外国人买二手房开发-又转手-可以吗？

liyuefu

外国人可以买二手房用于开发，24个月内必须开工。
这里有一个24个月的空档，外国人可否买了后申请一个批文，然后转手卖掉？

我问了FIRB,
得到答复如下：
---------------------------
If a foreigner applies for FIRB approval to purchase a second hand property for redevelopment, they would only receive approval on the condition that they must commence construction within 24 months.

If they are unable to comply with this condition, they should advise FIRB and can request to sell the property undeveloped, providing reasons as to why they cannot commence construction.

If you have information about a breach of Australia's foreign investment rules, you can report by completing the Report a Breach form http://www.firb.gov.au/content/real_estate/breach.asp?NavID=100

You are able to remain anonymous. All reports of suspected non-compliance are actioned where appropriate.

Regards
Lindy

-----------------------

请大家看看， 这里 they should advise FIRB, 是 must，必须吗？ 还是也可以不告知FIRB？如果不告知，是不是会被惩罚。

谢谢！

yourock

为何允许外国人来赚澳洲的easy money？

香香兔

看起来好像可以奥

lobsters

被举报会判坐牢现在

香香兔

lobsters 发表于 2015-9-9 11:57
被举报会判坐牢现在

那是肯定没有按流程走，变成违法的，只要手续合法看不出什么理由一定会导致楼上说的结局，毕竞法制社会，不会意气用事。

1212qwe

1212qwe

当然可以了，国内资金链断的有的

Baodie

巨额罚款加坐牢

toshio_yakawa

nope. can request to sell the property undeveloped.

EN25817

写个邮件，说明你不能开发的原因，想卖房，看看怎么说。

audreybest

可以，但是印象中是增值部分要全额交给政府。

liyuefu

这种做法肯定有人在做了，就是想了解一下，政府会不会对这种行为（卖之前没有向政府说明原因）会不会被处罚。
从回信看，政府如果要处罚也是有理由的。

香香兔

audreybest 发表于 2015-9-9 13:42
可以，但是印象中是增值部分要全额交给政府。

这种可能性会有的，安抚一些百姓的手段啊哈

香香兔

不过，凡是在法律的框架下的行为都是受到保护的，动动脑子投资人总会找到合法途径的。

toshio_yakawa

you can sell the land without the planning permit. so you are wasting all your planning and subdivision costs.

雾沉半垒

感觉是要卖也得FIRB批准

liyuefu

查到了对澳洲标准网站上对should的解释：

should 是建议/推荐，不是要求。

ref:
http://www.standards.org.au/Stan ... tive%20adoption.pdf
--------------------------------------
The use of MUST, SHALL and SHOULD
In accordance with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Directives, the word
‘shall’ is used to state that a requirement is strictly to be followed in order to conform to a Standard.
Consequently, there can be no deviation from that requirement, other than a specified tolerance.
It is noted that in legislation and specifications it is common to use the word ‘must’ to express a
requirement. Where Standards are adopted in legislation, the word ‘shall’ in the Standard should be
considered as equivalent to ‘must’ in the legislation.
The word ‘should’ introduces a suggestion or recommendation that is not a requirement. It is not
necessary that such recommendations or suggestions be followed in order to comply with the
Standard.
Within a Standard for Legislative Adoption, ‘should’ must not be used in Clauses or in Normative
Appendices, but may be used in Advisory Notes or Informative Appendices.
------------------------------------------