DG
2016-10-13 23:46:08
- #1
Then I end up with a 6% net rental yield, of course before taxes. Or am I mistaken? Again?
Probably – but that’s more because you define "net yield" differently or according to your own criteria.
Of course, you can mentally add the incidental purchase costs to the house purchase, but that’s not sensible – the house is worth €245K, not €265K. If you had to sell the house again in the short term, you could probably get around €245K again, but rather unlikely €265K if you don’t include any speculative gain.
That may initially improve the net yield according to your criteria – however, the ~€20K incidental purchase costs will consume the entire first year’s net rent, and you haven’t even paid any interest or principal to the bank yet, nor any income tax on the rental income.
Your consistent refusal to include income tax in the net yield calculation is, of course, your prerogative – but it is highly nonsensical. If you want to know what remains from an investment, you obviously have to deduct all costs and only then arrive at the true value.
There are (from an accounting/bookkeeping perspective) also no reserves for repairs, and if the house still has repair backlog not visible in the listing, things look rather bleak initially.
Without even picking up a calculator, your yield in the first 2 (probably rather 5) years is thus zero or negative – so far from your targeted 6%.
How much equity do you currently have available? The standard land value would also be interesting, then one would know what they approximately assume for the house value.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe