Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 54%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$69 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Try Pro Features for Free
Start your 7 day free trial. Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties.
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Scott Albritton

Scott Albritton has started 3 posts and replied 24 times.

Post: Capital gains tax

Scott AlbrittonPosted
  • Realtor
  • San Diego, CA
  • Posts 24
  • Votes 4

$250,000 exemption is federal and deducted from the gain. Not the sales price.
[Sale Price - (Original Purchase Price + Improvements) = Gain] 

In order to benefit from the $250k exemption, must be primary residence, lived in 2 out of the last 5 years, can use this once every 2 years.

Looks like there's no capital gains Tax in Washington. (still federal though depending on income bracket)

hope that helps some!

Post: Multifamily Underwriting Help

Scott AlbrittonPosted
  • Realtor
  • San Diego, CA
  • Posts 24
  • Votes 4

Looks like you removed CapEx in Proforma and increased repairs/maintenance by only $3,500? Any reason to not account for a larger CapEx?

Landscaping and Pest control seem cheap to me, but not knowing location, there's no way to actually know. 

What is current ask price? NOI/Purchase price = CAP rate (what's typical in the area for similar building types/unit mixes

Can the area demographics support the rental increases? 

Post: Making Sense of San Diego Real Estate (Renting and Investing vs Buying)

Scott AlbrittonPosted
  • Realtor
  • San Diego, CA
  • Posts 24
  • Votes 4
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Scott Albritton:
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Scott Albritton:

Welcome to San Diego! 

Near the 56 is a great place to live. As you've mentioned, great schools, area in general is nice and it's centrally located. Other areas nearby that are great include, Cardiff, Encinitas and Del Mar. 

As for your scenario, how many bedrooms would be ideal? If you elected to rent, would a house be the only considered option? Would you entertain a condo?

We've seen the rental market soften here in the greater SD area as whole, prices may continue to soften towards the end of the year. 

I'd consider renting for a period of time and identify a particular area you'd like to eventually buy. From an investment perspective, I'd look to invest in small multi-family 2-4 units with a larger down payment ~50% or more (only way to produce positive cash flow here at the moment) 

Investing in San Diego right now isn't driven by immediate cash flow. If cash flow is the main goal, there are many other markets to consider before San Diego. With that being said, if you're comfortable with a long term hold, San Diego and especially coastal, will always be attractive imo. 


Best of luck, San Diego is a great place to be!



 >I'd look to invest in small multi-family 2-4 units with a larger down payment ~50% or more (only way to produce positive cash flow here at the moment)

I never understood why one would want to buy cash flow.  Here are my thoughts:

- San Diego is an appreciation market implying poor cash flow and the bulk of the return comes from appreciation.

- the difference in rate of return for appreciation of a 80% LTV vs 50% LTV is 2.5x. As an example if a property appreciates 20% at 80% LTV you have made 100% from the appreciation but at 50% LTV you have only made 40% from appreciation.

- Fannie/Freddie (f/f) residential conventional loan is the cheapest money available.  Even with the recent rate increase of the last couple of years, f/f is significantly below S&P lifetime return.   This implies that rather than buy the cash flow, you are likely to do better putting that money in S&P or you can d far better using it to make a smart RE investment.

- current f/f is around 6%.  This implies paying down is saving 6%.  I think most of us can agree that we do not invest in RE for 6% return.  So why would we buy the cash flow at a rate of 6%?

- 6% rate at 30 year each $100k borrowed adds $600/month. My worst appreciating property has apprecated $2700/month.  My best property has appreciated over $10k/month.  Point is cash flow (positive or negative) is inconsequential compared to the appreciation assuming you do not need the cash flow to pay the bills.  

I put forth effort to keep my RE investment significantly leveraged.   To intentionally reduce the leverage more than required is a foreign concept to me especially in the San Diego market.  

Best wishes

Thank you for the reply Dan. I appreciate the perspective and insights. 

In the current market, it's pretty much impossible to have any positive cash flow in the 2-4 unit space with long term rentals, unless you're putting ~40-50% down, not only focused on the cash flow per se, but rather simply not being in the negative. As you're very aware, appreciation here locally has skyrocketed in the past ~4 years. I don't believe we'll continue to see that trajectory moving forward over the next 4 (you never know though!)... 

You've put yourself in a great position to capture both appreciation and increase in rents simultaneously, which is a great place to be. For investors looking to purchase properties here in SD at the moment, 20-25% down will most often leave you with negative monthly cash flow. 

With that being said, appreciation is certainly something to always consider here in SD.

Example of current property for sale, 

$1,800,000 asking price (25% down) - 4 units 

$10,200 total monthly rents (pro forma) - rental market has seen softening as of late

$9,770/month after assuming 5% vacancy rate.

$8,981 mortgage at 7%
$2,918 expenses monthly 33.38% of Gross rental income (Prop mgt, maintenance reserve, utilities, Prop Taxes, Insurance, other)

$6,852 NOI/monthly

($2,129) negative monthly cash flow..


Same scenario with 50% down, 

$864 positive monthly cash flow

Not saying it's the best use of capital or the only way to do it, instead providing an example using an available market opportunity to share what the numbers look like.


 My underwriting is a bit more conservative than yours (and yours is more conservative than most I see).  Note if monthly rent is 0.5% purchase ratio, the property tax will be ~20% of the rent.  Using your ratio that leave 13.38% for pm, insurance, maintenance/cap ex.   You can see why I am more conservative.  In fact assuming attached 4 small standard San Diego units, my maintenance/cap ex would be $1200 or almost 12% in your scenario.  So my property tax and maintenance/cap ex estimate use virtually all your expense estimate.  Utilities, insurance, pm, misc would place my expense estimates about 10% higher than your estimate.

we agree that mls San Diego properties at 75% LTV are likely large negative cash flow.

I also agree that RE appreciation is unlikely to match the last dozen years, but you never know.

Where I am unsure we agree is that paying $450k to improve the cash flow ~$3k (your numbers but I expect my delta wold be similar meaning both my cash flow estimates would be worse than yours but both would be worse by the same amount not affecting the difference) makes sense especially if the cost of having the extra $450k is only 6% rate which is historically simple to beat via numerous investment options and hopefully no one is investing in RE for an expected of 6%.  

To look at it from a months to recover, $450k divided by $3k is 150 months, which is 12.5 years.  I do not make investments that forecast an over 12 year recovery.   This is what is being advocated by buying the cash flow.  Note this calculation gets worse if you recognize the declining value of currency.  In inflation adjusted dollars, this likely is closer to 15 years to recover the $450k.  I have never held a mortgage 15 years (or even 12.5 years) and I have had quite a few mortgages.

I claim that it is better to have the negative cash flow and use the $450k to achieve a return in excess of the 6%.  This is especially true in appreciation markets.  If you put it in RE hopefully your return is many times the 6% (4x the 6% minimum). 

I recognize no one likes negative cash flow.  Worse than negative cash flow is buying out of negative cash flow at current rates.

Note I put forth certain effort to keep my leverage high Until the recent rent hikes, it was fairly simple to refinance every few years and keep the leverage without large penalty from rate differential. Today my rate differential would be a doubling of rates so my LTV may be at all time low. Nice to have a problem that the properties have appreciated so much that the LTV is below my desired LTV goal. Note if rates were still below 3% I would not have this problem.

Hopefully I have given you something to ponder.  


Dan, I appreciate the thoughtful response, many things to consider and certainly a lot of great information.

For the expenses, yes at 33% I would agree it is a little thin.

You bring up some great points as it relates to opportunity cost and the payback period with a large down payment. Something to definitely consider evaluating more. I appreciate your viewpoint and sharing your thoughts! So thank you for that. 

Do you typically reevaluate your current returns based on the net equity you have in your properties? I've found a lot of investors focus solely on the return they're achieving based on the initial investment in the property.

i.e. - 12 years ago you purchase a duplex for $400,000 with NOI of $30,000, for a return of 7.5%/year. However, that property has now appreciated to $1,250,000 resulting in a net equity of say $950,000 after mortgage and closing costs. Their actual return is 3.1%/year on the equity in which they've acquired over that time. With completing a 1031 exchange into a more expensive property, their depreciation table would reset as well, providing an even greater benefit.


Curious to hear your thoughts. 

Getting back to the original post, what would be a strategy you'd explore given his circumstances? 

Post: Making Sense of San Diego Real Estate (Renting and Investing vs Buying)

Scott AlbrittonPosted
  • Realtor
  • San Diego, CA
  • Posts 24
  • Votes 4
Quote from @Dan H.:
Quote from @Scott Albritton:

Welcome to San Diego! 

Near the 56 is a great place to live. As you've mentioned, great schools, area in general is nice and it's centrally located. Other areas nearby that are great include, Cardiff, Encinitas and Del Mar. 

As for your scenario, how many bedrooms would be ideal? If you elected to rent, would a house be the only considered option? Would you entertain a condo?

We've seen the rental market soften here in the greater SD area as whole, prices may continue to soften towards the end of the year. 

I'd consider renting for a period of time and identify a particular area you'd like to eventually buy. From an investment perspective, I'd look to invest in small multi-family 2-4 units with a larger down payment ~50% or more (only way to produce positive cash flow here at the moment) 

Investing in San Diego right now isn't driven by immediate cash flow. If cash flow is the main goal, there are many other markets to consider before San Diego. With that being said, if you're comfortable with a long term hold, San Diego and especially coastal, will always be attractive imo. 


Best of luck, San Diego is a great place to be!



 >I'd look to invest in small multi-family 2-4 units with a larger down payment ~50% or more (only way to produce positive cash flow here at the moment)

I never understood why one would want to buy cash flow.  Here are my thoughts:

- San Diego is an appreciation market implying poor cash flow and the bulk of the return comes from appreciation.

- the difference in rate of return for appreciation of a 80% LTV vs 50% LTV is 2.5x. As an example if a property appreciates 20% at 80% LTV you have made 100% from the appreciation but at 50% LTV you have only made 40% from appreciation.

- Fannie/Freddie (f/f) residential conventional loan is the cheapest money available.  Even with the recent rate increase of the last couple of years, f/f is significantly below S&P lifetime return.   This implies that rather than buy the cash flow, you are likely to do better putting that money in S&P or you can d far better using it to make a smart RE investment.

- current f/f is around 6%.  This implies paying down is saving 6%.  I think most of us can agree that we do not invest in RE for 6% return.  So why would we buy the cash flow at a rate of 6%?

- 6% rate at 30 year each $100k borrowed adds $600/month. My worst appreciating property has apprecated $2700/month.  My best property has appreciated over $10k/month.  Point is cash flow (positive or negative) is inconsequential compared to the appreciation assuming you do not need the cash flow to pay the bills.  

I put forth effort to keep my RE investment significantly leveraged.   To intentionally reduce the leverage more than required is a foreign concept to me especially in the San Diego market.  

Best wishes

Thank you for the reply Dan. I appreciate the perspective and insights. 

In the current market, it's pretty much impossible to have any positive cash flow in the 2-4 unit space with long term rentals, unless you're putting ~40-50% down, not only focused on the cash flow per se, but rather simply not being in the negative. As you're very aware, appreciation here locally has skyrocketed in the past ~4 years. I don't believe we'll continue to see that trajectory moving forward over the next 4 (you never know though!)... 

You've put yourself in a great position to capture both appreciation and increase in rents simultaneously, which is a great place to be. For investors looking to purchase properties here in SD at the moment, 20-25% down will most often leave you with negative monthly cash flow. 

With that being said, appreciation is certainly something to always consider here in SD.

Example of current property for sale, 

$1,800,000 asking price (25% down) - 4 units 

$10,200 total monthly rents (pro forma) - rental market has seen softening as of late

$9,770/month after assuming 5% vacancy rate.

$8,981 mortgage at 7%
$2,918 expenses monthly 33.38% of Gross rental income (Prop mgt, maintenance reserve, utilities, Prop Taxes, Insurance, other)

$6,852 NOI/monthly

($2,129) negative monthly cash flow..


Same scenario with 50% down, 

$864 positive monthly cash flow

Not saying it's the best use of capital or the only way to do it, instead providing an example using an available market opportunity to share what the numbers look like.

Post: Making Sense of San Diego Real Estate (Renting and Investing vs Buying)

Scott AlbrittonPosted
  • Realtor
  • San Diego, CA
  • Posts 24
  • Votes 4

Welcome to San Diego! 

Near the 56 is a great place to live. As you've mentioned, great schools, area in general is nice and it's centrally located. Other areas nearby that are great include, Cardiff, Encinitas and Del Mar. 

As for your scenario, how many bedrooms would be ideal? If you elected to rent, would a house be the only considered option? Would you entertain a condo?

We've seen the rental market soften here in the greater SD area as whole, prices may continue to soften towards the end of the year. 

I'd consider renting for a period of time and identify a particular area you'd like to eventually buy. From an investment perspective, I'd look to invest in small multi-family 2-4 units with a larger down payment ~50% or more (only way to produce positive cash flow here at the moment) 

Investing in San Diego right now isn't driven by immediate cash flow. If cash flow is the main goal, there are many other markets to consider before San Diego. With that being said, if you're comfortable with a long term hold, San Diego and especially coastal, will always be attractive imo. 


Best of luck, San Diego is a great place to be!

Quote from @Paul Florez:
Quote from @Gino Barbaro:

@Paul Florez

I would ask @Dave Foster if you qualify for 1031 if you sell even if you live in one apartment.

I am afraid if you get a situation where you have to evict and it takes months. I always try to plan for worst case scenarios, and carry enough reserves

Gino


 Definitely a good rule of thumb and to have enough reserves because you never know for sure!  Ok I will look into the 1031 situation because that can also be an option but probably my last resort.


 Hi Paul, 

Good stuff! 

For your current place, what is the cost basis for the property and what would it be worth if sold today? 

From a sales perspective, if you're married ($500k) or if single ($250k), you'd have a portion of the exclusion (%50) assuming the square footage is the same for each unit (assuming a duplex)

The remainder (%50) could be 1031 exchanged into another property tax deferred. 

Or, if possible, move into a different property, hold onto this property for another 2 years or so, (your circumstances have now changed) and you'd like to sell your investment property, 1031 all proceeds into a "like-kind" property and benefit from the 1031 tax deferral. 

Best of luck, seems like you're on a great path!

Hi All,

Looking to buy a property here in San Diego, CA. The property is zoned R-1 single. My question is, can I possibly get the lot rezoned to accommodate up to 4 units? The house would be divided amongst itself and all be connected. Adding some walls, kitchens, etc to make it 4 total units.

Do I have to get it rezoned? Is the a better way to do it?

Thanks in advance,

Scott

I will have to look into that some more. Thank you for the info! 

Thank you all for your replies! 

Sounds like I will have to explore this again when the time is right. I will move on and look for other opportunities! 

Thanks Mike! 

What would be a decent interest rate? 10%?