<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/consolidated-properties">Consolidated Properties Group</a> (CPG) is approaching the launch of its latest Brisbane riverfront development, Castile, on the dress circle Skyring Terrace in Newstead.

VIP buyers are now being engaged, with a full public sales launch coming later this year.

Positioned as the final opportunity to secure a new absolute riverfront residence on the East bank of Newstead, Teneriffe or New Farm, Castile at 47 Skyring Terrace has been designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/woods-bagot">Woods Bagot</a> as a timeless addition to the Brisbane skyline.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150489 project_image_fid=371113]

The name Castile draws on themes of permanence, sophistication and legacy, reflecting a broader vision centred on enduring architecture and timelessness in the rarest of riverfront positions.&nbsp;

CPG Chairman and CEO Don O’Rorke said the project had been envisioned as a future Brisbane icon.&nbsp;

“With 47 metres of direct river frontage and never to be built out views, 47 Skyring Terrace is the definitive address on the Brisbane River,” O’Rorke said.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150489 project_image_fid=371114]

“Rather than following trend-based apartment design, Castile draws inspiration from Brisbane’s great heritage buildings, reinterpreting classical architecture into a contemporary riverfront landmark designed to stand proudly for the next 100 years,” he said.&nbsp;

The approved development will comprise 227 apartments across a 25-storey tower alongside a boutique six-storey riverfront building of just 12 residences.&nbsp;

Construction is scheduled to commence in September 2026.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=150489]

Joel Robinson

CPG unveils Castile Newstead ahead of upcoming sales launch

Australia’s online shopping habits have shifted dramatically over the last decade. As eCommerce volumes surged, so too did the frustrations that came with traditional parcel delivery: missed deliveries, long Post Office queues, parcel theft and the challenge of being home during business hours.

Australia Post’s Parcel Lockers emerged as one of the more practical responses to that changing consumer behaviour.

What started as a relatively niche delivery option has evolved into a nationwide network of more than 1,400 self-service Parcel Lockers positioned at train stations, shopping centres, supermarkets and Post Offices across the country. The system allows Australians to send, collect and return parcels 24 hours a day, fundamentally changing how many people interact with deliveries.

The appeal is relatively straightforward: flexibility.

Instead of waiting at home for a delivery driver or rushing to a Post Office before closing time, users can direct eligible parcels to a Parcel Locker location of their choice. Once the parcel arrives, Australia Post sends a notification with a collection code or QR access through the AusPost app, allowing customers to retrieve their package at any time within the collection window.

For apartment residents in particular, the system has become increasingly valuable.

Higher-density living has created logistical challenges around deliveries, especially in buildings without concierge services or secure parcel rooms. Missed deliveries are common, while parcel theft has become an increasing concern as online shopping volumes continue to rise.

Australia Post itself has repeatedly highlighted the growing issue of “porch pirates” during peak shopping periods, encouraging customers to use Parcel Lockers as a safer alternative to unattended home deliveries.

That security aspect is one of the key reasons the Australia Post Parcel Locker network has grown so rapidly.

Parcel Lockers are positioned as secure, monitored collection points that reduce the risk of theft while also improving delivery efficiency for Australia Post. Instead of multiple redelivery attempts, parcels can be consolidated into a single secure destination.

The Parcel Lockers themselves are free to use through a MyPost account and support a range of parcel sizes up to 16 kilograms and dimensions of approximately 35 x 44 x 61 centimetres.

Beyond receiving parcels, the system has increasingly become integrated into the broader eCommerce ecosystem.

Customers can now use Parcel Lockers to return online purchases, while retailers have embraced the model as a way to improve delivery success rates and reduce friction in the shopping process. Australia Post has actively expanded partnerships with major retailers and promoted Parcel Lockers as part of a broader out-of-home strategy.

The timing of that expansion aligns with broader changes in Australian shopping behaviour.

The acceleration of online retail during and after the pandemic placed enormous pressure on delivery infrastructure. Parcel volumes reached record highs, particularly during Black Friday and Christmas periods, with Australia Post delivering more than 100 million parcels during peak festive seasons.

That growth forced logistics providers to rethink the “last mile” of delivery, widely regarded as the most expensive and operationally difficult stage of the process.

Parcel Locker systems have increasingly been viewed as part of the long-term solution.

The concept itself is not unique to Australia. Parcel Locker networks have become common globally, particularly across Europe and Asia, where dense urban environments and apartment living create similar logistical challenges. But Australia’s geography and suburban sprawl made adoption slower initially.

Now, however, the convenience factor is driving mainstream usage.

For commuters, Parcel Lockers near train stations allow parcels to be collected on the way home from work. For apartment dwellers, they remove the uncertainty around access and missed deliveries.

The rise of the AusPost app has also streamlined the experience, centralising notifications, tracking and Parcel Locker access into a single platform. Australia Post has increasingly pushed customers toward app-based delivery management, partly as a way to combat phishing scams and fake delivery notifications, which have become more sophisticated in recent years.

The Parcel Locker model is also beginning to influence property development itself.

Parcel management has become a growing consideration in apartment building design, particularly as online shopping becomes embedded in everyday life. Many new residential developments are now incorporating dedicated parcel rooms or Parcel Locker systems into foyers and communal spaces.

For developers, parcel management is increasingly viewed as part of the broader resident amenity offering, alongside gyms, wellness spaces and communal work areas.

That reflects a wider evolution in how residential buildings are designed.

Apartment buyers are placing greater emphasis on convenience, security and operational functionality, particularly in higher-density urban environments. Parcel delivery, once considered a minor operational detail, has become an increasingly important part of that equation.

Australia Post’s Parcel Locker network sits at the centre of that behavioural shift.

What began as a simple alternative delivery option has evolved into a key piece of infrastructure supporting Australia’s growing eCommerce economy and changing urban lifestyles.

And as online shopping continues to expand, the role of Parcel Lockers is likely to become even more embedded in how Australians live, shop and receive goods.

How Australia Post Parcel Lockers changed parcel delivery convenience in Australia

Perth’s new apartment market recorded its strongest quarter of sales since Q4 2021, with 412 apartments sold in Q1 2026 and a record quarterly sold value of $537 million, according to Urbis’ latest Apartment Essentials results.

Urbis said the March quarter result reflects strong, highly product‑specific demand across both ends of the market, from more attainable projects delivering at scale, through to premium stock being absorbed by equity‑rich downsizers.&nbsp;

David Cresp, Partner at Urbis, said the key story in Perth is not demand, it is the market’s ability to convert demand into delivered housing.&nbsp;

“This is the strongest sales quarter since Q4 2021, and it reinforces that demand in Perth is real and it’s local,” David Cresp said. “But the task now is delivery, turning that demand into projects that can actually be built and completed.”&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=110291 project_image_fid=302785]

<h2>Affordable product leads, premium demand remains resilient</h2>

Sales in Q1 were led by more affordable projects, with The Boulevard (SKS Group) recording 115 sales in the quarter, the presentation noting this is only the second time a single project has surpassed 100 quarterly sales. The project was able to offer more affordable housing product right next to a train station.&nbsp;

Palmyra West (Finbar) also delivered strong results with 28 sales in Q1, following 84 sales in Q4, with an average price of under $800,000, underscoring depth of demand for well‑located, attainable new stock.&nbsp;

At the premium end, Urbis said downsizer demand is continuing, with the results highlighting Romeo (Applecross, Finbar) recording 75 sales and reaching almost 50% sold in one quarter.

Jual (Shenton Park, Celsius Property) also posted a strong quarter with 28 sales, reaching 39% sold in one quarter.

Urbis noted that Perth apartment demand is not speculative, not investor‑led, and not uniform, describing it as localised, often equity‑driven and highly product‑specific, a pattern reflected in the polarisation between strong “attainable” performers and premium downsizer product.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=148957 project_image_fid=364102]

<h2>Prices underpinned by costs, and the delivery risk is growing</h2>

Urbis said pricing pressure is cost not demand‑driven: construction costs and delivery risk are now a central constraint, with the results noting build costs remain elevated and volatile, and that energy, fuel and labour uncertainty weigh on feasibility.

David Cresp said a growing challenge for private Build‑to‑Sell developers is simply securing a builder in the current environment.

“Developers are really feeling the pressure from a building market that was operating at capacity and securing a builder is challenging,” David Cresp said, adding that even where a builder can be secured, “trying to get to the price that makes the development financially viable is incredibly challenging in the current market.”&nbsp;

Urbis’ broader WA commentary also notes that industry remains at or above capacity with lot and housing creation, and that many builders are limiting new sales to manage stretched workforces and fixed‑price contract pressures, conditions that flow directly into apartment feasibility and delivery timing.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108869 project_image_fid=317905]

<h2>Supply: improving later, but still constrained, and Perth lags eastern benchmarks</h2>

While near‑term supply remains constrained, Urbis’ forecast shows completions lifting “Supply is forecast to be back above 1,500 apartments per annum for the first time since 2019”, with 1,775 completions forecast for 2026, and volumes remaining above that level over the following years.&nbsp;

Looking further ahead, completions are forecast to reach 2,500 in 2028, with the report noting 32% of that total is social/affordable, reflecting the role of government‑supported delivery in rebuilding the pipeline.&nbsp;

However, Urbis said Perth remains behind comparable markets on pipeline scale. In a national comparison of projects under construction, the report shows under construction Perth Build‑to‑Sell (BTS) at 3,446 apartments versus the Gold Coast at 7,922. Mr Cresp said “The challenge for Perth is how to we grow the delivery pipeline”.

Urbis’ conclusion is that Perth’s market is increasingly defined by product discipline and delivery certainty, with the research identifying “delivery certainty is key” and calling out builder risk and procurement models as core success factors, alongside “timing and staging”.&nbsp;

Perth apartment sales hit strongest pace since late 2021 as builder capacity tightens

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sammut-developments">Sammut Group</a> has secured development approval for its latest Brisbane apartment project, marking the Sydney developer’s next step in expanding its Queensland pipeline following the success of its debut Gold Coast development, Coast.

The approved project at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/44-glen-road-toowong-qld-4066">44 Glen Road, </a><a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/toowong-qld-4066">Toowong</a> will deliver a 15-storey riverfront apartment building with 42 residences, significantly increasing the scale of the site’s previous approval for a smaller luxury scheme. Designed by Bureau^proberts, the development will comprise a mix of predominantly four-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments positioned to maximise Brisbane River and city views.

Sammut Director Julian Sammut said the group had been actively searching Brisbane for several years before identifying Toowong as the right fit.

“Brisbane was the right step for Sammut,” Sammut said.

“With the success of Coast we thought we should definitely look to do more in Queensland alone. We then pushed up to look at Brisbane. We've been looking for I'd say two to three years actually and it was hard to find the right location.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/f_auto,c_limit,w_1440,q_75/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/field/image/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.14%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=dYAVIL7qdcGA8ojvkslSrLjczXFejSSx" />

Sammut said suburbs including New Farm and Teneriffe were considered before the group ultimately focused on Toowong due to its strong downsizer demographic and limited supply of developable riverfront land.

The site was acquired off-market after what Sammut described as a lengthy negotiation and planning process, with the developer pursuing an uplift to the original approval.

“We are DA approved now which is very exciting,” Sammut said.

“We've had our change approval come through and we've obviously doubled the height, 15 storeys plus rooftop. We've got 42 amazing apartments that are going to be coming to market soon.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,dpr_2.0,q_auto:good/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.26%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=ohkRkY0dIZlqdfME2EZePsCQavRiBadE" />

Bureau^proberts said the design responds to Toowong’s evolving urban character, balancing contemporary apartment living with the area’s established residential identity.

“A place where traditional Queensland living has taken place for centuries; Toowong is seeing a shift of contemporary influence, commercial and retail hubs mixed with well-considered residential offerings – all the while maintaining its character and charm,” the architect noted in planning documents submitted to Brisbane City Council.

The architecture practice said the project’s form was shaped by its riverfront setting, flood considerations, neighbouring building scales, and view corridors.

“They said the mix of four and two-bedroom apartments capture the ‘fundamental qualities of Queenslander living,’ translated into the context of a contemporary subtropical building.”

The development sits just off Coronation Drive within walking distance of Toowong’s retail precinct and the upgraded Regatta ferry terminal, while also benefiting from proximity to the incoming green bridge connection to West End. Sammut said the accessibility and amenity offering were central to the site’s appeal.

The approval adds to growing residential activity along the Toowong riverfront, joining nearby projects including Consolidated Properties’ Monarch Residences and Spyre Group’s ARC Residences.

Sammut secures approval for debut Brisbane apartment development in Toowong

Developer Lanevick is heading back into Sydney’s apartment market after focusing more heavily on the luxury townhouse and terrace sector in recent years.

Lanevick, founded and directed by Steve Maroun, is expecting to receive approval in the coming months for a new apartment development in Gladesville, with the aim to launch it to the market later this year.

The 51-apartment project, designed by Studio Johnston, will comprise a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments positioned toward the Hunters Hill downsizer market.

“Traditionally it’s been difficult for people in that market to downsize because there just hasn’t been the right product available,” Maroun said.

“We’re targeting buyers who might have 30 to 40 per cent of their house value sitting in the bank after downsizing.

“They still want good spacious entertaining areas, they still want quality design, but they also want flexibility and the ability to enjoy life a bit more after working hard for a long time.”

The project sits near Boronia Park and within close proximity to the Parramatta River foreshore, an area Maroun says offers more of a Hunters Hill lifestyle than a traditional apartment precinct.

“From a lifestyle perspective, it’s really more Hunters Hill than Gladesville,” Maroun said. “You’re close to the foreshore, close to parklands, and still connected back into the village precinct.”

From level four and above, apartments will capture water views&nbsp;toward Sydney Harbour. Communal amenity will include rooftop entertaining areas, wellness spaces, and a gym tailored toward owner-occupier buyers.

“We’ve really designed these apartments around that buyer coming from the Hunters Hill LGA and what they’re actually looking for in their next chapter.”

The proposed development has also been designed to respond to the changing character of the broader Gladesville town centre, where a growing number of mixed-use and residential proposals are expected to emerge over the coming years.

“Gladesville presented a rare opportunity to deliver a genuinely design-led residential project within an evolving lifestyle precinct, just moments from the growing Gladesville town centre, and we’ve approached the project with a strong focus on architecture, liveability and long-term community value,” Maroun said.

Maroun said Lanevick saw a first-mover advantage within the precinct as planning controls continue to evolve to accommodate greater housing density.

“We think there’s a real opportunity there that hasn’t really been serviced properly yet,” he said.

“There’s going to be a broader evolution of the whole Gladesville village precinct over time, particularly with more activation and mixed-use outcomes.”

The Venus Street proposal will include a commercial and retail component at ground level designed to contribute to that evolving streetscape activation.

“A big part of the thinking was how do you activate that area properly and create more vibrancy and amenity, which is what Hunters Hill has been looking for,” Maroun said.

Lanevick’s focus since 2020 has largely been on smaller-scale luxury townhouse and terrace developments. The developer recently completed Royale Randwick, also designed by Studio Johnston, where prices reached $3.65 million. The project was featured in the UDIA NSW 2026 Professional Development Prospectus and was also named a finalist for Development of the Year.

&nbsp;

Lanevick to cater for Hunters Hill downsizers with new Gladesville apartment development

Policy

<html><body>
One of Australia's biggest property lobbies has called for an end to stamp duty, claiming that the move will create a more mobile workforce.
The Property Council of Australia (PCA) has commented on the latest report from the Business Council of Australia, the Building Australia's Comparative Advantages report, which notes a need for higher mobility among workers.
According to the PCA's chief executive Ken Morrison, the report supports their call to end land taxes and stamp duties.
“Today’s report by the BCA reinforces what we have been saying for years – stamp duty is a ball and chain that deters many Australians from relocating for work," said Morrison.
"Workforce mobility is essential as the national economy transitions from the mining investment boom to a new phase of growth.
“As new areas become employment hubs, we need to make sure we have the right people in the right places and that means assisting Australians to relocate to where the jobs are.
“Unfortunately, there are many impediments to relocating, which makes an already daunting decision harder."
He cites stamp duty as a major deterrent to relocation.
“Stamp duty in particular not only increases house prices but means a significant loss of capital for many families seeking to move.
"For people already feeling the pinch, particularly those looking for work, the additional hit to savings of stamp duty costs makes the decision to relocate a last resort," he said.
“The Property Council has consistently argued that stamp duty is a handbrake on workforce participation and locks many Australians into housing and locations that do not suit their needs.
“Abolishing stamp duty is essential to encouraging greater productivity in our changing economy and must be considered as part of the Federal Government’s tax reform agenda," said Morrison.
</body></html>

jrichardson-uRX5hFdKfN

Time to abolish stamp duty: PCA

<html><body>
High density urban redevelopment is needed to improve housing affordability and ensure community access to amenities is fairly distributed around Sydney as the city grows, according to the chair of the Committee for Sydney and director of Turnbull and Partners, Lucy Turnbull.
But local resistance to high density development is creating barriers to urban improvement, Turnbull said at the 2014 HIA Building Better Cities Summit in Sydney last week.
“There is a fundamental break down between professional and industry understanding, and community understanding, of the benefits of smart growth,” said Turnbull, who among other board and executive positions is Chair of the Committee for Sydney and former Lord Mayor of the City of Sydney.
“Communities often have the default position that doing nothing is the best thing,” she said.
Resistance to development was often based on a fear of a loss of access to services such as healthcare, car parking, childcare, local schools and public transport.
This was exacerbated by the small size of Sydney’s local government areas which led to attitudes at a local level that managing wider national and metropolitan population and economic growth was someone else’s problem, Turnbull said.
With a population of around 4.5 million, Sydney has 38 local government areas. In contrast, Brisbane has one local government area covering a population of one million. Overseas, London has a population of 8.2 million and one city council that sits above 33 local government areas. New York City, with 8.3 million people, has one city council and five boroughs.
Turnbull said higher density developments in Sydney could deliver benefits to the community by improving the vitality of town centres and access to public transport.
She said the Central Park development near Sydney’s central station and Stockland Balgowlah on Sydney’s northern beaches should be held up as good examples of urban development done well.
She identified Parramatta, Liverpool and Penrith as areas in which higher density centres should be developed.
</body></html>

zfielding-GvX3Uq9KTa

Resistance to high density development creating barriers to urban improvement: Lucy Turnbull

<html><body>
“Too many workers live too far away to fulfil our cities’ economic potential,” is the conclusion of a recently published study by the <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/" style="line-height: 1.3em;">Grattan institute</a>.
The report maps the dollar value of goods and services produced by workers within a particular area of Australia’s biggest cities.  Demonstrating a disproportionate 80% is created on just 0.2% of the nation’s land mass.
 <img src="/images/2014/07/28/cashmore%20july28%20one.png" alt="">
Source: Grattan Institute.
It mirrors findings highlighted in a recent speech by Luci Ellis, head of financial stability at the RBA, who collected the addresses of people’s workplaces from the 2011 Census, to construct a picture that is particularly striking if directly contrasted with where employees actually live.
<img src="/images/2014/07/28/cashmore-july28-two.gif" alt="">
“Inner areas have become even greater job magnets in recent years; some middle and outer areas added people, but not so many jobs, so their job-to-worker ratios actually declined,” wrote Ellis. 
Places with ratios well above 1 are employment centres. They pull in commuters across the city even from outside its borders. While the very pale fringe areas, attracting the largest population growth due to pressures of affordability, are the ‘commuter districts’, dormitory suburbs, where jobs and community infrastructure have failed to follow through.
The picture is one of increased social polarisation – fringe localities tend to face higher crime rates, elevated levels of unemployment, along with reports of <a href="https://theage.domain.com.au/health-fear-on-estates-20120314-1v3lw">depression and mental illness,</a>
Poor supply policy and delays zoning pockets within the urban boundaries for residential development, means a typical house and land package on a compact 450 square metre site, transacts for no less than $400,000.
Instead of a sensible system of bond financing, where residents pay back proportionally over a lengthy period of time, or a broad based land value tax to replace other taxes as advocated in the Henry Tax Review, funds for the provision of essential infrastructure are loaded onto the upfront cost of housing and promptly passed to the buyer. 
Yet councils can wait years for the finances to arrive.  The funds are only payable upon subdivision and with no control over the development or release of newly zoned land; buyers often pay for services they may never receive.
Article continues on the next page. Please click below.
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
The Grattan report is subtitled “Cities as Engines of Prosperity” and charts Australia’s evolution from a country that “made things”, into one that is now reliant on centrally clustered “knowledge-intensive and specialised services”.
<img src="/images/2014/07/28/cashmore%20july28%20three.png" alt="">
Together, the cities above, account for 15% of Australia’s economic activity but despite declining job-to-worker ratios in the outer suburbs, along with increases in the price-to-distance trade off for home buyers, only 8% of Australia’s employed population actually work in the central hubs of each major capital.
In Melbourne for example, over 50% of jobs in are located more than 13 kilometres from the inner core, with fewer that 20% of jobs in the CBD itself.
These are not high paying jobs however, which leads the authors to imply we need to move closer in and“minimise barriers to highly productive activity in CBDs and inner city areas”.
They suggest this would provide industries with a “wider range of potential workers to choose from”. 
 “Australia’s cities are the backbone of our economy, with CBDs and inner city areas critically important to the nation’s prosperity….The more highly skilled and specialised a job, the greater the need to find the best person to fill it.”
Knowledge based and specialised services cover a diverse area, including industries such as, finance, insurance, real estate, and business services, as well as cultural, media, communication, and education facilities for example.
They are gaining predominance across the globe, due to a technological boom that is powering us forward in an expansion not unlike the industrial revolution.
3-D printing is lowering the cost and logistics of production. Advances in the research of solar and renewable energy have paved the way for homeowners to store electricity overnight and possibly <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/environment/energy-smart/storing-solar-power-is-the-key-to-cutting-energy-bills-csiro-says-20140502-zr2zw" target="_blank">disconnect from the grid</a> completely.  
Companies such as Uber and Lyft have created innovative apps to provide cheaper transport options for consumers and ironically, changes in the way we interact and communicate have allowed people and jobs to disperse over a broader footprint and successfully collaborate across international borders.
However, this is not where Australia excels.
Moves to take advantage of the innovation revolution have been continually hampered by government intervention, winding back tariffs and scaling down their 2020 Renewable Energy Target, acting to protect the cartel of the Taxi industry’s ‘licensing’ monopoly, and cutting funding to organisations such as the CSIRO. 
No - the predominant sector that yields the most “knowledge intensive” gains in Australia comes from the FIRE industry (finance, insurance, and real estate)– which has its infrastructure webbed like a parasite on the back of the great Australian housing boom. 
<img src="/images/2014/07/28/cashmore-july28-five.gif" alt="">
At a global banking conference in 2013, the question was asked: "Why the hell are Australian Banks performing so well!?" It was in response to a chart showing a decade rise in market capitalisation on the global banking index, from 2% to 14%.
The answer was obvious; the banking sector <a href="https://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/01/31/therovingcavaliersofcredit/" target="_blank">makes its money by creating debt</a> – mostly mortgage debt and our highly leveraged ‘too big to fail four’ are the world’s most heavily exposed to residential and commercial real estate, capturing 88% of the mortgage market alone.
To be clear, the FIRE Economy is not a value adding economy; it profits by extracting economic rent from the debt on rising land values, impeding areas of productive enterprise and trading the interest in a multi trillion-dollar derivatives market to advantage those sitting at the top of the financial pyramid.
Article continues on the next page. Please click below.
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
To survive, the FIRE sector must sell the illusion that the economy and its participants can achieve economic prosperity through speculation on rising property values.
This has been assisted by tax, housing, and monetary policy, resulting in Australian’s holding some of the highest levels of private debt in the developed world. 
Tax withholdings or exemptions given to land holders for example, result in an increase of unearned monetary gains (economic rent) available to be capitalised at the current interest rate into the upfront cost of land. 
This was aptly demonstrated in a recent release by <a href="https://www.prosper.org.au/2014/07/24/negative-gearing-is-costing-you-a-lot-more-than-you-think/">Moodys’ Analytics</a>, estimating how the tax policy of negative gearing, has acted to inflate Australian house prices by no small degree.
 <img src="/images/2014/07/28/cashmore-july28-seven.gif" alt="">
Supply policy has further assisted.
Inelastic responses to market conditions have allowed professional land-bankers to squat on sites at low cost and secure windfall gains when the sites are later rezoned for residential development.
Allowing the uplift of land values to capitalise year upon year into the cost of housing, may be gift-wrapped with corporate spin to suggest it somehow benefits the community, however, a cursory analysis reveals the exact opposite to be true.
It raises the cost of living for every single household, increasing welfare costs, and leaving less to invest in sustainable industries that contribute to the county’s real ‘value adding’ economy. 
As demonstrated by the British economist and historian Fred Harrison in his book The Great Tax Clawback Scam.
The pull of the centralised core, where property values and wages are highest, results in decades of progressive taxes on every worker in the state being clawed back by a few, as inner city land values benefit from higher wages, increased demand and improvements to social infrastructure and transport arterials to do precisely as the Grattan review suggests – and keep us locked and reliant on a small pocket of land for our economic gains.
It brings with it the theory of urban consolation – reduce sprawl and force residents into apartments, however doing so can have the adverse effect of increasing sprawl, as lesser industries ‘hop’ the middle ring, in search of cheaper options and their employees move out further still.
If we were living in ancient Rome where walking was the general mode of transport, you could understand the need to stay centrally located; however we are not. 
We’re in an age of mobility where global research is being poured into innovative modes of transportation such as solar roads and electric cars.
If a buyer is able to travel to the supermarket, park and any other amenity on the priority list within a 30 or 40-minute period, the distance from the CBD is not an imposing factor. The decider is the time it takes to drop the kids off to school in one direction and travel to work in the other. 
Since the 1970s, successive governments have poured millions into incentives to try and decentralise and boost regional localities.  However, all attempts have failed, because the funding mechanism is flawed.
Decentralisation requires affordable land for both business and buyer, which is not unduly inflated due to policies that promote speculation, as well as growth enhancing infrastructure and flexible supply policy that responds in a timely manner to homebuyer (not speculator) demand.
The Henry Tax review was not slow to <a href="https://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/content/finalreport.aspx?doc=html/publications/papers/final_report_part_1/chapter_12.htm">point this out</a>, when it suggested slowly phasing out a vast array of ‘bad taxes’ that impede productivity and reduce mobility (stamp duty, payroll, insurance, vehicle registration, and so forth, as well as phasing out those that ‘reward’ speculation) and instead, collecting more of the economic rent from the unimproved value of land.
Historically, the capture of economic rent (through land tax and to some extent ‘betterment’ taxes) financed some of the most remarkable infrastructure we have. Sydney Harbour Bridge being a case in point.
It was <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rearvision/tony-abbotts-big-plans-at-odds-with-infrastructure-history/5404212">acknowledged</a> at the time, that residents on the north shore would benefit significantly from an increase in their property values as a result of this essential piece of infrastructure.  Therefore, a framework was set in place to capture a proportion of the uplift – approximately one third – to assist with funding.
This was in no way detrimental to the property owners.
The increased advantage of economic activity coupled with the rise in prices resulting from the enterprise, more than compensated. A win-win if you like – and readily accepted by the public as ‘fair’.
A more familiar example can be used for owners of apartments. 
When buyers purchase a unit, they expect to pay a yearly corporation fee for maintenance and improvement of community services. In doing so, it reduces the up front cost consumers are willing to pay as they configure the fee into their budget, yet it is also an investment, as the benefits and any subsequent improvement attracts future purchasers. 
A broad based land value taxation as advocated in the Henry Tax review is essentially no different.
In markets that have similar policies – a change in the tax mix, with higher taxation on land in lieu of those on productivity in order to fund related infrastructure, coupled with good supply policy, enables a process of decentralisation and increased affordability to follow through.  Both reforms work hand in hand.  
The prosperous economy of Texas in the USA is a good example of this.
Since June 2009, about 48% of all jobs created in America have been in the state; it has booming population growth, high levels of disposable income, low house prices and has been termed 'The Texas Miracle'.
This is because with no income tax employees get to keep more of their earnings while higher property taxes used to fund community infrastructure stem speculative inflation, which along with good supply policy has created a truly decentralised city, with only <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQtDHY_tkns" target="_blank">7% of jobs located ‘downtown’</a>.
We do not have to mirror another country’s policies, but it does prove the ability to create a system that provides a fairer regime for the funding of infrastructure and stops runaway house price gains.
However, in an economy that is dominated by the financial sector, and reports such as the latest Grattan review celebrating Australia’s city-centric culture, efforts to decentralise and produce a fairer system for all Australian’s is, once again, likely to fail.
</body></html>

catherinecashmore-6LXia3pPQj

We need to change our city-centric economic views

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Having led the world in the 1990s in embracing defined contribution retirement plans, Australia now is rightly reviewing whether the design of its retirement income system is meeting the needs of Australians living in retirement.
David Murray’s interim report into Australia’s financial systems noted the particular strengths of this three-pillar system, which comprises the age pension, compulsory superannuation guarantee and voluntary private savings. With more than A$1.8 trillion of assets under management, Australia now has the fourth largest private pension pool in the world. The questions, as the Murray report identified, are around the complexity, efficiency and efficacy of the system.
The fact is Australians are not only living longer, they are seeking greater choice and control in managing their retirement arrangements and need cost-effective products that meet their income needs over many decades after stopping full-time work.
The problems with the current system, as I see it, are two-fold: One is around the lack of meaningful information given to consumers and the other is around the stated lump sum goal of most superannuation plans. Unlike the old employer-sponsored defined benefit plans, the defined contribution (DC) plans that dominate in Australia and in the US market transfer the investment and other risks from companies to employees.
My view is that putting relatively complex decisions in the hands of individuals with little or no financial expertise is problematic. While some say the answer is increased financial literacy, it is simply unrealistic to expect people to make decisions about strategies that challenge even seasoned investment professionals. To use an analogy, when we service our cars, the mechanic does not expect us to be able to understand how the fuel injection system works. Most of us just want a vehicle that gets us safely and reliably to our desired destination.
It’s the same with our retirement plans. It really makes no sense to ask individuals to make complex choices about risk exposures and asset allocation, for instance.
The second problem is the goal itself. The language around DC investment is about asset value. People are trained to see the key metric as the size of their fund pool, when what really matters to them is whether they will have sufficient income in retirement to live the lives they want to live.
If an individual’s pension savings are invested to maximise capital value at time of retirement and her personal goal is to achieve a reasonable level of retirement income, there is a clear mismatch involved.
In the view of the superannuation fund, the relevant risk is portfolio value. But the risk for the individual is uncertainty around retirement income. How do we solve this dilemma? The answer is to adopt a liability-driven investment strategy that is equivalent to how an insurer hedges an annuity contract or how pension funds hedge their liabilities for future retirement payments to members. Nearly a quarter of a century since Australia moved to compulsory super, the financial technology now exists to invest individual super contributions this way. Each fund member would still get a pot of money at retirement and would still have the same choice over their savings they have under current DC arrangements. The difference is the value of the pot would be obtained through a strategy meant to maximise the likelihood of achieving the desired income stream.
Moving to this income-focused strategy would require changes not only to the way super plans actually invest their members’ money but also to how they engage and communicate with savers.
Instead of being asked complex (and meaningless) questions about asset allocation, members would be asked three simple questions – their retirement income goal, how much they can contribute from current income and how long they plan to work. Of course, the asset allocation is important, but this only a factor for achieving success. It is not a meaningful input for the choices the consumer actually makes. Once these variables are known, the fund need only regularly communicate to the member the probability of reaching her goal. To increase that probability, the fund member has only three choices – save more, work longer or take more risk. There are no other ways.
The gap between what exists and what Australians need was highlighted by the Murray inquiry interim report, which noted that the current focus on lump sum balances in the superannuation system is evident in the absence of retirement income projections from annual statements to members.
“For many people, income projections, while difficult to calculate, would be far more useful than total accrued balances,” Murray said.
As someone who has spent much of his professional life researching this issue, I can only agree. Ultimately, what Australia needs is an approach to superannuation that uses smarter products rather than trying to make consumers smarter about finance.
Robert C. Merton is Nobel Laureate, Professor of Finance, School of Management at <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/massachusetts-institute-of-technology">Massachusetts Institute of Technology</a>.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/29547/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="line-height: 1.3em;">
Alongside his academic positions at MIT and Harvard, Professor Merton holds the post of resident scientist with global asset management firm Dimensional Fund Advisors. This article is drawn partly from his recent essay in the Harvard Business Review on the retirement planning challenge.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Superannuation: make income the outcome

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
On Saturday, I witnessed two auctions that were marketed in two different ways and which resulted in very different outcomes.
The first property was advertised with a fairly typical auction marketing campaign which included the usual underquoting. The price guide that was provided throughout the marketing campaign was $1,050,000. At auction the bidding ran out of steam short of the reserve. The agent came and told me he needed more money to get it on the market as the reserve was $1.25 million. I said, "best of luck as you won't be getting that out of me".  
Frustrated the agent went inside to talk to the vendor again before coming back outside to tell me that he had convinced the vendor to reduce the reserve to $1,225,000.  He then told the auctioneer and it was called on the market at $1,225,000. No further bids were made and it sold for $25,000 under the vendor’s reserve to us.  
Anyone who did detailed research and looked at the comparables would know that the property was worth $1,250,000 to $1,275,000 but the underquoting attracted people with a budget closer to the guide of $1.05 million rather than those with a budget of $1.25 million or more. More than likely many of those people with a budget around the $1.25 million mark were attending auctions that had price guides around that point but reserves and values that were maybe closer to the $1.45 million mark?   
The fact is my clients loved the property so much that they gave me a budget of $1,330,000 to spend if needed to secure the property. Yes we purchased the property $105,000 below what my clients were prepared to pay for it which they are very happy about. However they are even happier we purchased it for $50,000 below what the comparables indicated the property was worth up to. 
In comparison at the second property auction I attended the vendor had decided to be transparent with the market. Whether he decided to do this of his own accord or read about my petition to make it mandatory to publish reserves and decided to take the idea on board, I don’t know.  What I do know is that he was transparent with buyers and attracted bidders who could actually afford the price he wanted for the property. He set and published his reserve at $570,000 and <a href="/expert-insights/buying/a-7-5-premium-above-disclosed-reserve-at-bexley-auction-experiment">the property sold for $613,000, some $43,000 over the reserve</a>.
The buyer was ushered into the house to sign the contract and so I spoke to the under bidder. I asked her if the publishing of the reserve price influenced her decision to bid on the property.  She said she would not have even attended the auction if the reserve price had not been disclosed as she was ‘fed up’ with attending auctions that had reserves set well over the price guide provided by agents.
The bottom line here is that transparency won the day.
Let’s hope it catches on for not only all the vendors’ sake but for all the buyers who keep wasting money and time attending auctions every week where the reserve is set in excess of the guide when in fact they should be one in the same.  
If you think my idea of publishing reserves prior to auction is a good move then simply <a href="https://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/the-honourable-matthew-mason-cox-mlc-nsw-government-make-it-compulsory-to-advertise-auction-reserve-prices-to-stamp-out-underquoting-and-dummy-bidding" target="_blank">sign my petition</a> which is calling on the NSW state government to make it mandatory for all property auctions to have the reserve price advertised seven days ahead of a scheduled auction. 
Feel free to make your comments as to why you signed the petition in the comments box.
Patrick Bright is the founder of Sydney-based buyer’s agency <a href="https://%20www.epspropertysearch.com.au/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">EPS Property Search</a>.
Patrick is the author of four best-selling real estate books known as “The Insider’s Guide to Buying Real Estate Series”.
<a href="https://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/the-honourable-matthew-mason-cox-mlc-nsw-government-make-it-compulsory-to-advertise-auction-reserve-prices-to-stamp-out-underquoting-and-dummy-bidding" target="_blank">Visit change.org to sign the petition</a> calling on the NSW state government to make it mandatory for all property auctions.
</body></html>

pbright-aNtgvRfvJN

No more excuses: Publishing the reserve price prior to auction works

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
It is not difficult to establish the case for the importance of financial advice.
With an ageing population, increasing longevity, higher expectations of post retirement living standards, the complexity of financial products and services, more scams and spruikers, financial illiteracy and money stress… getting quality financial advice has never been more important. Indeed, wealth management is seen as a key area of future growth for the economy.
Given this, one has to wonder how financial planning in Australia finds itself mired in regulatory uncertainty and persistent distrust by the community. This is fuelled by high profile failures such as Storm Financial, Commonwealth Financial Planning and Opes Prime.
These failures led (under the previous Labor government) to the Future of Financial Advice (FoFA) reforms which aim to improve the trust and confidence in financial advice while improving availability, accessibility and affordability.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/resist-efforts-to-water-down-fofa-to-protect-all-australians-26822">Central elements of this</a> included the banning of conflicted remuneration, a duty for advisers to act in the best interests of clients, an obligation to renew ongoing fee agreements with clients, and further powers to the regulator (ASIC).
A long path to change
The Abbott government has since moved on pre-election views that the laws were too restrictive and would unreasonably increase the cost (and therefore limit access to) advice.
After <a href="https://theconversation.com/sinodinos-stands-aside-during-corruption-inquiry-24571">the replacement</a> of the relevant minister, Arthur Sinodinos, a <a href="https://theconversation.com/call-for-commonwealth-bank-asic-to-face-royal-commission-28509">Senate inquiry</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-governments-financial-advice-regulations-are-in-the-senates-firing-line-29116">a move to regulate rather than legislate</a>, Labor’s disallowance motion and finally a <a href="https://theconversation.com/fofa-deal-encourages-government-to-humour-palmer-29237">government deal with the minor parties</a> in the Senate to vote down said motion, this is still not finalised.
The government now has a further 90 days to produce the revised regulations. And do not forget the ongoing <a href="https://theconversation.com/infographic-the-financial-system-inquiry-at-a-glance-29210">Financial System Inquiry (FSI)</a> and the newly established Parliamentary Joint Committee <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Corporations_and_Financial_Services/Financial_Adviser_Qualifications">Inquiry into proposals to lift professional, ethical and education standards</a> in the financial services industry.
It appears however that the best interest duty, the ban on conflicted remuneration (including on general advice) and increased transparency will also be maintained. And a register of financial advisers will be created.
So, what does all this mean? Will the amended FoFA deliver on the stated aims?
First, it must be noted that there are many planners in Australia that have been and will continue to provide outstanding service to assist all manner of clients in all manner of situations. This is often lost in this debate and we would be well served to learn from how they operate.
Second, the inherent conflict in FoFA must also be acknowledged. The difficulty of achieving both an increase in quality and an increase in access/affordability is almost impossible through a political process. FoFA was always going to be a difficult balancing act.
This article continues on the next page. Please click below.
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
FoFA will not fix the trust problem
Third, the limited scope of FoFA means it will not in and of itself deliver quality advice and consumer trust. Critical issues not dealt with include the financial capability of consumers, the training requirements (both entry level and ongoing) for financial planners and remedies for aggrieved clients.
The management of vertically integrated business models, the different forms of advice (product advice vs personal advice), codes of professional/ethical conduct for advisers, and the role of the regulator are also not addressed.
Finally, when considering these issues the fragmented nature of the industry becomes apparent.
On one hand a financial planner may sign up to an enforceable code of conduct, have tertiary and professional qualifications in financial planning, undertake ongoing professional education, have professional indemnity insurance and experience gained within a professional practice environment. Another planner may meet ASIC requirements to give advice with only a few weeks of training, no adherence to a code of conduct and no related experience. FoFA does not deal with these issues.
So who wins and losses from the Senate deal? No one that matters - FoFA is a step in the right direction but the details of the regulations have not been produced. The key elements of FoFA appear to remain, yet it still ignores key issues, and the regulatory uncertainty remains.
Ironically, some sections of the industry have enhanced professional standards by addressing many of these issues without the long running political and regulatory intervention. This is a lesson for all.
The government might consider an alternative approach that partners with the industry to develop and foster professional behaviour, culture and standards. A more facilitative approach would pick up where FoFA fails to deliver and build upon the great work done in some sections of the industry already. If the revised FoFA, the new PJC Inquiry and the FSI start to support and cooperate in this regard, the future for Australians may be brighter.
Mark Brimble is discipline head of finance and financial planning at Griffith University.
Mark Brimble receives funding from the Financial Planning Education Council research grants scheme. He is chair of the Financial Planning Education Council, co-chair of the Financial Planning Academics Forum and a member of CPA Australia, FINSIA and FPA Australia.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

mbrimble-cbecKJ9y78

FoFA a step in the right direction, but ignores key issues

<html><body>
The passing of the legislation repealing the carbon tax has been welcomed by the Housing Industry Association, who say they have been vocally opposed to the tax since its creation.
HIA chief executive industry policy and media, Graham Wolfe, said that it is a barrier for the industry. Previously, they had c<a href="/news/hia-urges-the-federal-government-to-scrap-the-carbon-tax">alled on the government to scrap it, calling it a “bad tax”, and asking for transparency over the costs added to a new home</a>.
"HIA has advocated against the carbon tax since its inception, as it represents yet another impost on one of the most heavily taxed sectors in the economy," said Wolfe.
"The repeal of the tax was a key part of HIA's 2013 federal election platform to help revive the housing industry."
He noted that it has had direct impact on energy production costs, which in turn had a flow-through effect onto manufacturing and fabrication phases for building material, product and assembly production.
Wolfe says that this drove up the prices of new homes, through manufacturing, jobs and material input costs.
In 2011, they had <a href="/news/carbon-tax-to-add-6-000-to-new-home-costs-hia">estimated the additional cost to a new home at $6,000</a>.
However, <a href="/expert-insights/investing/carbon-tax-wont-increase-housing-costs-much-stockland">Stockland had said that the additional costs would be closer to $2,500</a> – or just 0.6% of their house and land packages.
Property Observer is keen to see if any new home developers actually do reduce the costs of their developments' offerings as a result of the repeal.
RELATED STORIES:
<a href="/news/carbon-conscious-homebuyers-should-be-spared-tax-industry-bodies">Carbon-conscious homebuyers should be spared tax: industry bodies</a>
<a href="/expert-insights/investing/more-than-half-of-potential-home-buyers-put-off-by-spectre-of-carbon-tax">More than half of potential home buyers put off by spectre of carbon tax</a>
<a href="/expert-insights/investing/scaremongering-over-the-carbon-tax-just-a-lot-of-hot-air">Scaremongering over the carbon tax just a lot of hot air</a>
</body></html>

jduke-EHk3XBmHkn

Carbon tax repeal part of HIA plan to revive housing industry

<html><body>
Several times in recent weeks the RBA has made statements about the price of Australia’s housing. 
The first was that overseas buying is having little impact on price; the second was that owners shouldn’t expect prices to rise every year and the third, that if price growth slows, then many would be better off renting.
With only one real tool now left in the tool box – i.e. interest rates – there is little that The Guv can do but jawbone. 
Nothing wrong with that – you, I and many others do it on a regular basis.  The difference is we don’t get front page coverage (well, you do sometimes) or a mention on the nightly news. 
Overseas buying
Well the RBA, in my view and according to our research, is wrong.  Somewhere between 25% and 50% of new attached residential property is being sold directly overseas.
We are about to release a series of apartment sales and performance reports – which cover buyer profiles and origins, along with resale plus rental results – and the recently settled projects have all got very high overseas buyer origins.
Also, having given over 60 market outlook presentations over the past 12 months, I can tell you that many in the audience – especially in Sydney and Melbourne – are recent migrants and they tell me during our one-on-one discussions, after the formalities are over, that they are buying for not only themselves, but friends and relatives currently living overseas.  Interestingly, many think that ownership gives their friends and relatives the right to occupy.
Despite the recent low interest rates, why is it this housing recovery has been quarantined (so far) largely to Sydney and Melbourne?  Little has happened over the past 18 to 24 months, outside of these two capitals.  Is it just coincidence that both Sydney and Melbourne attract the most overseas migration and direct overseas interest?  Come on, let’s get real. and the RBA have no control over this.
Price growth to slow
Once interest rates normalise (rise) then the housing market will slow.  But more importantly, ageing demographics, especially the contraction in the size of the upgrading market, will be a big drag on house spending.  Ditto persistently high unemployment and fewer full-time jobs being created. 
Annual price growth, say, post mid-2016 (when I think interest rates will rise, due to the Federal Reserve’s action rather than anything here), would at best be 5% per annum.  So, well under 2.5% in real terms.
Article continues on the next page. Please click below.
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
<a href="/expert-insights/finance/no-property-bubble-but-rba-pinpoints-the-possible-future-wisdom-in-renting">Better off renting?</a>
Statistically yes, but only if households wisely invested the difference; the quality of the owner resident homes and rental properties in this country were the same and that pride, security and self-worth weren’t generated out of security of title and the ability to improve your lot.
It is amazing how a really boffin-ish academic study can get so much airplay.  But it does reiterate that the RBA expects less residential growth in the future.
I think more will rent in the decades to come, as many will be priced out of the ownership marketand/or don’t want to commit to the mortgage.  Ironically, we are likely to see fewer investors – well, first time investors mostly – as the past and easy property growth rate has gone.  It will take real skill and focus to buy the right investment product and even if investors buy wisely, gone are the days of double digit annual price growth, once this current upturn is over. 
What’s going on
Let me share some statistics with you:
<ul>
<li>
16,000 new jobs were created across Australia in June, but just 3,800 were full-time.  The unemployment rate is now at 6%.  Less wage growth is the result and about half of that experienced just five years ago.  Half of the new jobs created across Australia over the last year have been part-time.  This is now a growing trend.
</li>
<li>
Mining capex is in decline and has not (yet) been replaced by non-mining stuff – i.e. retail, tourism, gas projects, public transport and especially construction.  Things look increasingly encouraging in this space, especially with housing commencements finally starting to move upwards, but many of these new jobs will not pay as well as resource-related ones and a lot will be part-time.
</li>
<li>
94.9 is the current reading of the Westpac/Melbourne Institute index of consumer confidence – a reading above 100 signals optimism.  So, we are pessimistic. and it is more than just the federal budget or PUP and this Senate; we have been pessimistic for some time. I think many believe that Australia has been living ‘above its means’ for some time and that we need to do something about it,and now, rather than leaving it to our children/grandchildren to deal with.  This means having less.  Hard to do and such change usually zaps confidence.
</li>
<li>Investment housing loans are up over 20% on last year.</li>
</ul>
My reading is that the RBA is having a bet each way: rates to remain steady for some time, or if things continue to soften economically, then the cash rate will need to fall sometime over the next couple of months – down another 0.25%  – to help boost employment and help boost the non-mining capex industries along.
If rates do fall, this will add strength to the housing cycle, increasing prices above a sustainable growth path and level (they have already passed this point in many centres – seriously so in Sydney, Melbourne and to some degree Perth).
This collateral damage is the price we will be paying for having only one tool now to work with (we have no money left in the bank) and it is why the RBA is megaphoning about such housing matters now.
And sometime in the future – let’s say for now, in 18 or so months, the USA will start increasing their cost of funds. Why?  Because their economy will be improving and higher interest rates will be warranted. The world will have to follow suit, Australia included.
For mine, Australia’s housing markets are at a watershed – the future is much less generic price and even rental growth, real issues with affordability, acceptance of more compact and cheaper housing, plus the dire need for major changes to town-planning regulations and practice. Taxation on housing, new and established, will also need a major overhaul.
Fewer are likely to invest in property as a result; many will age in place; look to take in a tenant to help pay their way and where it is allowed, many owners will redevelop their homes – adding granny flats; creating duplexes; making extensions, but not for ‘pleasure’, rather for income generation and/or accommodating children at home for longer, or housing their ageing parents at home.
Sadly, the RBA isn’t megaphoning about this.
</body></html>

michaelmatusik-49YzLvdmNv

Australia’s housing markets are at a watershed moment

<html><body>
The current tax treatment of investment property losses, through a combination of negative gearing and capital gains tax, has come under fire for putting the financial system at risk, according to the federal government’s Financial System Inquiry interim report.
Currently, <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/investment/34310-should-negative-gearing-be-scrapped-experts-weigh-in" target="_blank">negative gearing</a> means that interest costs and other property expenses are fully tax deductible, while capital gains tax on properties is applied with a 50% discount.
The Financial System Inquiry, headed up by David Murray, states in its interim report that these arrangements “encourage leveraged and speculative investment — particularly in housing”.
“Because of these tax arrangements, owners of residential property have an incentive to repay their mortgage as slowly as possible to maximise the tax deductions they can accrue,” says the report.
“Loans with interest-only periods help to maximise these tax deductions in the early years of a loan, although these loans also give borrowers more flexibility with repayments. The tax system, therefore, encourages individuals to take on more risk, which does have implications for risks to lenders.”
Aside from negative gearing and the asymmetric tax treatment, the report identifies additional tax-related factors that are also distorting the housing market.
“In addition to the more favourable tax treatment, individuals have an extra incentive to put more of their wealth into their primary residence because of the means test for the age pension, which excludes the primary home. This leads to higher allocation of wealth to housing and, for some, an inefficient level of consumption of housing services,” the interim report states.
Current arrangements also mean family homes are a key savings vehicle for many Australians.
“Returns on owner-occupied housing (including imputed rent and capital gains) are exempt from tax, although this is not unusual by international standards. This makes housing a very attractive vehicle for savings,” the report states.
The favourable tax treatment for property investment has created a situation of increasing mortgage indebtedness, which in turn has created risks for the financial system.
“Since the Wallis Inquiry, the increase in households’ mortgage indebtedness has been accompanied by banks allocating a greater proportion of their loan book to mortgages; the share of loans for housing has increased from 47% in 1997 to its current share of 66%,” says the report.
“A large enough disruption to the housing market could have significant implications for household balance sheets, financial stability, economic growth, and the speed of recovery in household spending and broader economic activity following a shock.”
Mark Chapman, head of tax with lobby group Taxpayers Australia, told SmartCompany the report is correct in identifying that tax deductions people claim over the life of a property are greater than the losses they claim at the end.
“For high income earners, it’s an astute way to reduce their tax rate. But 70% of those using negative gearing are not high income earners, and are required to buy an asset to get a tax deduction,” Chapman says.
“It needs to be reformed. From a tax policy perspective, [negative gearing in its current form] makes little sense. In most jurisdictions, offsets for losses on property investments can only be claimed against profits on other properties, or be carried forward against future profits.”
Philip Soos, a research Masters candidate at the School of Management at Deakin University specialising in property tax law, told SmartCompany that since 2001, most investment property rents have not been high enough to cover interest and expenses.
“Around 60% of investor loans are interest only. It’s a big leverage bet on a capital gain – as long as wages are high enough to sustain the rents,” Soos says.
“While the argument is that it encourages new property development, around 96% of all investment property loans by value are spent on existing properties.”
“Abolishing negative gearing would be better than reform, but that’s unlikely, so quarantining it or reforming it so it’s limited to new, rather than existing properties, is probably the best option,” says Soos.
Brian Chant, managing director of Property Asset Planning, told SmartCompany negative gearing has some important benefits when applied to new properties.
“I think it’s very effective when used on brand new property. It allows you to turn over the economy, and when you turn over the economy, you employ people. It allows you to build new homes and new affordable housing,” Chant says.
“It needs to be reviewed and discussed further, but when it’s applied to new homes, it’s brilliant.”
However, Property Tax Specialists' Shukri Barbara told SmartCompany reforming negative gearing too quickly could create its own risks.
“One important issue is the banks, who lend up to 90%, are heavily dependent on negative gearing. If you remove it too quickly, the values will drop and create the risk that people will sell their properties for less than they owe on their mortgages,” he says.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.SmartCompany.com.au" target="_blank">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

asadauskas-o9wSWMRiAW

Negative gearing could be putting the Australian financial system at risk: Murray inquiry

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The government has grabbed an unlikely victory to preserve its changes to Labor’s Future of Financial Advice legislation, after a last minute deal with Clive Palmer.
Just over a week after Palmer insisted his party would not be swayed by government lobbying and “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/comment/fofa-your-financial-planner-is-about-to-send-you-a-letter-but-its-not-enough-20140714-zt6gi" target="_blank">they can stick it up their arse</a>”, PUP senators and their ally, Motoring Enthusiast Ricky Muir voted against disallowance of the regulations.
Finance Minister Mathias Cormann, desperate to preserve his changes – which are widely condemned by consumer and seniors' groups as watering down FoFA – secured PUP by agreeing to make further regulations spelling out protections.
For Cormann, regarded as one of the most ideological in the government, it was a significant personal victory.
Palmer’s U-turn will give the government greater hope for cutting deals with PUP on other issues. Hours before the Senate vote, Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss told the Coalition parties the government was still “learning to deal with the crossbenchers” to achieve its agenda.
The government now knows that even the most unequivocal statements by Palmer are not necessarily immutable – that, whatever he’s said, he may be willing to play. This presumably increases the incentive for it to humour him when it can – provided he doesn’t set the price too high. It will be a game of wits.
On FoFA, Palmer has ended up centre stage, rather than just being part of a political consortium (with Labor and Greens) saying no. He was able to claim ownership of the outcome. “I was negotiating as hard as I could for the people of Australia,” he told reporters.
He negotiated into the early hours of Tuesday. The terms of the deal were read into the Hansard by Cormann (presumably Palmer thought one couldn’t be too careful).
Publicly, the issue was surrounded by confusion. At one stage on Tuesday morning Labor seemed confident it had the PUPs in its camp.
The government will be delighted to have got its way, but it risks alienating older voters, an important Liberal constituency. Its actions continue to carry significant dangers for the Coalition; Labor can campaign on bringing back stronger consumer protections.
Chief executive of National Seniors Australia Michael O'Neill, who previously had exchanges of text messages in which Palmer indicated he was on side with their concerns, accused the PUP leader of stringing him along.
“Changes as important as this should not have been developed in a deal that excluded all the key interests,” O'Neill said.
Palmer indicated it wasn’t just the consumer groups who’d not been consulted – he said he hadn’t spoken with the financial advice industry either in developing his proposals. “I thought it out. I drew on my own experience,” he said, but then quickly mentioned the “team” of senators.
In his letter to Palmer, Cormann pledged the government would make further regulations within 90 days to ensure certain requirements “are explicitly listed in the Statement of Advice provided by financial advisers to their client and signed off by both”. (In fact they’re already in law or in practice covered by professional standards.)
The requirements are that the adviser has to act in the best interests of the client and prioritise the client’s interests ahead of their own; fees are to be disclosed and the adviser will provide an annual fee disclosure statement for post 1 July 2013 arrangements; a client can return financial products under a 14-day cooling off period; and the client has the right to change instructions to the adviser, if for example they experience a change in their circumstances.
The government also agreed to work in consultation with stakeholders to “establish an enhanced public register of financial advisers”, including advisers who were employees. It would have on it their credentials and status in the industry. The initiative for this, a proposal supported by various inquiries and submissions, came from Motoring Enthusiast Ricky Muir.
The vote was lost 31-34, with the minority comprising Labor, the Greens and independent Nick Xenophon. The DLP’s John Madigan abstained.
Critics condemn the Palmer deal as adding red tape without significantly increasing protections.
Cormann won over Palmer on the day when the interim report of the inquiry into Australia’s financial system, chaired by the former CEO of the Commonwealth Bank David Murray, said it “considers the principle of consumers being able to access advice that helps them meet their financial needs is undermined by the existence of conflicted remuneration structures in financial advice”.
While the government insists it has retained the ban on commissions and conflicted advice its changes allow incentive payments for general advice in certain situations.
The government’s regulations have survived despite the background of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia scandal in which many people lost their savings due to bad or fraudulent advice. In the Coalition parties room on Tuesday National party minister Luke Hartsuyker revealed that his parents had been victims of the CBA affair and said there should be a new Senate inquiry. Treasurer Joe Hockey, whose mother-in-law also lost money (although was later compensated) lashed out at the regulator, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, saying it is “failed miserably and I am very, very unhappy with this”.
In the Senate, Labor’s Sam Dastyari used the line that’s becoming the opposition’s mantra: the PUP was “wagging the tail wagging the dog”. To the Palmerites, he said: “You have been sold a pup”.
There’s another way of looking at it. At the end of the day, Palmer wanted PUP to have the last bark.
Michelle Grattan is one of Australia's most respected and awarded political journalists. Michelle currently has a dual role with an academic position at the University of Canberra and as associate editor (politics) and chief political correspondent at The Conversation.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com/" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. 
</body></html>

Policy

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Policy

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News