Anthony Albanese - How long? -3-

[JackOutback]

Not necessarily.

The overwhelming carrot for property investment is value appreciation over time.

Even if cgt ad ng never existed, property is still an attractive option. Before they were introduced, property value has steadily increased after WWII

And everyone needs to be reminded ng is not a positive, if you're in ng territory if you have an investment property it means

'Negative gearing occurs when the costs of holding an investment asset (e.g., mortgage interest, maintenance, rates) exceed the income it generates, resulting in a net loss.'
Simple Negative Gearing Example

• Annual Rental Income: $25,000
• Annual Expenses: $35,000 (mortgage interest, repairs, management fees)
• Net Loss: $10,000
• Outcome: The owner can deduct this $10,000 loss from their personal salary, lowering their taxable income by $10,000.

So basically it's still a loss. Yeah it's a 'discount' (for want of a better word), but it's talked about as some ill gotten gain. It isn't.

And while it may dissuade some investors, studies have shown that removing cgt and ng will have little impact on property value decreases.

So, while there may be more incremental supply, the property value needle won't move much. And remember 2/3 of the population either own their own home or have a mortgage - they won't want to see value depreciation, again the needle won't move much.

Increasing affordability is key, not value depreciation.

The problem with this 'loss' is that you can include interest payments in your losses and use those to offset the taxes you pay on salary, which makes you more able to carry an investment you couldn't afford without this government help. There's a reason investment as a proportion of home ownership has shot up in the last 20 years. We, along with Canada, are the the only major countries that are this generous. I would suggest removing negative gearing would have the most effect, CGT discounts would be less influential.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Grandfathering existing concessions and introducing a staged withdrawal of CGT and limiting future negative gearing to just new builds only, is a sensible approach and could all be sold under an improving housing affordability umbrella.
However with the hysterical vested interests, the noise could drown out the rationale behind it. Would need a very strong and committed government following through on it

Or a government with a once-in-a-century majority and an opposition hellbent on stepping daily on its own landmines.

Halloooooooooo Albo??

 

[peetoo]

The problem with this 'loss' is that you can include interest payments in your losses and use those to offset the taxes you pay on salary, which makes you more able to carry an investment you couldn't afford without this government help. There's a reason investment as a proportion of home ownership has shot up in the last 20 years. We, along with Canada, are the the only major countries that are this generous. I would suggest removing negative gearing would have the most effect, CGT discounts would be less influential.

Other countries do buy to rent without the ‘largesse’

 

[Rob R]

People turned off shorten because he wanted to fix cgt & franking credits
Half those people didn’t even know what franking credits were.

^^ all that ain’t gonna happen.

He lost because he ran an awful campaign with lots of badly explained policies cluttering the campaign, we're caught with different policies depending on the state and he wasn't trusted. Not to mention the stupidity of saying we have to cut tax breaks while increasing foreign aid.

That doesnt mean a smarter campaign couldn't succeed with those policies..

 

[Rob R]

Limit ngv to one per Australian citizen household (grandfathered for existing citizens who own multiple at the moment) would be popular and raise a lot of money plus a lot of non citizens would then sell.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Jeez if your a boomer wanting more return from your home after what’s gone already it’s a little greedy

I am in this category by the way

I'm not a boomer.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I would suggest removing negative gearing would have the most effect

Maybe, but that's not the point, the point is the theory that if you remove ng and cgt then property value will dive and supply will increase

Economists have repeatedly stated that these moves will do little in either.

Also, as I've already stated the 2/3 of the population that have a mortgage or own property won't want value to dip.

Property devaluation is not something to be advocated to make property more affordable, what should be advocated is to increase affordability.

 

[JackOutback]

Maybe, but that's not the point, the point is the theory that if you remove ng and cgt then property value will dive and supply will increase

Economists have repeatedly stated that these moves will do little in either.

Also, as I've already stated the 2/3 of the population that have a mortgage or own property won't want value to dip.

Property devaluation is not something to be advocated to make property more affordable, what should be advocated is to increase affordability.

It’s not about making property values dive, it’s about stopping the unsustainable growth that has completely decoupled house prices from wages. If house prices didn’t move for 10 years, nobody has lost any money, but the increase in wages will allow the next generation to catch up. That’s what changes to negative gearing and CGT can do.

If the complaint is, I was waiting on that investment house I can only afford because of tax concessions to double in value so I can live large while our children never own a home, well, cry me a river.

 

[nut]

Economists have repeatedly stated that these moves will do little in either.

Go out side…. find a tree …. Shake it and 10 Economists will fall out, all with different opinions.

 

[Carringbush2010]

It’s not about making property values dive, it’s about stopping the unsustainable growth that has completely decoupled house prices from wages. If house prices didn’t move for 10 years, nobody has lost any money, but the increase in wages will allow the next generation to catch up. That’s what changes to negative gearing and CGT can do.

If the complaint is, I was waiting on that investment house I can only afford because of tax concessions to double in value so I can live large while our children never own a home, well, cry me a river.

Don't disagree, I was more pointing to the now not 10 years time, which is what the other third want - now.

It's not coming.

 

[JackOutback]

Don't disagree, I was more pointing to the now not 10 years time, which is what the other third want - now.

It's not coming.

Refusing to make improvements because they are not immediate is irresponsible and idiotic.

 

[QuietB]

Maybe, but that's not the point, the point is the theory that if you remove ng and cgt then property value will dive and supply will increase

Economists have repeatedly stated that these moves will do little in either.

Also, as I've already stated the 2/3 of the population that have a mortgage or own property won't want value to dip.

Property devaluation is not something to be advocated to make property more affordable, what should be advocated is to increase affordability.

1. Property prices will fall. If you lower demand then prices will fall. I really don't care what Property Council "economists" say
2. Maybe Australians might be forced to invest in actual economic activity rather than parking huge sums of cash in destroying their children's future. Australia has zero innovation, invests next to nothing in science and has barely any startups. Maybe if capital was forced to go somewhere other than residential property that could improve.

 

[peetoo]

Even Victoria’s clumsy Airbnb tax has freed up the housing supply

 

[QuietB]

Even Victoria’s clumsy Airbnb tax has freed up the housing supply

I love what the Vic government has done with property taxes.

I do believe you should be allowed one extra house - a holiday shack (cost $3m these days) is an Aussie tradition.

But the hoarders who accumulate multiple homes can GAGF.

 

[Festerz]

Oh No.

NewsCorp (which just happens to own Australia's largest web based real estate website in the country valued at $22 billion - realestate.com.au) has published a story saying that the Albanese changing the CGT and Negative gearing tax concessions for residential property investment would be 'political suicide' and 'worsen affordability for first home buyers'.

Their source? Someone who owns a 350 listing $100m+ residential property personal investment portfolio.

Reckon they're getting worried.

 

[Rob R]

Wonder if albo plans to call an election soon, seem to be a lot of taxpayers funded adds for the albo government at the moment depsite us apparently needing to cut spending..

 

[pebblesofsand]

Just heard Albo referencing his mother's advice saying that the so called "ISIS" brides and their children have "made there own beds and now they have to lie in them".

He's quickly turning into a vacuous waste of space more interested in retaining power than actually achieving anything.

 

[QuietB]

Wonder if albo plans to call an election soon, seem to be a lot of taxpayers funded adds for the albo government at the moment depsite us apparently needing to cut spending..

A CGT double dissolution would be epic.

 

[Rob R]

Just heard Albo referencing his mother's advice saying that the so called "ISIS" brides and their children have "made there own beds and now they have to lie in them".

He's quickly turning into a vacuous waste of space more interested in retaining power than actually achieving anything.

Or just doing what an overwhelming number of Australians would want done to these terrorist supporters

 

[Rob R]

A CGT double dissolution would be epic.

He won't risk it. double dissolution elections bump up minor party numbers and alp's primary isn't enough.

 

[ferball]

Just heard Albo referencing his mother's advice saying that the so called "ISIS" brides and their children have "made there own beds and now they have to lie in them".

He's quickly turning into a vacuous waste of space more interested in retaining power than actually achieving anything.

Is that the speech he gave during their 1975 GF loss?

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Jamal Rifi. Allegedly took the passports to Syria for the ISIS families.

 

[Festerz]

Wonder if albo plans to call an election soon, seem to be a lot of taxpayers funded adds for the albo government at the moment depsite us apparently needing to cut spending..

A CGT double dissolution would be epic.

Think you guys need to do some research on what it takes to get a double dissolution trigger under S.57 of the Constitution.

Specifically the requirement for the Senate to reject, fails to pass, or amends a House of Representatives bill in a way the House rejects, twice over a three-month period.

Especially in a time when there is not a clear single party Opposition majority in the Senate and has a huge majority in the House of Reps as currently exists.

In other words, I can't see such a trigger presenting itself - especially around CGT/Negative Gearing tax reform aimed at improving housing affordability.

The Greens and most of the Cross Bench as I see it would be very open to such legislation. The trick for the Albanese Government is to present a Bill that does not damage its own electoral chances in the long term.

 

[Festerz]

Just heard Albo referencing his mother's advice saying that the so called "ISIS" brides and their children have "made there own beds and now they have to lie in them".

He's quickly turning into a vacuous waste of space more interested in retaining power than actually achieving anything.

Pretty sure you've both misquoted and missed the context of what was said and why.

But leaving that aside for the moment, what specifically are you asking the Australian PM to do here?

Particularly just weeks after a mass terrorist attack inspired by ISIS ideology.

 

[QuietB]

Think you guys need to do some research on what it takes to get a double dissolution trigger under S.57 of the Constitution.

Specifically the requirement for the Senate to reject, fails to pass, or amends a House of Representatives bill in a way the House rejects, twice over a three-month period.

Especially in a time when there is not a clear single party Opposition majority in the Senate and has a huge majority in the House of Reps as currently exists.

In other words, I can't see such a trigger presenting itself - especially around CGT/Negative Gearing tax reform aimed at improving housing affordability.

The Greens and most of the Cross Bench as I see it would be very open to such legislation. The trick for the Albanese Government is to present a Bill that does not damage its own electoral chances in the long term.

Agree it would get through the Senate - it would still be epic if it did happen though.