 1000 + sq/ft houses on them. The area used to be summer cottages and then people started tearing down the cottages and building brick year round homes My dad found out that one house about 8 doors down sold for $ 380,000 five years ago. If anybody is familar with the area. It is the lone vacant lot on the canadian side right near the mouth to the entrance of the Snye river next to whapool Indian reservation.

RHC 09-20-2007 10:49 AM

Well,, in my opinion, :D not one of you brain's have ask the correct question!!! Is the water deep enough to dock a boat ,, can you build a dock on the water front or not ,,, how much frontage will you be able to use ,, do you see a lot of activity from city hall making new regulations,, all of these things will effect the long range value of the lot,,, it looks like your Dad has the market comps for the area ,, do not sell to the man who has offered untill it has been exposed to the market for a higher price ,,, then you can help Dad make a good decision !! Just my 2c ,,,,, good luck, Oh,, can it be sub-divided or build a duplex so both you and your brother gets a share ???

RHC

phughes69 09-20-2007 11:10 AM


Originally Posted by RHC (Post 2278606)
Well,, in my opinion, :D not one of you brain's have ask the correct question!!! Is the water deep enough to dock a boat ,, can you build a dock on the water front or not ,,, how much frontage will you be able to use ,, do you see a lot of activity from city hall making new regulations,, all of these things will effect the long range value of the lot,,, it looks like your Dad has the market comps for the area ,, do not sell to the man who has offered untill it has been exposed to the market for a higher price ,,, then you can help Dad make a good decision !! Just my 2c ,,,,, good luck, Oh,, can it be sub-divided or build a duplex so both you and your brother gets a share ???

RHC

They have 50ft of seawall. I think they can build a small dock ( about 10 ft out). The water last year was about 2 1/2 feet deep about 1 foot from the seawall. Other people have put pillings in front of their property for tying up their boats.

44MTI 09-20-2007 11:31 AM


Originally Posted by tanner (Post 2277986)
Easy answer... If the property is not gaining 12-15% a year in value, you need to sell it and invest in any decent Mutual fund. Any fund will gain 15% a year over a period of 7 - 10 years. The waterfront property is not in Florida or California where it will out perfrom averages. So just do the math calculations for yourself.

I'd sure like to know what you investing in.

tanner 09-20-2007 02:40 PM


Originally Posted by 42MTI (Post 2278648)
I'd sure like to know what you investing in.



NY Davis "B" fund to start.

tanner 09-20-2007 02:51 PM


Originally Posted by tanner (Post 2278895)
NY Davis "B" fund to start.

http://www.investorguide.com/mutual-...E0&ma=0&maval=

Mike J 09-20-2007 03:01 PM

I bought "Waterfront" in the Hi-Desert in SoCal 3 years ago,
They say theres a BIG one every 300 years and its been 310
the end of this year.
My neighbor asked why I was putting in such a wide driveway
I said its a launch Ramp:rolleyes:
Mike J.

Quinlan 09-20-2007 03:15 PM

Thats what I was thinking. Lots of new waterfront sum day.

Zudnic 09-20-2007 04:12 PM


Originally Posted by phughes69 (Post 2278598)
It is the lone vacant lot on the canadian side right near the mouth to the entrance of the Snye river next to whapool Indian reservation.

The big threat is unlike the US, Constitutional rights are not absolute, unless you are an Indian. Canada's native population has a "seperate constitution" they are governed under The Royal Proclamation of 1863. There is also no Provincial rights in Canada. In fact they are called provinces because thats the form of government. As Provinces they are in reality colonies of Canada. The Indians in BC for example have successfuly taken over entire real estate developments claiming its their land.

Royal Proclamation reads:

Warrants of Survey, or pass Patents for any Lands beyond the Heads or Sources of any of the Rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean from the West and North West, or upon any Lands whatever, which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us as aforesaid, are reserved to the said Indians, or any of them.

And We do further declare it to be Our Royal Will and Pleasure, for the present as aforesaid, to reserve under our Sovereignty, Protection, and Dominion, for the use of the said Indians, all the Lands and Territories not included within the Limits of Our said Three new Governments, or within the Limits of the Territory granted to the Hudson's Bay Company, as also all the Lands and Territories lying to the Westward of the Sources of the Rivers which fall into the Sea from the West and North West as aforesaid.

And We do hereby strictly forbid, on Pain of our Displeasure, all our loving Subjects from making any Purchases or Settlements whatever, or taking Possession of any of the Lands above reserved, without our especial leave and Licence for that Purpose first obtained.

And We do further strictly enjoin and require all Persons whatever who have either wilfully or inadvertently seated themselves upon any Lands within the Countries above described or upon any other Lands which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us, are still reserved to the said Indians as aforesaid, forthwith to remove themselves from such Settlements.
In other words the only Person Indians cant try and take land from is the Monarch of England. Non Crown lands have become fair game. In the landmark 1997 case of Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, the Supreme Court expanded the definition of aboriginal land title to include the modern use of resources like forestry and mining -- in essence, full ownership. It determined that oral histories should be given as much legal weight as written evidence, and that the government should provide compensation if there was a compelling reason to infringe native land rights. The tsawwassen Indian band used the ruling to grab a major coal port and a BC Ferries terminal, plus 7.4 million acres surrounding their reserve! The landowners however got to keep their property, the Indians have ever collect all the property taxes for the reserves coffers. As a result buyers are very leary of lands in Canada that could be claimed by Indians.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42 AM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.