Iwan Sunito's vision for a landmark mixed-use precinct in Sydney's Inner West has taken a major step forward, with approval granted for the $1.9 billion Five Dock development first unveiled earlier this year.

The approved scheme by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/one-global-capital">One Global Capital</a> will deliver an 80,500 sqm mixed-use precinct comprising 840 apartments, integrated hotel accommodation, commercial and retail space, alongside publicly accessible open space designed to create a new destination for the growing suburb.

"This is a significant milestone for One Global Capital and for the future of housing delivery in Sydney," Sunito said.

"The Housing Delivery Authority was established to identify major housing projects capable of delivering meaningful supply more efficiently, and we are delighted that Spencer Street has been recognised as one of those projects.”

He said the declaration reflected the rapid progress achieved since acquiring control of the site.

"In less than seven months we have progressed from taking control of the site to securing entry into one of the NSW Government's most important planning pathways. It reflects the experience of our team, the strength of our consultant group led by Urbis, and our long-term commitment to delivering transformational projects that contribute to Sydney's future."

When the project was revealed earlier this year, Sunito described the opportunity as one of the strongest development sites he had worked on.

"I probably hadn't appreciated the uniqueness of the site until more recently when putting together the concept plans," Sunito said.

"The proximity to the water, and the golf course opposite, is unlike any other part of Parramatta Road. We have a unique position and view corridors over the water that makes this one of the best sites I've worked on."

The development has evolved since its initial announcement, with the approved plans increasing the residential component from the originally proposed 750 apartments to 840 homes while retaining the project's focus on creating an integrated neighbourhood rather than a standalone residential development.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/a-city-within-a-city-iwan-sunito-flags-1-5-billion-mixed-use-precinct-in-five-dock">"A city within a city": Iwan Sunito flags $1.5 billion mixed-use precinct in Five Dock</a>

The precinct will combine apartments with hotel accommodation, commercial workplaces, retail offerings and public spaces, creating a mixed-use environment intended to serve both residents and the broader Five Dock community. The proposal also continues the collaboration between One Global Capital and internationally recognised architect <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/koichi-takada-architects">Koichi Takada</a>, whose previous work with Sunito includes Infinity, Arc and Skye North Sydney.

Takada previously said the design was driven by a philosophy of integrating nature into the built environment.

"The concept for this development is born from our design approach to naturalising architecture," Takada said.

"The public realm benefits from biophilic design that integrates generous landscaping, and the development is optimised for natural daylight, airflow and water views to foster wellbeing, sustainability and spaces that foster community interaction."

Sunito has consistently described the project as a "city within a city", with a strong emphasis on creating a destination that extends beyond housing.

"We want to create a development that's not only to be seen, but to be experienced by the whole local community," he said.

The approval comes as Five Dock continues its transformation ahead of the opening of the Sydney Metro West line, with the new Five Dock station set to significantly improve connections between the Inner West, Parramatta and the Sydney CBD.&nbsp;

The precinct will also benefit from its proximity to the Parramatta Road corridor, nearby waterfront parklands and established retail and dining offerings that have made Five Dock one of Sydney's most tightly held Inner West suburbs.

Joel Robinson

Iwan Sunito secures approval for $1.9 billion Five Dock mixed-use precinct

The new <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/yarraville-green-42-stephen-street-yarraville-vic-3013">Yarraville Green</a> development in Melbourne's inner west is showing that landscaping can be just as influential as architecture, with buyers responding strongly to the garden-first approach adopted from the outset by developer Excelon Projects and the project's design team.

Excelon appointed Six Degrees Architects and landscape architects SBLA to work collaboratively on the development, with a brief to create "a sustainable, design-led building with a focus on community."

That approach has resonated with buyers. According to Next Chapter Director Tom Hirini, who is leading the sales campaign, the landscaped communal garden has become one of the project's defining features, alongside its boutique scale and European-inspired cluster housing concept.

Local downsizers, right-sizers and established families already living in Yarraville and surrounding suburbs have accounted for the majority of purchasers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144913 project_image_fid=297740]

Yarraville Green will comprise 53 homes, including apartments and townhomes, arranged around the shared central garden to maximise connections to the landscaped open space. Parking has been moved underground, allowing the ground plane to be dedicated to greenery, pedestrian movement and communal spaces.

The landscape extends well beyond passive planting. Productive garden beds, a pergola, communal gathering spaces, garden sheds and a pet wash have all been integrated into the masterplan, creating spaces designed to encourage everyday interaction between residents.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144913 project_image_fid=297741]

The interiors continue Excelon's focus on craftsmanship, incorporating bespoke elements by Melbourne artisans including leadlight detailing by Adadaz, hand-turned timber hardware by Auburn Woodturning and blown-glass lighting by Ruth Allen.

Sustainability has also been embedded throughout the project, with Yarraville Green targeting an average 7-star NatHERS energy rating through passive design principles, rooftop solar servicing common areas and rainwater harvesting for landscape irrigation.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144913 project_image_fid=297735]

Construction continues to progress at Yarraville Green, with structural works well underway and framing works approaching completion under builder Balmain &amp; Co. The project remains on track for completion in mid-2027.

Apartments at Yarraville Green are currently priced from $625,000, while townhomes start from $1.4 million.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=144913]

Garden-led design drives buyer demand at Yarraville Green

National diversified developer Fortis has officially launched Crest &amp; Walker, its latest Brisbane apartment development, with construction now underway on the 20-storey Newstead project.

Award-winning builder BINAH has commenced construction on the Bureau^Proberts-designed building, which will deliver a limited collection of 65 two and three-bedroom apartments on Kyabra Street.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=145922 project_image_fid=373556]

The project marks Fortis' fourth active residential development in Brisbane, following River House, which is nearing completion, alongside projects in New Farm and Hamilton as the national developer continues to expand its South East Queensland pipeline.

Fortis General Manager – Development Queensland Dan Boman said Crest &amp; Walker reflects the developer's long-term commitment to delivering design-led residential projects in Brisbane's established inner-city suburbs.

"We're proud to be strengthening our presence in Brisbane with Crest &amp; Walker, particularly in such a sought-after lifestyle destination as Newstead," Boman said.

"Every Fortis project is shaped by its context, and we approach each one with the respect and care it deserves.

"Our focus is always on creating places that feel connected to their neighbourhood and elevate the everyday experience for residents. Newstead continues to evolve as one of Brisbane's most sought-after urban communities, and Crest &amp; Walker reflects our ambition to contribute meaningfully to that story."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=145922 project_image_fid=373559]

Positioned between Gasworks Plaza and James Street, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/crest-walker-newstead-12-kyabra-street-newstead-qld-4006">Crest &amp; Walker</a> has been designed as a boutique residential address offering privacy and generous living spaces within one of Brisbane's most established lifestyle precincts.

The building features a contemporary brick podium softened by integrated landscaping, while the upper levels are characterised by restrained architecture and enduring materiality. Interiors have been designed to maximise natural light, acoustic performance and long-term liveability.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=145922 project_image_fid=373583]

Residences comprise spacious two and three-bedroom floorplans, with two-bedroom apartments priced from $1.55 million and three-bedroom, half-floor residences from $3.95 million.

Residents will have access to a wellness-focused rooftop featuring a swimming pool, sauna, steam room, landscaped dining spaces and outdoor lounge areas overlooking Newstead and the Brisbane CBD.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=145922 project_image_fid=373571]

Sales are being managed by Slaite Projects, with Fortis expecting strong demand from owner-occupiers seeking a high-quality, design-focused apartment in one of Brisbane's most tightly held inner-city suburbs.

Completion of Crest &amp; Walker is slated for late 2028.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=145922]

Fortis expands Brisbane pipeline with launch of Crest & Walker in Newstead

The enormity of delivering a true skyscraper in Australia's new development market is often overlooked.

It has taken the best part of a decade since plans for Chevron One were first unveiled, but the 41-storey tower is now complete, with residents collecting their keys and moving into what has become one of the Gold Coast's most recognisable new landmarks.

Rising 127 metres above Chevron Island, Chevron One stands almost twice as high as any other building on the island. Its scale places it alongside the trio of towers at Jewel, arguably the last truly significant addition to the central Gold Coast skyline when they were completed around six years ago.

While there are several developments underway around a similar height to Chevron One, they are more concentrated within clusters of the highest towers in the city. The fact Chevron One sits within a developing precinct, looking back at the other high-rise developments in Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach, makes it a different proposition altogether. It will certainly become a reference point on the Gold Coast skyline.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6515 project_image_fid=68833]

Developer Bensons Property Group is behind the 41-storey tower, which has 229 apartments, along with an exhaustive list of resident amenity spread across what is the largest development site ever assembled on Chevron Island.

The tower has been the talk of the town for years, says Ray White Projects Gold Coast agent Caitlin Rosenboom, who is selling the remaining apartments.

"People have been watching Chevron One go up for years," Rosenboom says, adding that many prospective buyers have been surprised by the scale of the views once they step inside.

"It's only when they walk through a completed apartment that they truly understand the position of the building," Rosenboom says.

"The views are jaw-dropping. Whether you're looking east over the ocean, across Surfers Paradise, along the river systems or out to the hinterland, every level offers something different but equally impressive."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6515 project_image_fid=360215]

One of Chevron One's defining advantages is its location on the eastern side of Chevron Island on Stanhill Drive, a position which protects the views forever.

"There's only one row of houses between Chevron One and the water, and the height restrictions along the river means views from Chevron One can never be built out,"&nbsp;Rosenboom says.

While new apartment developments continue to emerge across the Gold Coast, Rosenboom says opportunities to secure a completed apartment with this level of outlook are becoming increasingly rare.

"The size of the site is something that would be incredibly difficult to replicate today," she says.

"That's allowed Chevron One to deliver the sort of amenity, open space and resident facilities that very few projects can offer. There are not many completed apartment buildings on the Gold Coast right now that can compete with the combination of scale, quality and amenity."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6515 project_image_fid=68839]

There's around 2,000 sqm of amenity solely for the use of residents of Chevron One. Club One features a uniquely shaped swimming pool that mirrors the footprint of the building itself, set within a extensively landscaped gardens. There's also an indoor pool and spa, a fully equipped gym with a Pilates room, a yoga garden, a bookable private dining area and lounge that can host up to 30 people, and a 24-hour concierge service.

As for the buyers, Rosenboom is fielding enquiry from everywhere: Sydneysiders and Melburnians looking at the new and off-the-plan market following the changes in the Federal Budget, as well as those looking to relocate, through to South East Queenslanders seeking either a permanent home or a weekender bolthole.

"The Gold Coast lifestyle continues to resonate with people relocating from the southern states, and when they see the views and the quality of what's been delivered at Chevron One, it becomes very easy for them to understand the appeal," Rosenboom says.

A diverse mix of one, two and three-bedroom apartments remain available, with each offering "something a little different", be it the orientation and views, configuration, or level, to suit a wide variety of buyers.

The remaining apartments are ready to inspect in person, by appointment.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=6515]

A decade in the making: Residents to move into Chevron One as construction wraps up

A general rule of thumb in new apartment developments is that the penthouses get the rooftop.

It's a formula that's become commonplace across Australia's apartment market. Residents might have access to a pool, gym or barbecue facilities on a dedicated lower level, but the most desirable outdoor spaces are typically reserved for the highest-priced homes at the top of the building.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sherpa-property-group">Sherpa Property Group</a> has taken the opposite approach.

Rather than dedicating the rooftop to a handful of buyers, the Gold Coast developer has made it the centrepiece of its Flourish collection, creating expansive shared spaces from the best vantage point in the building.

The philosophy has reached its most ambitious expression at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flourish-soleira-palm-beach-1150-1160-gold-coast-highway-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Soleira</a> in Palm Beach, where two rooftop precincts connected by a skybridge will deliver one of the most extensive lifestyle offerings seen in a residential apartment project on the Gold Coast.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=374053]

"We're seeing a clear move toward developments that offer more than just an apartment," Sherpa Group founder Christie Leet said.

"People want spaces that support how they actually live, whether that's working from home, staying active, or spending time with family and friends.

"That's where amenity becomes critical. It's not just about what's included, but how those spaces are designed to be used every day."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=374052]

The breadth of amenity has already attracted buyers across multiple demographics. Younger first home buyers have been drawn to Soleira's one-bedroom apartments, a product rarely delivered in Palm Beach, while families have responded to practical inclusions such as the shallow children's pool adjoining the main lap pool and the extensive communal recreation areas.

Instead of a single rooftop, Soleira delivers two distinct lifestyle zones.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=372547]

The southern rooftop has been dedicated to wellness, featuring a gym, yoga and Pilates studio, work-from-home facilities, a wellness centre, spa, and hot and cold plunge pools.

The northern rooftop focuses on recreation and entertaining, incorporating a heated resort-style pool, private dining rooms, pizza ovens, barbecues, a golf simulator, children's recreation areas, and what is expected to be the Gold Coast's first rooftop basketball court, which will also double as a squash court.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=374054]

Beyond the rooftops, Soleira will introduce 1,500 sqm of curated retail beneath the towers, creating one of Palm Beach's first genuinely mixed-use lifestyle precincts where cafés, restaurants and convenience retail become part of residents' everyday lives.

Sherpa has also retained management rights across the development, allowing it to oversee the long-term operation of the building through a 24-hour concierge model. The developer is also exploring additional revenue streams within the precinct aimed at helping offset ongoing body corporate costs for residents.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=370962]

While Soleira is the largest project Sherpa has delivered, the rooftop-first philosophy has been evolving for several years.

It began with <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/amargo-6-12-sixth-avenue-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Amargo</a>, the first project released under the Flourish brand. Rather than competing at the ultra-luxury end of the market with oversized half-floor and full-floor residences, Sherpa focused on creating lifestyle-driven apartments supported by resort-style shared spaces.

Amargo introduced more than 800 sqm of rooftop amenity, combining wellness facilities, heated pools, entertaining areas, cabanas, pizza ovens and private dining spaces into what was designed as an extension of residents' homes rather than a facility used only occasionally.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=146527 project_image_fid=366550]

That approach continued with Flourish Oasis, where the same amenity-led philosophy was refined into a more boutique development. Strong demand from Sherpa's growing VIP database saw much of the project sold before it reached the broader market, reinforcing buyer appetite for apartment communities centred around shared lifestyle experiences.

Flourish Amargo is slated for completion mid-way-through next year, with Oasis to be delivered by late 2027. Flourish Soleira is expected to complete in 2030.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=150017]

Sherpa takes amenity to the sky as Flourish Soleira captures booming Palm Beach demand

Negative gearing

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
When considering changes to negative gearing, commentary about the potential to wind back negative gearing benefits on a retrospective basis is concerning.
People make medium to long term economic decisions based on the law at the time, and while some may argue the environment has changed to warrant the wind back of negative gearing benefits, doing so retrospectively and applying it to people who have already bought properties on which negative gearing benefits are claimed would be tantamount to penalising them for planning ahead and being financial responsible.
These people should not be penalised for choosing an option that would make themselves financially self-sufficient, rather than having to rely on the Government for assistance when they retire.
Shifting the goal posts by way of retrospective application is blatantly inequitable.
It could undermine the stability of the economic environment, which may have a far reaching impact on market confidence and therefore the stability of the economy.
It is akin to telling people who have been saving for years through their superannuation funds the environment has now changed and the Government will seize all superannuation benefits to balance the budget.
You simply don't tinker with people's medium to long term plans because these plans need political and economic certainty to achieve their intended outcome, which underwrites the economic future of this country.
Even if negative gearing changes are to be entertained, allowing these changes to apply retrospectively must not be an option.
Eddie Chung is tax partner, BDO and can be contacted <a href="https://www.bdo.com.au/en-au/our-people/eddie-chung" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Retrospective changes to negative gearing must not be an option: BDO's Eddie Chung

<html><body>
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has sought and been given advice from former Prime Minister John Howard on tax reform.
The former prime minister warned the Coalition to be careful about making any changes to negative gearing.
Mr Howard told Sky News negative gearing had been around "forever" and the Coalition should be careful about making any changes.
"There are a lot of modest-income people who accumulate some money and then negatively gear a property, particularly [those] who don't want to invest in the share market," Mr Howard said.
Mr Turnbull said he had been discussing the issue with Mr Howard.
"Look, it's very important to treat any changes to the tax system very carefully, indeed I had a long chat with John about negative gearing and other aspects of tax only yesterday, in fact — a long chat," he said.
The Prime Minister said Mr Howard had been "a great source of advice".
"The last time the abolition of negative gearing was tried by the Labor Party ... it was quickly reversed because of its negative impact on the housing and in particular the rental market," he said.
"Howard's advice [to] look at these things carefully — absolutely, that's exactly what I'm doing."
Some Coalition backbenchers worry any changes will expose the Government, given the Prime Minister's criticism of Labor's negative gearing plan.
The Government will unveil its tax package in the lead-up to the next budget.
</body></html>

John Howard warns on negative gearing changes

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
There is much confusion about the effects of Labor’s tax proposals with respect to investors in rental housing. They propose to grandfather existing arrangements. But investors in the future can only negatively gear newly constructed housing, while the policy recommends the capital gains discount fall from 50% to 25%.
Claims by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull that house prices will collapse appear to be contradicted by his assistant treasurer Kelly O'Dwyer who claims that housing costs will soar. These puzzling assertions arise due to a failure to distinguish between the market in rental housing, where housing is leased, and the market in which investors and owner occupiers buy and sell housing. Critically these two markets are interrelated.
To see why, consider the first round effects of Labor’s proposals when we put the grandfathering arrangements to one side (for the moment). Some existing investors will sell up when leases come up for renewal. There are now more tenants seeking rental housing opportunities than there is supply to meet their demand. Rents will begin to rise.
But the houses which investors quit add to the properties available for sale; there are now more houses available for purchase than there are buyers. House prices will begin to fall.
These market signals trigger a second round of effects. Some tenants will elect to buy rather than rent. After all renting has become more expensive and home ownership has become cheaper. These second round effects help to put a floor under falls in house prices, and help cap rent rises.
By considering the inter-relationships between the two markets we can understand how the government has issued apparently contradictory statements. Rents will rise and so the housing costs of tenants will increase. But there will be falls in house prices (or more likely a slower growth in prices); while existing owners take a hit, first home buyers housing costs are lower and attainment of home ownership becomes more affordable.
The second round effects mean that impacts are likely to be muted. This is made even more likely by a grandfathering proposal that should prevent a stampede by existing investors seeking to relinquish their property investments.
A disappointing aspect of the debate so far has been its neglect of the longer term structural consequences of Labor’s suggested reforms. Our current arrangements encourage high tax bracket investors to take on debt in the “chase” for capital gains. Capital gains are leniently taxed as compared to ordinary sources of income, such as earnings and rents.
Only 50% of capital gains are added to assessable incomes. This is particularly attractive to high tax bracket investors. Moreover, they are taxed on realisation rather than as they accrue. The shrewd investor realises the gains when assessable income from other sources declines; for example, following retirement when the investor’s marginal tax rate commonly falls.
There are not enough high tax bracket investors willing and able to invest in all our private rental housing stock. They tend to cluster in those segments of the market where healthy capital growth is expected, but rental yields are lower. Low tax bracket investors tend to cluster in segments where capital growth is expected to be subdued. Typically these are areas with lower house prices. To ensure adequate returns rental yields have to be higher in these low house price segments.
We therefore get a distorted investment pattern that disadvantages the supply of affordable rental housing.
Labor’s proposals will curb these distortionary effects by reducing the capital gains discount. They will also reduce the tax incentives to leverage investments. Rising indebtedness is a threat to the resilience and stability of our housing market.
Many believe that repayment and investment risks carried by heavily indebted home buyers played a central role in precipitating the global financial crisis. Tax concessions that favour taking on debt exacerbate those risks. If Labor’s proposals succeed in attracting attention to these and other structural problems that plague Australian housing markets, they will have a much wider significance.
 
Gavin Wood is professor of housing, RMIT University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gavin-wood-113723" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Will Australian house prices collapse if negative gearing changes?

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The Australian tax debate has placed negative gearing under scrutiny. Most of the debate lurches between retentionists, who back negative gearing as a necessary subsidy to support affordable housing, versus abolitionists, who see it as a market-distorting extravagance that delivers an unfair advantage to the wealthy.
But what if there was a middle option between retention and abolition that made it work better?
Negative gearing allows investors to claim a tax concession against their personal income for losses incurred on a rental investment property. It is estimated to be worth around A$8 billion a year in tax concessions.
There is a somewhat obscure technical argument in favour of negative gearing for equalising concessions for property investment losses with similar concessions for other investment classes. But most participants in the debate about negative gearing treat it as a subsidy for investment in housing supply.
The abolitionist argument hinges on two main issues. First, it distorts investment by encouraging deliberate loss-making in property investment. Second, as a form of subsidy, it adds inflationary pressure to housing markets that favour already wealthy investors over home buyers. And the federal government pays for it in tax revenue forgone.
Retentionists, however, argue that abolishing negative gearing would lead to an adverse supply shock in the rental housing sector. That would result in housing shortages, higher rents, and worsening affordability for low-income households.
Labor has taken a moderate abolitionist stance. It proposes to restrict negative gearing to new housing, though with the concession continuing for loss-making landlords who already receive it.
The Coalition government has not yet stated its position on negative gearing. However, there appears to be a strong retentionist stream within government policy statements. The government is also being assailed by property sector lobby groups advocating retention.
<h2>We’re flying blind on policy reform</h2>
There may be another perspective that sits between abolition and retention. A sensible reformist view might be encouraged by the federal government’s preparedness to, in effect, subsidise private market housing by $8 billion per year.
But such a view might also lament the extraordinarily ineffective targeting, outrageously poor transparency about who receives the subsidy, and egregious lack of accountability for supply outcomes.
These concerns emphasise the gross information gaps about the landlords who receive the subsidy and the rental houses that incur the concession. We generally know which landlords receive negative gearing, their occupational status and their income levels. We don’t which properties in the rental market are negatively geared, nor the social status of their tenants.
Thus there is no transparent connection between the landlords receiving the subsidy, the dwellings that are negatively geared and the status of the tenants who live in them. This means there is no direct empirical way to verify whether negative gearing benefits low-income tenants.
The federal government seems willing to forgo $8 billion in tax revenue to subsidise rental housing supply. Surely, then, it ought to ensure this concession assists the neediest tenants in the most pressured parts of the housing market and make landlords transparently accountable for this.
Labor’s partial abolition proposal takes a minimal step towards transparency by limiting negative gearing to new properties.
<h2>Let’s talk about the alternatives</h2>
A reformist approach would seek better value for the government’s A$8 billion-a-year investment, in terms of improved affordability for tenant households. How might this work?
The key requirements would be to ensure transparency about which dwellings are negatively geared and the socioeconomic status of their tenants. There are various ways to achieve this.
One model would be to tie the negative gearing subsidy to specified tenant groups. In this case, only if landlords let properties to target tenants, such as those on Newstart, sole parent or aged pension, would they receive the subsidy. This could be done by requiring tenant social security numbers to be reported with landlord tax returns to enable verification.
This approach could be extended by capping the value of weekly rents on properties to which negative gearing could apply. Locational targeting could focus the subsidy to areas with high market rents and poor affordability.
The transition to such a model could be phased in by starting with minimal transparency and accountability requirements and ramping up to more specific requirements. Additional compliance costs would raise the cost of investing in housing. But, it would weed out the investors who are seeking pure profit and encourage those with a social perspective.
A second model that extends transparency and accountability could involve converting negative gearing to a formal low-income housing tax credit <a href="https://theconversation.com/americas-rental-affordability-crisis-is-about-to-go-from-bad-to-worse-48143">as operates in the US</a>. Such a model provides a tax credit for investors in affordable housing that is certified as managed by a legitimate social housing provider. This could be the fillip that Australia’s small community and non-profit social housing sector needs.
A third model might be to channel negative gearing to a dedicated financial investment vehicle drawing on private investment for affordable housing that is built for or let to low-income tenants. There has been a long-standing debate in Australian housing policy circles about the need for long-term institutional investment in affordable housing.
A finance vehicle that offered a return on capital to investors supported by a tax concession could underpin new affordable housing supply. Other countries have used housing bonds in this way to attract additional investment in affordable housing.
Another model could use a reverse auction approach, with landlords competing to supply housing of certain specifications to tenants of a particular income category in return for set levels of tax credit. This would operate in a similar way to the government’s carbon abatement plan, which involves a reverse auction for renewable energy projects. Though this might raise transaction costs, it might encourage helpful institutional consolidation in the private rental sector.
A fifth approach might be for the government to provide the A$8 billion as vouchers to low-income tenants for use in renting housing of a set standard or location. Landlords would then cash these vouchers in as tax concessions. The US operates a subsidy model of this type known as “Section 8”.
A final option would be to simply take the $8 billion-a-year subsidy represented by negative gearing and build desperately needed public housing. Such an approach guarantees transparency and accountability and could directly build around 20,000 dwellings a year, or more with leveraged private finance.
No doubt the current subsidy could be remixed in multiple other ways to improve effectiveness, transparency and accountability in how it procures affordable housing. The examples offered above show that we could be having a much more positive debate about negative gearing than just abolition or retention.
 
Jago Dodson is professor of Urban Policy and director, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jago-dodson-2359" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Negative gearing: scrap or preserve?

<html><body>
The Aussie Home Loans founder John Symond, in an interview with Ross Greenwood on 2GB's Money News, has lashed out at the mooted changes to negative gearing.
Ross Greenwood suggested that he was surprised by the Labor's strategy of only allowing negative gearing on new homes, which was met accord from John Symond.
"Ross, can you imagine?"
"Let's say they introduce that legislation - only new housing - the day you exchange contracts on a new home, it immediately becomes an old home and guess what, it will drop by at least 20 percent in value, and who's going to walk in to that one?"
Greenwood stated that house prices seem to be resilient around the country with investors not shying away from the property markets at the moment.
"The markets have had a bit of a kick up in the last few weeks, but who knows the real reason," Symond said.
In response to Ross suggesting any big tax changes will change the mood and the direction the money flows, John offered an alternative view.
"Conversely I think a lot of people think I better get in now before any changes come in because they probably won't be retrospective I probably better buy a property now."
"Certainly if the government introduced anything that was perceived to be significantly adversed it would prick the balloon of the housing market and that's for sure," he said.
John said his concern is if they scare away the mums and dads from their negative gearing on their housing.
"The average Australian understands housing and they try and build up a nest egg for future years, and they'll run a mile," he said.
"Everyone will be too scared."
"Imagine what that will do to the real estate market."
"Five trillion dollars in asset value for Australian's as a buffer for the future and a government could be so dumb to blow that up."
He said that we already have a shortage of housing in most capital cities.
"Imagine you being a developer, I'd run 100 miles per hour."
Ross Greenwood said that we need to encourage people to build houses with the population projections.
The population is expected to reach 35 million people between 2050 and 2060, with Sydney and Melbourne to have eight million people each and Brisbane and the Gold Coast to have four million.
John said it will have the opposite impact.
"They are really playing with dynamite here and I hope to goodness they don't come up with some crazy idea and totally destabilise the one industry Australia is relying on."
"They can totally blow it up and I'm amazed that they're even talking about it," he said.
Symonds said he hadn't been speaking to many politicians however thinks they are all clutching as straws.
"They got frightened off with the GST and now they're looking at tinkering with super, they're tinkering with negative gearing and these are areas that impacts the vast majority of working mums and dads or retirees."
"I just think they're desperate."
"Unfortunately the tax system has been busted for decades and it hasn't been addressed."
He suggested that every time they have a look at a particular area they get scared.
"I think we're in no different position than we've been in for the last 20 years with a flawed tax system that just doesn't work."
</body></html>

jrobinson-rf4aSBido9

Expect values to drop 20 percent under Labor negative gearing: Aussie John Symond

<html><body>
In proposing reforms to negative gearing structures, any government should take a long-term view and classify ‘new’ stock as any property up to 10 years old and not pull the rug from under the feet of investors abruptly because of economic implications, according to property research and investment firm Aviate Group. 
“Those looking to abolish negative gearing, as well as those whom support this, need to perhaps be reminded as to what it is that investors bring to the table. Not just in terms of providing rental stock to areas that may really need it, but also for the economy at large,” said Aviate managing director Neil Smoli.
Investors’ focus on wealth creation through property stimulates the economy, creates jobs and fosters a more self-sufficient population which has the knock-on effect of alleviating the burden of social housing and dependence on aged care facilities by an ageing population, added Smoli.
“Investors make a strong and undeniable contribution to housing options by way of rental stock. This provides direct housing options for those that do not have the means or have not yet sought the right advice that would allow them to enter the property market.”
There also hasn’t been near enough debate, or thought, says Smoli, of the definition of ‘new’ property stock when it comes to the proposed reforms, which are being weighted not just by the Opposition, but also by the Nationals, albeit under a varied model.
 “Applying negative gearing reforms that apply to all newly built properties in terms of their physical construction and occupation could have a knock-on effect whereby investors may ‘short-sell’ or ‘flip’ these properties in order to maximise their financial benefits,” he said.
“If it is to be successful, any well considered policy surrounding negative gearing should also take into account how long a property is, or has been, held by an investor.
“There has to be some kind of incentive for investors to take the universally respected view that property investment is most optimal when a long term view is held, rather than a short term hold to turn a quick profit by selling when a market is at its cyclical peak.”
In addition to rewarding investors that hold onto their new properties for longer, Smoli says, there should also be a period of at least a year before any successful changes to negative gearing policy are implemented.
A property should be viewed as ‘new’ when it is up to 10 years old to minimise any potential fallout or exodus from the marketplace. 
“It typically takes five to six years for an investment property to become neutral, that is, for the rent received to balance the interest payable. This is influenced by the interest rate of the day, the net rental income received after costs such as management fees, letting fees, body corporate fees and outgoings are taken into account, the investor’s marginal tax rate as well as depreciation allowances,” he said.
“A timeline of this duration for the investor to be able to use negative gearing seems logical and fair.”
Additionally, whatever changes are implemented in the context of property and associated negative gearing, the same should apply to shares and the equities market to ensure all asset classes are on an even playing field. 
Stamp duty: another opportunity for reform
In addition to possible negative gearing policy reform, Smoli also believes there are other opportunities for reform that could create a fairer balance for the property industry’s many stakeholders, particularly as the rampant transactional activity of recent years has softened in recent months.
At the top of the list is stamp duty, according to him.
“Most industry professionals seem to be in agreement that stamp duty should be phased out without delay. However in the absence of its complete abolition, the market should at least be able to rely on some national consistency when it comes to the application of this tax,” Smoli said.
“Let’s not forget we were promised an end to stamp duty when the GST was introduced. It’s clear that state governments are addicted to the revenue, but the economic benefits of abolishing stamp duty in terms of transactional activity, not to mention the fact it would relieve a significant burden for first home buyers, warrants genuine consideration at the Federal level.
“Failing this, perhaps it is time to look at more effective stamp duty models and, more importantly, introduce some national consistency as to how the tax is applied,” Smoli said.
He pointed to the implementation of a sliding scale, whereby the stamp duty payable depends on the phase in the construction cycle that the dwelling is at when the purchase is made, could be considered as the basis for a national model. 
“A fairer system, which has been used in some states including Victoria and South Australia, could be based on the principle that the earlier in the construction phase a dwelling is, the less stamp duty should be payable by the purchaser on that property,” Smoli said..
“In this way, those who purchase a property off-the-plan or early in the construction phase are rewarded for that early purchase, creating heightened demand for new supply and supporting the broader market.
“It makes sense to lessen the burden on buyers of off-the-plan properties, as these buyers are directly contributing to demand for new housing construction.
“A nationally consistent approach to stamp duty would also make it easier for investors to purchase properties outside their own state, fuelling demand on a broader scale. 
“Like the conversation happening around negative gearing at the moment, so should the industry seek to elevate the issue of stamp duty. Until its abolition comes to fruition, and the promise of many years ago is finally upheld, the more alternatives we consider as an industry the better,” he said.
</body></html>

prateek24-ezbwHMbNAk

Negative gearing changes need long-term approach: Aviate Group MD

<html><body>
Residential property investment is going to be a political football during 2016, right up to the election and then beyond.
Just which way the investment herd heads will unfold but property markets don't like uncertainty.
As our politicians dwell on how to tax property investors, many will pause their decision making.
Yes some might rush in ahead of any change, but more likely there could be a flight of capital away from rental housing at the very time when the early 2016 sharemarket turmoil was likely to attract investment towards property.
We have a scenario where both the Turnbull Government and Shorten opposition work have mooted significant changes that will reduce tax benefits arising from property investment.
Both major parties seem intent to end the longstanding negative gearing arrangements that have been in place since the Hawke/Keating Government days.
The opposition has also signalled it intends changing the capital gains tax benefits that have been their since the Howard-Costello government, ie halving from 50 per cent to 25 per cent the capital gains tax deduction for investors who sell a property after holding it for at least 12 months.
The Turnbull government is pursuing negative gearers after tentative plans for an increased GST were virtually ditched as too hard.
Then Bill Shorten announced that a Labor government, if elected, would change the rules so that only new homes purchased after July 1, 2017, could be negatively geared.
Existing investors would supposedly not be affected by the grandfathered tax change, but that ignores the disappearance of the potential investor buyer pool into new housing and leaving just owner occupiers to compete for the established home rental offering. 
While the Turnbull government has rejected Labor's policy to restrict negative gearing to new properties, it seemingly plans to target high-end and professional investors by either capping the number of properties that can be geared or limiting the annual tax deductions of which can be claimed.
Earlier this month the Property Council of Australia released data on the number of negatively geared voters in the most marginal seats and threatened a campaign in Labor and Liberal marginal seats should negative gearing be touched.
Their data indicated over 430,000 Australians who negative gear an investment property live in marginal seats held by the Government and the Opposition.
The 10 most marginal Coalition seats have an average of 8,181 investment property owners and the 10 most marginal Labor seats have an average of 8,357 property owners. 
Federal Liberal Craig Laundy in Barton has over 11,000 with a stake in the outcome. Opposition treasury spokeperson Chris Bowen has 7400 negative gearers in his Sydney electorate.
“Mums and dads see owning an investment property as a way of securing their long term prosperity," said Property Council chief executive Ken Morrison.
“To play with negative gearing is to play with the financial futures of 430,000 people who live in the most marginal seats."
This article was first published in the Saturday Daily Telegraph.
</body></html>

Property investment becomes a political football

<html><body>
The headlines around the negative gearing policy uncertainty failed to unnerve Sydney's nascent 2016 auction property revival.
The auction success rate sat well above 70 percent for the third successive weekend as earlybird sellers secured strong buyer interest.
When it came to affordability, there were however just the four reported sales at $500,000 or less across Sydney.
A $488,000 sale of a two bedroom fibro at Bradbury was the cheapest result.
"It sold to an investor," Richardson &amp; Wrench Campbelltown agent Michelle Balabka said.
The biggest weekend sale under the hammer was $3.68 million at Curl Curl.
The five bedroom Curl Curl offering had a $3.5 million to $3.85 million price guide (above).
There was also a $3,675,000 South Coogee six bedroom house sale.
"The Sydney market is back in full swing," the auctioneer Damien Cooley said after the result.
There were private treaty sales of an $8 million plus harbourfront in Northbridge and a $6 million sale in Cammeray.
The weekend had 539 homes scheduled to go under the hammer, which was well up on the 336 auctioned last weekend, CoreLogic RP Data noted but below the same weekend last year.
With 80 auctions the inner west the was busiest district followed by the east, the south and the upper north shore all with 70 or more.
Manly, Mosman and Randwick were the busiest weekend auction suburbs.
The lower auction numbers are securing higher clearance rates with the fewer choices increasing competition for available properties, agents suggest.
There is confidence in Sydney eastern suburbs property, says Bob Guth at BradfieldCleary, following a perfect 10 out of 10 at the agency's first auctions of the year.
Bob Guth suggested the "very best time" to market Eastern Suburbs real estate was February when there is less competition.
After the federal opposition's policy was unveiled last weekend - restricting negative gearing to new properties and reducing capital gains discounts available to investors - the Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull warned " this should put concern into the minds of every single house owner".
Home owners would see the value of the family home "smashed" under Labor's "very blunt, very crude" negative gearing policy, Malcolm Turnbull warned.
</body></html>

Negative gearing policy debate fails to unnerve the market

<html><body>
Proposed changes to negative gearing would drive up rental prices and hurt Australian renters, REIV president Geoff White said on Wednesday, joining the industry debate over the impact of the move if implemented.
Commenting on an announcement by the Federal ALP in recent days, White said a policy proposal by the Federal Opposition to limit negative gearing to newly constructed houses had not been fully considered.
He said it would be a “double hit” as fewer investment properties became available – driving up rental prices – and a crisis of affordable rental properties would quickly become apparent. Further to this, the government would need to fill the void by providing state-subsidised and built housing.
“The proposal lacks insight, in that it will not only affect the property sector but renters nationally,” said White.
“Already we are seeing a relatively low vacancy rate – that is, the level of available rental housing – at around two per cent in some areas of Melbourne, particularly areas further from the CBD, where families are looking for a rental property they can afford.
“If investors withdrew from the established home market in this vital property belt, it would cause a significant shortage in rental supply and impact heavily on the government of the day.
“More importantly, it will ‘hit’ those who most need help in the housing market.”
He added that Melbourne has experienced a significant population boom in recent years, and available housing is critical to fuel the state’s economy.
“With more than 100,000 new residents moving to the state in the past 12 months – and interstate migration at its highest in 40 years – an ongoing, high level of available housing is essential to meet this demand.”
He added that with about half a million rental properties statewide, much is at stake in tinkering with negative gearing. 
“A small percentage shift in the number of available rental properties in the state would, quite clearly, impact and undermine the lives of tens of thousands of Victorians,” he said.
</body></html>

Negative gearing changes will hit those who need help: REIV

<html><body>
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
GUEST OBSERVER
Much of the current tax debate is mangled by poor analysis and misconceptions. Let’s consider three topics: “bracket creep”; corporate tax rates; and negative gearing.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
The fact that inflation, more precisely wages growth, pushes individuals into higher marginal tax brackets has been advanced as the rationale for a variety of tax proposals. But the unacknowledged elephant in the room is the simple, rational, response to bracket creep – index the tax scales.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
That is, if inflation was 5% over the past year and the 37% marginal tax rate previously started at an income threshold of $80,000, that threshold would be increased to $84,000 (that is, an increase of 5%).
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
It is legislatively and administratively simple. A low inflation environment makes this the ideal time to implement such a beneficial change which can counter profligacy of future governments, should high inflation return and induce higher tax revenues from bracket creep.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
That one is simple. The real issues in the corporate tax rate debate, where many advocate lowering the rate, are more subtle – and missed by most of those advocates. Under our dividend imputation tax system, company tax payments are offset by lower investor tax payments when earnings are paid out as franked dividends to Australian investors. For such investors, lowering the company tax rate has (subject to a few caveats) no effect on their after tax returns from investment.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
Who would benefit? Foreign-owned companies for one, for which the after-tax returns from Australian operations are increased (assuming they haven’t structured affairs to avoid tax anyway). That might induce more of them to establish or expand operations in Australia – although it should be stressed that our corporate tax rate, while above that of some Asian neighbours, is below that of a number of advanced countries. So arguments that our corporate tax rate is “uncompetitive” do not obviously cut the mustard.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
Other beneficiaries would include private Australian companies owned by wealthy individuals on (hopefully) high marginal tax rates. For them, there are significant tax benefits from retaining earnings in the company rather than paying franked dividends.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
Doing so avoids the extra tax payable at the personal level (after allowing for franking credits) due to their marginal tax rate exceeding the company rate. Instead retention of earnings (and franking credits) generates capital gains which may eventually be taxed at the concessional capital gains tax rate. So lowering the company tax rate would benefit these wealthy individuals (and does nothing for small private companies struggling to make a taxable profit).
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
A third set of beneficiaries might be Australian companies – but the source of any such presumed benefit is subtle. A benefit would arise if the cost of equity capital was reduced through a lower company tax rate.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
As explained above, there is unlikely to be any such effect from a change in the required rate of return of Australian investors. Foreign investors might lower their required rates of return, but that is, at least, debatable.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
Of course, one doesn’t need to lower the company tax rate to achieve this – a rebate of tax on dividends paid to foreign investors would achieve the same outcome. And the political resistance that would undoubtedly occur in response to such a proposal should indicate that relying on this argument for reducing company tax is untenable. And remember, our company tax rate is in the middle of the pack for advanced economies.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
Finally, negative gearing. There is nothing wrong with negative gearing itself (although fraught with risk due to leverage). The problem is that there are undesirable tax benefits associated with it, arising from claiming current tax deductions for interest paid on financing an investment on which tax on returns will be deferred and at a concessional rate.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
The solution? Removing concessional capital gains tax (or at least returning to full taxation of real capital gains) is part of the solution. But it is only part – because deferring tax payments until realisation of the asset sale implies a lower effective tax rate.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
It would not be feasible to tax capital gains as they accrue, given the adverse cash flow consequences for investors. However, we could use a variant of the tax treatment of companies with carry forward tax losses, which are compounded up at the government bond rate to keep their real value until usable.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
Quarantining currently deductible interest costs on negative gearing to offsetting income earned on the investment, plus carry forward of additional unused interest costs is one way to go. When the investment is eventually sold, or when income exceeds interest expense, those accumulated unused costs could be claimed for tax purposes.
<h4><a href="https://theconversation.cmail20.com/t/r-l-vkiihjl-qitldhiii-yh/" target="_blank"></a></h4>
This is not administratively complex, would be fairer for other taxpayers who ultimately pay for the concessions, and might reduce incentives for excessively leveraged investments.
Kevin Davis is research director of Australian Centre for Financial Studies and professor of Finance at Melbourne and Monash Universities, Australian Centre for Financial Studies and author for The Conversation.
He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kevin-davis-3497" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

Negative gearing

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Negative gearing

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News