Palting

To be clear, I can purchase the car outright, but there are tax advantages for me to lease the car first then buy it at the end of the lease period. This will be the most expensive car I will purchase to date. Just wondering if there are certain rules or caveats I need to know at this price range.

Thanks!!

Drifting

Not worth it even with tax advantages. GT cars hold their value much better than the lease terms support, so you lose more money by leasing a GT car.

It's smart to lease a 911 carrera, but dumb to lease a GT3/RS.

Nick

I don’t understand you logic.

I am not advocating buying or leasing but leasing a car is like owning it. Whatever value there is you get. No doubt leasing interest is higher but tax benefits can offset or surpass the higher interest rate of a financing or loss of investment by using cash.

Finally, with leasing there is the added benefit of should the car be in an accident your not charged when you turn the car in.

Catorce

Leasing is weak. At this level you are either buying the car or looking like a poseur to rent it. There is no advantage from a tax standpoint that couldn't be made up somewhere else. You lease, I have a corporation that buys my personal cars and writes them off a million different ways. Same difference, except I own the car.

Norcalgt3

This is one of the most incoherent posts in terms of syntax and logic I've read in a while. And for rennslist, that means a lot.

LexVan

Then you don't know Mootish.

Norcalgt3

This guy makes Mooty look like a native speaker

ipse dixit

You should read this post by Mech33, and peruse the entire thread generally.

https://rennlist.com/forums/991-gt3-...l#post12043190

Lapis

”...looking like a poseur to rent it”? Sheesh. Who the hell cares how someone else chooses to finance? And how or why would you even know?

In terms of trying to help answer the OP’s question, I think the only thing to be eyes wide open about leasing a high end car like a GT3 would be:

1. The residual for the lease will be much lower than reality, so you’re paying more for depreciation during the term of the lease than it’s actuallt depreciating. But as long as you buy the car at lease end for the residual price, it doesn’t really matter other than having the effect of inflating your payments during the term of the lease vs what they really “should” have been and artificially lowering the purchase price at the end to well below it’s true market value at lease end. This has the effect of canceling itself out. But it would be a horrible deal to lease one and NOT buy it at the end of the lease do this reason.

2. For the reason above, you really need “gap” insurance. That is, if car is totaled during term of lease, the payoff amount will be far less than the car’s true value.

shapiroeric

Hers my story why I would never lease again....leased a Jeep Grand Cherokee....wanted to buy it 6 months before the leased ended as it was worth much more than the residual plus remaining payments.....buried deep in the contract was an early buyout was at market value....couldn’t even make the remaining payments plus pay the buyout to own it....long story short had to finish the 6 months then buy it.....why relevant?

Let’s say you wanted to buy it early to trade it in? The above scenario would be a killer....these GT cars hold their value so well and the banks are only out to screw you in the end one way or another I wouldn’t lease...

Catorce

Hey, it's my opinion. With these cars, you need to be able to write the check. I don't buy the "tax writeoff" piece about leasing any more than I buy the bit about financing which states that your money can work harder for you in some other investment vehicle which therefore justifies a car loan.

Leasing or car loans mean you don;t actually own the car when it boils down to it.

Again, just my opinion. If I can't write a check I don't buy it.

Palting

Thanks, Lapis. This was what I was looking to confirm. Lease through corp, then buy through personal funds at end. Good thought on the Gap insurance. Though I can write the check outright from the get-go, this alternate route seems like a smarter way to do it.

ScottMellor

I'm investigating buying a car personally and then leasing it to my corporation.
I have not yet run it by the accountant, but initial research points to it being legal.
I would have to have a proper lease agreement between myself as a person and my corporation at a reasonable market-rate payment.
Obviously this is a fairly particular situation, but I would imagine a number of you might be in a similar position.
Has anyone else done this?
It seems like a having my cake and eat it proposition, so there must me a flaw in my logic! ��

Jamie140

I rarely get involved in these 'can I afford it and how?' Conversations, but isn't this exactly the opposite of what you want to do?

Shouldn't your corp buy the depreciating asset, write it off and lease it to you at a discounted rate?

WernerE

Luxury car limitations on depreciation limit tax advantages, particularly if your personal use is over 50%. Also, commuting to and from work is not "business use."

Sales tax alone favors leasing, as sales tax is only charged on your monthly payments. Flip the car in a year? You've only paid sales tax on 12 monthly payments vs. 100% of sales tax on the purchase price in a cash or finance deal. Not all states offer a sales tax trade-in (Calif. doesn't).

Porsche strategically offers a low residual on GT cars, probably because they'd lease fewer Turbo models. I'll explain: Turbos depreciate heavier than most cars. If Porsche offered a realistic residual on GT cars, no one would lease a Turbo model. In other words, Turbos set kind of a ceiling for residuals on GT cars. (Why? A high residual of 70-75% on a GT car would produce a far lower monthly payment, as compared to a Turbo model).

There's a lot of misinformation on leasing. I'm a fan of leasing (as should be the dealer).