&nbsp;

Developer GURNER™ Group has revealed $1.65 billion in residential sales nationally across the 12 months to December 2025, driven largely by the continued momentum of its Docklands wellness-focused precinct, Elysium Fields.

The sales result was generated across seven projects in Victoria and New South Wales, headlined by Elysium Fields, GURNER™’s $2.75 billion mixed-use precinct planned for Harbour Esplanade in Docklands.

The project has recorded more than $500 million in sales across the first three towers, equating to around 580 apartments sold.

The first tower, Helios, has now sold out of its 240 private residences, with GURNER™ preparing to release a premium penthouse collection comprising 15 three-bedroom penthouses in coming weeks.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370975]

Elysium Fields is being developed on the long-held 20,000 sqm Docklands site at 208-226 Harbour Esplanade, which had remained undeveloped for more than two decades prior to GURNER™ taking over the project around four years ago.

Construction has now commenced across four towers ranging between 18 and 30 storeys, with Hamilton Marino and Maxcon appointed as builders.

Once complete, the precinct is expected to comprise around 1,100 residences, alongside retail, hospitality and public realm uses integrated throughout the site.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370981]

Designed by Fraser &amp; Partners in collaboration with GURNER™ Design House, the project has been positioned around the developer’s broader focus on wellness-led residential living.

“We don’t sell apartments. We create a true luxury lifestyle that simply doesn’t exist elsewhere in the market today,” Founder and Executive Chairman Tim Gurner said.

“To deliver that requires an extraordinary level of detail, coordination and discipline across multiple verticals, from design and hospitality through to wellness and service.”

“We’ve always believed that living extends far beyond the physical residence. It’s about how you feel the moment you arrive, how you live day-to-day, and the ecosystem that supports that.” 
[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370977]

The project’s design places a heavy focus on landscaping, wellness amenities and biophilic design principles.

Plans include around 3,700 sqm of landscaped gardens and open space throughout the precinct, alongside a retail and dining offering spanning approximately 5,000 sqm.

The broader public realm strategy centres around what GURNER™ describes as the “Path of Life”, an urban forest and landscaped pedestrian environment intended to connect the various buildings and wellness spaces across the precinct.

The apartments themselves will incorporate a range of wellness-focused inclusions, including purified air and water systems, circadian lighting, antimicrobial surfaces, and optional in-home wellness upgrades.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370980]

Gurner said the company’s experience through its Saint Haven wellness clubs had directly informed the residential offering now being incorporated into Elysium Fields.

“We’re seeing a clear global shift toward longevity, performance and proactive health,” Gurner said.

“Our role is to deliver that in a way that feels seamless, highly private and beautifully resolved within the environments we create.”

A large component of the wellness offering is planned through the resident amenity and health facilities proposed within the precinct.

That includes plans for bathing and recovery facilities spread throughout the towers, incorporating mineral pools, saunas, steam rooms, flotation therapy, red light therapy and wellness lounges.

The developer is also seeking approvals for what it describes as a “reverse ageing medical clinic” within the precinct.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370978]

According to project information released by the group, the proposed facility would include cryotherapy, IV infusion therapy, infrared and dry saunas, PEMF beds, MRIs, DEXA scans, brain scans and blood analysis services.

Within the first tower, Helios, residents will also have access to a dedicated amenity offering known as the Sky Private Club.

The upper 15 levels of the building will include private lounges, dining spaces, rooftop amenities and optional private wellness studios integrated within residences.

The Helios tower itself comprises 260 apartments ranging between 60 sqm and 300 sqm, including a collection of penthouses.

That includes a planned two-storey penthouse spanning around 600 sqm with uninterrupted bay views.

The Elysium Fields precinct is being delivered in partnership with Digital Harbour Holdings, a consortium that includes the Liberman family, which controls the development rights across the Docklands site.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370979]

The sales result comes as GURNER™ continues expanding its national development pipeline beyond Victoria.

“We have a strong pipeline across Australia and are now focused on scaling into key markets including New South Wales and Queensland, while continuing to build on our Melbourne base,” Gurner said.

“We currently have more than $3 billion in the market, growing to over $5 billion by October, and expect to materially outperform last year in the 2026 calendar year.”

The result also reflects the continued strength of the upper-end apartment market in Melbourne, particularly for owner-occupier-focused product with large-scale amenity and lifestyle offerings.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=144441]

Record result anchored by the Group’s “utopian” Elysium Fields precinct – defying market headwinds in Docklands.

Joel Robinson

Elysium Fields drive Gurner to $1.65 billion in apartment sales over 2025

National Australia Bank (NAB) will fund <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/palmera-residences-gold-coast-18-garfield-terrace-surfers-paradise-qld-4217">Palmera</a>, a $1 billion, 52-level luxury residential tower being developed by Central Equity in one of the Gold Coast’s most tightly held coastal locations at Northcliffe.

The project, launched recently by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/central-equity">Central Equity</a>, one of Victoria’s largest private residential developers, comes at a time when construction funding for large residential developments has become increasingly competitive as lenders tighten exposure to the sector.

Multiplex has been appointed the builder, and construction is now underway.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108274 project_image_fid=365784]

Since its first project, Central Equity has delivered more than 85 residential developments with a combined end value exceeding $8 billion.

Palmera reflects Central Equity’s growing focus on the Gold Coast luxury apartment market and continues a relationship between Central Equity and NAB that dates back to the late 1980s, when the bank funded one of Melbourne’s earliest inner-city residential towers at a time when high-rise apartment living in the CBD was largely unproven.

“NAB’s funding of Central Equity’s $36 million CBD development in the late 1980’s to the financing of the billion-dollar tower today highlights the long-term relationship between the two organisations in delivering major residential projects” said Central Equity Founder and Chairman Eddie Kutner.

He said NAB’s early support was instrumental in helping establish the company’s development model.

“When we commenced our first residential tower in the late 1980s the concept of funding off-the-plan apartments was still largely untested in Australia,” Kutner said.

“NAB recognised the opportunity early and supported the project when others were uncertain. That relationship has now continued for more than 37 years across many developments.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108274 project_image_fid=365771]

Central Equity was established in 1987 when Melbourne’s CBD and Southbank precinct were still dominated by warehouses and commercial buildings. Fewer than 100 residents lived in Southbank at the time, and large-scale residential development in the inner city was not widely considered.

Recognising changing demographics and lifestyle preferences, the company began developing high-rise residential projects designed to bring permanent residents into the city centre.

Central Equity has provided accommodation for approximately 40,000 residents across Melbourne’s CBD and Southbank, while also incorporating supporting infrastructure including essential lifestyle facilities like retail spaces, childcare facilities and neighbourhood activity centres.

Central Equity has spent many years assembling the Palmera development site on the corner of Garfield Terrace and Frederick Street in Northcliffe, creating a supersite of around 3,300 sqm.

The developer said the Palmera apartment tower reflects its long-term view of the Gold Coast as a growing and increasingly diversified economy.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108274 project_image_fid=365768]

Supported by infrastructure including the light rail network, major road upgrades expanded education, hospital and medical facilities and continued expansion at the Gold Coast Airport with more internation and domestic flights.

Positioned in the tightly held Northcliffe precinct, the 52-level tower will deliver 347 apartments, targeting buyers seeking a high-end coastal lifestyle, from downsizers to interstate investors.

Designed by Marchese Partners with interiors by DBI, Palmera has been conceived as a next-generation residential offering, featuring a collection of oversized apartments, with premium three-bedroom residences offering sweeping northern views stretching from Surfers Paradise through to Burleigh Heads.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=108274]

NAB funds $1 billion Surfers Paradise apartment development, Palmera

Two years after completing one of the newest developments in North Sydney, developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/aqualand-australia">Aqualand</a> is turning its attention to the rapidly evolving St Leonards apartment market.

The developer, which completed AURA by Aqualand on North Sydney's Walker Street, has lodged plans for a 5,918 sqm site at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/33-37-herbert-street-st-leonards-nsw-2065">33-37 Herbert Street, St Leonards,</a> seeking approval for a pair of residential towers rising above a shared podium opposite Royal North Shore Hospital.

The proposal forms part of the broader transformation underway across the St Leonards-Crows Nest precinct, where former industrial and commercial sites are increasingly being redeveloped into high-density mixed-use projects tied to major transport infrastructure.

<img alt="Aqualand" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2cc428cf-fe70-4cac-9cd5-264ad53af62c" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.51.56%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=otKSnHtbjAvAddOnovyXQMgcAwE6DMe1" />

According to the planning documents, the site sits “within the St Leonards–Crows Nest Strategic Centre, identified by the NSW Government as a key area for accommodating future jobs and housing across Sydney.”

The proposal has been designed by fjcstudio, formerly FJMT Studio, and is being progressed through the State Significant Development pathway due to its scale and affordable housing provision.

The scheme would comprise 413 apartments, including 46 affordable housing units, alongside retail and commercial uses fronting Herbert Street. The project would also include communal open space, landscaping, a swimming pool, gymnasium, children’s play areas and podium-level resident amenities.

Planning documents show the development would consist of a part-13, part-39 storey tower form positioned above a four-storey podium.

“The development comprises a unified podium that activates the street interface, and two setback towers to accommodate new housing supply while maintaining an appropriate human scale at ground level,” fjcstudio noted in its Design Report.

The northern and southern towers have been shaped to respond to the surrounding skyline while also limiting overshadowing impacts to nearby public open space, particularly Talus Reserve.

The design report said the differing tower heights were intended to “contribute to a varied skyline while responding to the surrounding built form context and solar access considerations.”

<img alt="Aqualand" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="36da62dc-ff9e-41f2-a7e3-7be38373751c" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.51.45%E2%80%AFAM_0.png?VersionId=Mo6Rp2r.XRLTzIfg_PEEpw8NepDH8UBs" />

The site sits directly opposite Royal North Shore Hospital and within walking distance of both St Leonards Station and the new Crows Nest Metro station.

While the site itself sits just outside the formal Crows Nest Transport Oriented Development boundary, the planning documents repeatedly reference its alignment with the broader TOD objectives reshaping the Lower North Shore.

“The site is located adjacent to St Leonards Station and in close proximity to Crows Nest Metro which is within the Crows Nest Transit Orientated Development Accelerated Precinct which has been identified by the NSW Government to support housing delivery,” the Design Verification Statement noted.

According to fjcstudio, the project has been designed to respond to the broader transition occurring across St Leonards, where increasing residential density is being concentrated around transport infrastructure and employment hubs.

“The broader precinct is undergoing significant change, with a mix of existing mid-rise buildings and newer high-density developments,” the report stated.

“Recent and approved projects indicate a consistent shift toward taller built form, typically organised as tower-and-podium typologies with more active ground levels.”

The proposal includes close to 6,000 sqm of retail and commercial space across the ground floor and podium levels, designed to create a more activated street edge along Herbert Street.

Aqualand’s plans would also introduce a landscaped podium shared between the two towers, with communal open space in the form of a podium rooftop designed to support resident interaction and improve urban greening outcomes. The scheme would also introduce pocket parks at the northern and southern ends of the site, including a landscaped area at the corner of Herbert and Ella streets designed to improve pedestrian amenity and soften the streetscape.

&nbsp;

The proposal is being progressed through the NSW Government’s Housing Delivery Authority pathway, which was introduced to accelerate housing supply across the state. The application was declared State Significant Development in April 2025 following an expression of interest process.

<img alt="Aqualand" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="faf6d97d-2671-454f-b85a-fe1c6a7be608" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.51.49%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=diVd28OBVr5.YV.7prrOz.uAanwwwm7a" />

St Leonards has been particularly active with new developments in recent weeks. Developer SP Setia’s <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-sp-setia-targets-st-leonards-skyline-with-40-storey-tod-tower">plans for a new 42-storey tower</a> recently went on exhibition through the same pathway, while <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-stockland-plans-52-storey-538-apartment-st-leonards-tower">Stockland’s 52-storey tower proposal</a> was also recently unveiled.

Aside from the St Leonards project, which is expected to take around nine months to move through the approvals process ahead of a potential 2027 launch, Aqualand is also preparing to launch Boronia, a new apartment project in Roseville comprising around 111 apartments on Larkin Street.

The developer also has approvals in place for the next stage of the Barangaroo precinct, which will feature new residential, retail, hospitality and community uses, alongside a new metro entry across the five-hectare site.

More than 50 new retail destinations are planned for Central Barangaroo, alongside a 270-metre-long boulevard connecting Hickson Park to Nawi Cove. Together with Harbour Park, more than 50 per cent of the precinct will comprise public open space and parkland.

First look: Aqualand joins St Leonards apartment party

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-5" data-turn="user" data-turn-id="e65dbe94-e3b6-47f7-b62a-9cbb30c9bf79" data-turn-id-container="e65dbe94-e3b6-47f7-b62a-9cbb30c9bf79" dir="auto">Time &amp; Place’s plans to transform the former David Jones factory building in Surry Hills into a mixed-use residential precinct have gone on exhibition through the NSW Government’s In-fill Affordable Housing pathway.</section>

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-6" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:f4d533b7-64a5-413d-86fd-5c99649c2b73-2" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:f4d533b7-64a5-413d-86fd-5c99649c2b73-2" dir="auto">
The Marlborough House proposal, lodged for the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/marlborough-house-47-97-marlborough-street-surry-hills-nsw-2010">47-97 Marlborough Street</a> site, would see the adaptive reuse of the heritage-listed warehouse building alongside the construction of new residential additions and a separate apartment building on the northern portion of the site.

The proposal seeks approval for 172 apartments across three buildings, including 15 per cent affordable housing managed by a community housing provider for at least 15 years from occupation.

<img alt="Marlborough" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="5d1d3c2a-bf13-47d6-a335-7c01102cdee1" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.29.36%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=cjMYrbR.BLUlWH4dar0RVDDo0bG.u2YT" />

Interior view from the Northern Building Penthouse overlooking the park

&nbsp;

The redevelopment is planned for the prominent 3,413 sqm site bounded by Marlborough Street, Goodlet Street and Lansdowne Street, directly opposite Eddie Ward Park and around 200 metres from the Surry Hills light rail stop.

Time &amp; Place acquired the former David Jones building in 2024, marking the first time the property had changed hands in around 50 years.

Designed by Wardle, the proposal centres around the adaptive reuse of the former David Jones factory, originally constructed between 1913 and 1935 in the Inter-War Chicagoesque architectural style.

Wardle noted in its Architectural Design Report that the building “occupies a significant place in the industrial and cultural history of Surry Hills” and at its peak was “the largest department store manufacturing facility in Australia, employing over 800 people and fuelling the growth of Sydney’s fashion and retail industries.”

The practice said the project positions itself “not as an isolated intervention, but as a contributor to the civic, social, and architectural grain of the precinct.”

The proposal would deliver 75 apartments within the retained southern heritage building, 59 apartments within the central addition, and a further 38 apartments within the new northern building fronting Lansdowne Street.

Planning documents show the scheme would comprise a mix of heritage apartments, new-build apartments, townhouses and penthouses.

<img alt="Marlborough" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="57758518-40a3-4b83-958c-d06e96a2cffa" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.29.42%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=VerlX9ST5xgBi8.1_YRsqdWTJeT6ygjs" />Interior View of the Heritage Building Apartment

The development would also include a ground-floor retail tenancy on the corner of Marlborough and Lansdowne streets, rooftop communal open space, a landscaped pedestrian link along the western edge of the site, and basement parking accessed from Lansdowne Street via a car stacker system.

&nbsp;

The scheme emerged from a competitive design process run by Urbis, with Wardle ultimately selected as the winning architect ahead of FJC Studio, TZG, Architectus and Wilkinson Eyre.

The Design Integrity Panel later described several aspects of the Wardle scheme as fundamental to the project, including “the stepped character of the new addition to the north of the site”, the landscaped western pedestrian link, and the “garden arrival” experience separating the original Marlborough House from the heritage addition.

Wardle’s design heavily references the site’s industrial and heritage history, while also responding to the surrounding Surry Hills streetscape.

The Architectural Design Report describes Surry Hills as “a finely grained neighbourhood with beautiful and expressive brickworks throughout the suburb,” with the proposal introducing a material palette intended to sit comfortably alongside the existing warehouse fabric and neighbouring terraces.

The report also outlines the project’s relationship with Eddie Ward Park and the broader landscape context of the area.

“Marlborough House occupies a site of deep cultural memory and the neighbouring Eddie Ward Park is of local ecological significance, where natural systems, topography, and stories have long shaped human experience,” Wardle noted in the report.

The architects said the proposal sought to “rebind built form to Country” through landscape, materiality and the adaptive reuse of the heritage structure.

<img alt="Marlborough House" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="9ae3f2f9-c85f-477a-a6f8-b43f6cb97c41" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.29.53%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=B.qUCLqRvJOR.n9CvYcTpaknIX9LuqKZ" />

The project is also being progressed under the NSW Government’s in-fill affordable housing provisions, allowing developments that include affordable housing to access additional height and floor space incentives.

Under the plans, 2,593 sqm of the project’s floor space would be dedicated to affordable housing, slightly exceeding the required 15 per cent threshold.

In its Design Excellence Strategy, Urbis said the project aimed to “sensitively adapt and enhance the heritage-listed building on site through alterations and additions that preserve its historical significance” while delivering “high-quality market and infill affordable housing development in Surry Hills.”

Time &amp; Place has been one of the most active developers nationally in the last 12 to 24 months. Late last year they completed&nbsp;The Queensbridge in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/southbank-vic-3006">Southbank</a>, a mixed-use tower with 353 apartments and a hotel. They are currently selling Park Modern, 246 apartments near the famous Botanic Gardens in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/south-melbourne-vic-3205">South Melbourne</a>, and have future projects, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-wilmot-173-burke-road-28-hope-street-glen-iris-vic-3146">The Wilmot</a>&nbsp;in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/glen-iris-vic-3146">Glen Iris</a>, the redevelopment of the Northcote Plaza, and another tower in South Melbourne.

The developer broke into Sydney just a few years ago with Two Tides in Manly. They have another project nearby, which is at the ultra-luxury end of the market on&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/buildings/shoreline-manly-beach-89-90-north-steyne-manly">North Steyne</a>, fronting the beach.

It is also continuing to work through the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-time-place-settles-on-design-for-the-chimes-potts-point-redevelopment">redevelopment of The Chimes building</a> on Macleay Street in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/potts-point-nsw-2011">Potts Point</a>, as well as a project on <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/time-place-to-take-on-mosman-apartment-market">Mosman's Redan Street</a>.
</section>

First look: Time & Place unveils Marlborough House redevelopment designs for former David Jones warehouse in Surry Hills

The residential transformation of St Kilda Road is set to continue into with more new apartment plans for the sought-after boulevard.

Wing Tai Asia has lodged plans for a major residential tower at 464-466 St Kilda Road, replacing the former VACC House with an 18-storey mixed-use development designed around a retained heritage podium and a sculpted contemporary tower.

The proposal, prepared under Victoria’s Significant Residential Development with Affordable Housing pathway, would deliver 325 apartments and ground-floor retail across the prominent 4,653 sqm boulevard site in Melbourne’s St Kilda Road North Precinct.

The project centres on the adaptive reuse of the site’s heritage-listed VACC Building, an eight-storey office designed by Bernard Evans that has occupied the address for decades. Planning documents state the development would involve “carefully dismantling and conserving off-site the original metal fabric of the podium visible from St Kilda Road,” before reinstating it as the defining frontage of the new scheme.

Above the restored podium, Wing Tai is proposing a curvilinear residential tower. The scheme includes 172 one-bedroom apartments, 63 two-bedroom apartments, 66 three-bedroom apartments, and 24 four-bedroom apartments, alongside two ground-floor food and beverage tenancies fronting St Kilda Road.

The tower has been designed with substantial articulation and variable setbacks to minimise perceived bulk and maintain view corridors along the boulevard. Urbis, which prepared the planning report, said the design “has been significantly articulated through a curvilinear design” with “an interplay with materials, façade expression and depth” to create visual separation and visual interest.

The proposal also includes 254 basement car spaces, landscaped pedestrian links connecting St Kilda Road and Queens Lane, and a biophilic landscape strategy featuring canopy trees, raised planters, cascading greenery and a glass oculus pool overlooking the eastern frontage.

Planning documents confirm the $270.1 million development will contribute 3 per cent of project costs to the Social Housing Growth Fund as part of the application process.

Wing Tai acquired the St Kilda Road property in 2018 alongside Abacus Property Group for $95.38 million, before later consolidating ownership of the site. The property previously served as the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce headquarters for around 60 years.

The transformation of the St Kilda Rd boulevard is already beginning to materialise, with a number of high-profile projects recently completed, launched, or approaching launch as developers continue to back the long-term appeal of the precinct.

Among the most notable recent completions is Louise by Samuel Property Group, just off the strip on Queens Lane, the same pocket Hirsch &amp; Faigen recently launched The Queensbury. Mirvac is too on the same street with The Albertine, which is approaching completion.

Dexus recently secured approval for its slice of St Kilda Road, while Gurner also has approved plans for the precinct.

Wing Tai unveils 325-apartment St Kilda Road tower on former VACC House site

<html><body>
The factor overlooked in the “debate” about tax benefits for property buyers is that the amount taken from real estate by government is considerably more than the amount given back.
Real estate is the cash cow of choice for all three levels of government – including through stamp duty, land tax, capital gains tax, rates and infrastructure charges.
The appeal for governments of taxing real estate transactions and ownership is so great that we’ve just seen a government with a multi-billion dollar budget surplus (thanks to revenue from a rising real estate market) introduce a new tax on real estate construction to help fund its attempt to buy the upcoming state election.
The Victoria state government is able to spend big in an election year thanks to real estate and the increased tax take via stamp duty on increased sales levels and land tax helped by rising property values.
<blockquote>
Abolishing negative gearing would ultimately cost government more than it saves, while resulting in a dramatic escalation in residential rents, especially in the major cities.
</blockquote>
The amount of stamp duty ripped out of each real estate transaction by state governments is so obscene ($27,000 on the average purchase in Sydney) that it’s a wonder citizens aren’t marching in the street – particularly as we were told the introduction of a GST would result in the elimination of stamp duty.
But governments never eliminate existing taxes. They only introduce new ones – even governments like that of Tony Abbott who promised repeatedly before the federal election he would never do so.
Land tax is an example of an impost that was introduced for a specific purpose and then became entrenched as a convenient revenue source. It was introduced in the nineteenth century specifically to break up large land holdings, which were considered a problem at the time, and remains a blight on the property landscape 130 years later.
So we can be sure that the new tax in Victoria – which has started life as a tax on the construction of buildings costing more than $1 million to fund a new bureaucracy, the Metropolitan Planning Authority – will still be around a century from now, but with much broader application that in 2014.
The Property Council of Australia’s executive director in Victoria, Jennifer Cunich, says: “A government projecting multi-billion dollar surpluses shouldn’t be introducing new property taxes.”
Well of course they shouldn’t, but they can’t help themselves. It’s like telling a rodent that’s been raiding your kitchen every night that it can’t eat the chocolate mud cake you left sitting on the bench.
The total tax take from real estate is around $33 billion per year. The cost to the federal budget from negative gearing is around $4 billion a year.
Abolishing negative gearing would ultimately cost government more than it saves, while resulting in a dramatic escalation in residential rents, especially in the major cities. There would only be losers from such a move.
You can contact Terry via  <a href="https://mailto:ryder@hotspotting.com.au" target="_blank">email</a> or on <a href="https://www.twitter.com/hotspotting" target="_blank">Twitter</a>.
</body></html>

terryryder-YECXbqmri2

Governments take out a lot more through property tax than is given back

<html><body>
A new levy on planning permit application fees will fund the Victorian government’s $62.8 million commitment to the Metropolitan Planning Authority (MPA).
The Plan Melbourne strategy was drafted by the Coalition government in October last year. Plan Melbourne’s initiatives include accelerated investment in metropolitan hubs and outer growth areas, strategies to facilitate the supply of affordable housing and transport infrastructure investment.
The Victorian government will provide $51.6 million over four years to the Metropolitan Planning Authority to implement Plan Melbourne, which has not yet been finalised.
An additional $11.2 million will be provided over four years to fund short term actions including the delivery of major urban renewal sites and a local “pocket park” fund. The government has also committed cash for a “20 minute neighbourhood” fund. The <a href="https://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2013/12/11/the-20-minute-neighbourhood-does-it-make-sense/" target="_blank">20 minute neighbourhood strategy</a> aims to see retail, job, education and recreation precincts within 20 minutes travel time of every home, with a strong focus on non-car transport.
The spending commitment will be funded by new planning permit application fee tax for projects worth more than $1 million. The levy is forecast to raise an estimated $17.1 million per year. To be introduced on 1 July 2015, it is estimated that the levy will be charged to approximately 6% of all planning permits.
According to Minister for Planning Matthew Guy, the increased levy costs would be offset by the benefits of the new planning system.
“Developers face millions in land holding costs every week across Victoria. A fully funded MPA will reduce overall development costs over time by bringing land to market earlier,” said Guy, who claimed that the funding will help drive job creation and investment opportunities.
“Plan Melbourne supports the Coalition government’s commitment to building a stronger Victorian economy by working with development industry to create more jobs right across the State,” said Guy.
“This funding is an important boost for jobs and productivity, by helping the growth and development of significant employment hubs across the metropolitan area and driving the expansion of the central city.
“It will kick start the major employment clusters at Monash, Latrobe, Sunshine and Fishermans Bend, urban renewal a framework for expanding the central city and a metropolitan-wide open space strategy, to promote growth and investment, further increasing their attraction as great mixed use places for businesses, workers and new residents.
“These job centres are a fundamental principle of Plan Melbourne, our new plan for the city, and they mean more jobs and services in Melbourne’s middle and outer suburbs,” he said.
Planning will also begin for urban renewal areas at Cremorne and Collingwood, and along railway corridors from Huntingdale to Dandenong, Brunswick to Batman, and North Richmond to Victoria Park, according to Guy.
“Unlocking land opportunities across Victoria and expanding our central city and urban renewal areas will not only deliver more jobs, more housing and transport options, it will be a major boost for the State’s productivity and economic growth over the next 50 years,” said Guy.
The Victorian branch of the Property Council of Australia has criticised the Victorian government's new property tax despite supporting the increased infrastructure investment, with deputy executive director Asher Judah claiming that the government has an "unhealthy addiction to property taxation."
"The Property Council will vigorously oppose the introduction of a new $17.1 million tax on apartment buyers to fund the activities of the new Metropolitan Planning Authoirty," said Judah.
"While we welcome the increase in funding for the MPA, a government projecting multi-billion surpluses shouldn’t be introducing new property taxes. This action combined with the 2013 expansion of the Congestion Levy exposes a Government with an unhealthy addiction to property taxation.
"Property owners across Victoria will also be uneasy about the government’s plans for new taxes via asset value capture mechanisms (AVC). AVC already exists in the form of land tax and local council rates. Any move by the government to triple tax property value uplift will face fierce opposition from the industry.
"Over the next four years, tax revenue sourced from property will increase by over $2.3 billion. Increases in Stamp Duty, Land Tax, Fire Services Property Levy and the Car Parking Levy each reflect a growing and unhealthy addiction to property taxation."
</body></html>

jrichardson-uRX5hFdKfN

Victoria’s budget: New tax for $1 million property projects to fund Plan Melbourne scheme

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) are the fastest growing sector of the superannuation industry, <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Super-statistics/SMSF/Self-managed-super-funds--A-statistical-overview-2010-11/?page=4#Growth_of_SMSF_sector" target="_blank">spiking</a> by 33% between 2008 and 2012, putting them in the sights of both the super industry and the Australian Taxation Office.
From July the ATO will be able to levy individual <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Super/Self-managed-super-funds/In-detail/News/SMSF-News/SMSF-News---edition-29/?page=2#Be_prepared_for_new_penalty_powers">fines</a> of up to A$10,200 on fund trustees who breach superannuation law, a step up from the previous environment where breaches could only result in making a fund “non-compliant”, or a referral to a court for penalties.
But many superannuation industry representatives want more regulation of self-managed super funds, with calls to the current financial system inquiry ranging from <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.financialstandard.com.au/news/view/39283887" target="_blank">regulating the funds as a financial product</a>, to <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.financialstandard.com.au/news/view/39104282">forcing</a> fund trustees to use a financial planner when the fund borrows money to invest in property.
The current benefits of SMSFs
SMSFs are perceived as giving tax advantages to their members, but they are taxed at the same (concessional) rates as other superannuation funds, and must comply with similar regulatory requirements: the main technical differences are in the administration of the fund, and the control that the member/trustees of an SMSF have in devising an investment strategy. The tax advantages that members of SMSFs do obtain are largely through the characteristics of the structure and the profile of SMSF members.
However there are some regulations that apply specifically to SMSFs; and others that in practice are more relevant to SMSFs than other types of superannuation funds.
A SMSF is a superannuation fund that has fewer than five members, and these members are also the <a href="https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/sia1993473/s17a" target="_blank">trustees</a> of the fund. This gives the member/trustees the flexibility to devise and control an investment strategy that meets the needs of its members, as required.
One of the key reasons that many members of SMSFs give for choosing an SMSF as an investment vehicle is the level of control it gives them over their investments. However this places a high level of obligation on the trustees, and also exposes the members of the SMSF to risk which the trustees must manage.
SMSFs are not eligible for financial assistance where the fund has suffered loss due to fraud or theft, and do not have access to the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal to resolve disputes.
Funds must already pass the sole purpose test
All superannuation funds are required to meet the sole purpose test, which requires that the purpose of a superannuation fund must be to provide benefits to members in retirement and, in the event of their death, their dependants.
The regulatory framework for all superannuation funds is designed to support this core purpose, but SMSFs are particularly impacted: for example the law prohibits a fund from intentionally acquiring an asset from a related party, or loans or other financial assistance to the members of a fund.
But there is room for bias…
There are long-standing exclusions from the non arms-length rules that allow a SMSF to pay market value to purchase business real property from or lease it to a related party. This allows a person establishing a SMSF to transfer business premises to their superannuation fund and lease the property back from the superannuation fund, a strategy frequently used by business owners to provide an income stream to the fund.
One of the issues around SMSFs is ensuring that the trustee/members properly recognise the separation of superannuation assets from assets that are personally owned and controlled, and the regulations are designed to preserve that separation of assets. For example, from 2011 investments by SMSFs in certain collectibles, including artwork, wine, antiques or memorabilia were subject to regulations regarding these investments that regulate the use of certain collectible assets by members so that they cannot be used by or stored in a member’s residence.
The other exclusion that has gained much coverage during the recent property boom is the rule which overrides the prohibition on borrowing. In principle the trustees of a superannuation fund are not permitted to place members’ retirement funds at risk, thus the power to borrow is restricted. This restriction was eased in 2010 to allow borrowing by any regulated superannuation fund where the borrowing is linked to a specific asset. The provision is particularly relevant to SMSFs due to the structures used to comply with the requirements and the relative scale of the funds held by SMSFs.
This is where the flexibility and investment strategies of SMSFs become relevant. If the members have a bias toward investing in real property, then they may devise an investment strategy incorporating borrowings; whereas other investments with lower capital requirements, such as property trusts, could be funded without borrowing.
However the biggest tax advantage that SMSF members obtain flows from the profile of the SMSF investor. Members of SMSFs typically have <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Super-statistics/SMSF/Self-managed-super-funds--A-statistical-overview-2010-11/?page=39#Table_11__SMSF_member_age__balances_and_taxable_income__contrasting_with_non_SMSF_member_taxable_income" target="_blank">higher income levels</a> than members of other superannuation funds across all age groups, and their account balances are correspondingly higher. Further, the nature of the fund makes it attractive to investors who take an active interest in their superannuation strategies, despite the risks.
In the meantime the rapid growth in the sector, combined with the level of control that trustees have over the assets of the fund, raises the risk that trustees will make poor decisions: either through not being sufficiently informed in respect of an investment or through pushing the boundaries of the SMSF structure.
There seems to be something inconsistent in a system that mandates savings but then allows those savings to be put at risk through insufficient regulation. It is time for the sector to be examined more closely.
HELEN HODGSON is senior lecturer at the School of Tax and Business Law at the <a href="https://www.unsw.edu.au/" target="_blank">University of New South Wales</a>.
Helen is a member of SPAA.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

hhodgson-WTYf8w7F7q

Taxing times for self-managed super funds

<html><body>
The proposed car park tax in Adelaide has seen an opposing petition signed by 10,000 South Australians to halt the introduction, with fears it will be carried by those who shop, work and reside in the city.
However, they have also been joined by senior politicians and businesses, according to the Property Council of Australia (SA Division) executive director, Richard Angove.
Family First’s Robert Brokenshire and Dennis Hood are planning to block the Transport Development Levy.
“Public opposition to the tax has held sway with senior politicians and divided Parliament's Upper House,” said Angove.
The parking tax in Adelaide’s starting rate would be set at $750 per annum – more than triple the rate in Sydney. Angove warns that there is no assurance it won’t also ripple out towards the suburbs, as Sydney’s had. He also noted that since 1992, Sydney’s car park tax has increased eight times.
“South Australians have been staunch in their objection to this discriminatory, inefficient tax,” he said.
“The cost of the Adelaide car park tax, like Melbourne, like Sydney, will be borne by those who choose to shop, work and enjoy the activities in our city.
“The Property Council is urging politicians to oppose this tax on productivity, on business and on central city vibrancy,” Richard Angove said.
</body></html>

jduke-EHk3XBmHkn

Adelaide’s proposed car park tax faces public, business and political opposition

<html><body>
Australians earned more than $33.5 billion in rental income on investment properties and claimed more than $41.5 billion in tax deductions against those properties in the 2011-12 tax year, according to the latest Australian Taxation Office figures.
The total of $8 billion in net losses claimed in the 2011-12 financial year was a slight increase on the $7.9 billion claimed in 2010-11, ATO figures taken from rental property schedules show.
Investment property owners in NSW earned the largest total rental income, bringing in almost $11.6 billion in rent combined, followed by investors in Queensland property, who earned more than $7.9 billion in total rent.
After deductions, however, NSW investors claimed an average loss of just $1,484 on average, while Queensland investors claimed average investment losses of $4,860.
The data is based on rental property schedules so it does not reflect the total number of properties or individuals with a rental property as the same property can have more than one owners and an individual can own more than one rental property.
Interest on loans accounted for the biggest value of deductions by far, with a total of over $24.1 billion in interest expenses claimed in the 2011-12 tax year. That was up from $22.3 billion in the previous tax year.
Council rates were the next biggest ticket item for deductions, although the total claimed in 2011-12 was only $2.36 billion.
Capital works deductions, repairs and maintenance, plant depreciation, and property agent fees and commissions were other major categories of tax deduction.
The figures have fuelled further debate about the costs of negative gearing and the merits of allowing investors to claim sizeable deductions against their rental properties.
The National Commission of Audit report, released last week, did not recommend negative gearing be removed and the government is not expected to tamper with negative gearing in next week’s Federal Budget.
However, Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey has previously indicated that negative gearing would be addressed in a white paper on taxation, which would also consider changes to income tax and the GST.
</body></html>

zfielding-GvX3Uq9KTa

Australians claimed $8 billion in net losses on investment properties in 2011-12 financial year

<html><body>
Land tax, lawn mowing and legal fees sit among the lengthy list issued by the ATO of landlord rental expense claims.
Australia's 1,895,775 property investors own 2.71 million rental investment properties, according to the latest figures from the ATO.
NSW leads with 812,000 properties, followed next by Queensland and Victoria. 
<img src="/images/2014/05/01/invesotr-may-1-one.jpg" alt="" style="line-height: 1.3em;">
The statistics for the 2011–12 income year show the extent of rental property expense claims on the properties.
Some 2 million plus properties were subject to claims by landlords for interest on loans, averaging an $11,500 claim.
The data shows council rates is the most claimed expense with 2.51 million claims from the 2.71 million rental property pool. The typical council rates were $937 a year.
Water charges averaged $530 a year, the second most utilised expense with 2.17 million properties.
The lowest number of landlord claims on the 19 expenses check list was for lawyers which was utilised by 69,590 properties at a $620 average expense. Pest control was also not that utilised, in second last place, with a typical $210 average cost.
Some 582,000 properties - 21% - were hit by land tax with the average expense being $1,270 a year.
Some 12% of tenancies were requiring advertising for new tenants at a typical cost of $230.
The highly scrutinised travel expense refund was claimed for 804,000 properties - around 30% of properties - with a typical $480 travel claim.
(Claim type                                  no of properties           $ total landlord claims)
<table style="width: 460px;" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Council Rates
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
2,517,370
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$2,360,548,979
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Water charges
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
2,170,135
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$1,155,573,028
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Interest on loan(s)
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
2,087,570
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$24,102,668,712
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Insurance                                      
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
2,086,740
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$1,062,276,520
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Repairs and maintenance
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
2,020,540
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$2,073,635,655
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Property Agent fees/commission
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
1,855,500
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$2,098,084,871
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Plant depreciation
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
1,780,500
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$2,028,038,155
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Sundry rental expenses
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
1,489,575
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$894,509,695 
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Capital works deduction
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
1,054,175
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$2,139,156,047
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Stationary, telephone and postage
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
935,455
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$59,486,951
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Body Corporate Fees
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
852,805
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$1,667,073,259
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Travel expenses
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
804,925
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$388,233,963
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Borrowing Expenses
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
585,395
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$242,502,146
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Land tax
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
582,300
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$739,311,332
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Gardening/lawn mowing
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
409,145
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$165,738,793
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Cleaning Expenses
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
342,015
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$192,405,834
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Advertising for Tenants
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
331,470  
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$76,681,158
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Pest Control
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
269,325
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$57,307,475 
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Legal Fees
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
69,590
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
$43,177,549
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="209">
Total Net rental income
</td>
<td valign="top" width="137">
2,696,785
</td>
<td valign="top" width="144">
-$8,034,540,412
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

The top 19 rental expenses that landlords claim from the ATO

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
If you own a rental property you could be one of the 110,000 investors who will be getting a letter from the Australian Tax Office (ATO) about your tax liabilities.
The ATO has announced that it will be writing to a sample of rental property owners about their tax obligations and entitlements, after new data mining technology identified that property investors may have submitted incorrect tax claims in prior tax years.
The ATO are targeting aggressive expense deductions and particularly the estimated two thirds of property investors who are negatively gearing their investments and claiming losses on their investment properties to offset their tax bills.
If you fall into this category, the following tips might be worth considering when you are completing your tax return.
What’s the status of the property?
Firstly, it’s vital that, if you’re claiming deductions, your rental property needs to be rented or available for rent. If a property is not available for rent, then expenses incurred by a taxpayer are not deductible.
This would seem an obvious point, but it’s worth remembering particularly if your property – as a holiday home or other part-time accommodation - is not rented out across the entire year. If that’s the case, remember that you can only claim deductions for the period that the property is rented or available for rent.
Who’s the owner?
It’s also worth remembering that the legal ownership of the rental property determines the proportion of ownership and entitlement to deductions on your individual tax return. This means that if a husband and wife purchase a rental property in joint names, then their levels of ownership will be 50/50 unless stated otherwise in the purchase contract.
Categories of deduction
Generally, the ATO specifies three types of rental property expenses:
<ul>
<li>Those which you cannot claim a deduction. 
</li>
<li>Those which can be claimed as an immediate deduction in the financial year in which they were incurred. 
</li>
<li>Those that can be deducted over a number of years.</li>
</ul>
Capital or personal expenses aren’t deductible, although you may be able to claim decline in value deductions (depreciation) or capital works deductions, or include certain capital costs in the cost base of the property for capital gains tax purposes. Other examples across each of the three categories are outlined in the sidebar alongside this article.
The picture also gets a bit more complicated when other considerations are factored in. For example, if you take out a loan to purchase a rental property, you can claim the interest charged on that loan as a deduction. However, if the loan is taken out for more than one purpose, you can only claim the interest relevant to the amount borrowed for the rental property. Depending on your circumstances, there may also be potential to claim prepaid interest to maximise your deductions.
Another factor which often confuses owners is the area of repairs and improvements to the property. Spending on repairs and maintenance is tax deductible, but you can’t immediately deduct costs on improvements and total replacements of items, as these are considered capital in nature. However, you might be able to claim depreciation and capital allowances on some improvements.
And, if you’re looking to fix something straight after buying the property, remember that you cannot claim initial repair costs for deterioration and damage already there when you bought the property until at least 12 months after purchase
You should consider getting a quantity surveyor’s depreciation report to ensure you can claim the maximum depreciation and capital allowances deductions. A specialist quantity surveyor can visit your property and prepare a depreciation report that will cover the actual building and the items within it (such as air-conditioner, stove, hot water service, etc).
It’s also worth consulting your accountant before you leap into the property investment space. Given the issues outlined above, tax time can be complex for property investors. When it comes to completing your tax return, working with your accountant to get it right can save a great deal of paperwork – and cost – down the track.
Daniel Deutsch is a partner at <a href="https://www.marinaccountants.com.au/" target="_blank">Marin Accountants</a>, a firm specialising in advice for individuals, investors and family businesses. 
</body></html>

jake-cSmGT7VXVf

Rental properties – keeping deductions working for you

<html><body>
Residents in the Sydney suburb of Mosman paid the most income tax in 2011-12, according to <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Tax-statistics/Taxation-statistics-2011-12/" target="_blank">data released by the Australian Tax Office</a> today.
The wealthy suburb topped the ATO’s list of postcodes that paid the highest level of <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/legal/politics/41685-debt-levy-on-income-tax-would-hit-small-business-the-hardest" target="_blank">income tax</a>, with a tax bill of close to $874 million. According to the data, 15,300 people in Mosman and Spit Junction paid tax in 2011-12, with a mean taxable income of $164,484.
Other suburbs to record high tax bills include Mackay in north Queensland’s, where residents paid $757 million in 2011-2012, and the affluent Melbourne suburb of Brighton, where locals paid taxes worth $569 million.
At the other end of the scale, the 90 taxpayers in the Gippsland towns of Baw Baw and Icy Creek recorded a tax bill of just $485,495.
According to the data, the Queensland town of Bundaberg is home to the most number of welfare recipients, with locals receiving $15 million in Centrelink payments during the period, while Toowoomba is home to the largest number of pension recipients.
Professor Chris Evans from the Australian School of Business at the University of New South Wales toldSmartCompany the results are “not at all surprising”.
“These suburbs record the highest level of tax because they generate the highest levels of income, and disproportionately so,” said Evans, who said these locations also have high levels of capital.
Evans said that income inequality has been steadily increasing in Australia, with the rich getting richer. The same suburbs and cities have been topping these lists for a long time and the income tax system “is not as progressive as it once was”, he said.
“There has been no spreading of wealth in Australia and, in fact, there has been a concentration,” he said.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/" target="_blank">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

ekeating-PWvazjYE25

Which suburbs and towns pay the most tax? 

<html><body>
State government taxes on property decreased by $470 million (2%) to $20,335 million from 2010–11 to 2011–12, according to the latest ABS data.
It was mainly due to a decrease in stamp duties on conveyances of $572 million (5%) and a $74 million (23%) decrease in other stamp duties.
Local government taxation revenue increased $760 million (6%) from $12,449 million in 2010–11 to $13,209 million in 2011–12. Taxes on property are the sole source of taxation revenue for local governments.
Taxes on income increased $26,310 million (13%) while taxes on provisions of goods and services increased $2,172 million (2%). Taxes on income represented 59% of total taxation revenue for all levels of government and taxes on provision of goods and services, including the goods and services tax (GST) represented 24%.
Photo courtesy of Flickr/Creative Commons. 
</body></html>

State government property tax revenue drops 

<html><body>
Business groups have hit out against the federal government’s so called “debt levy”, saying a potential increase in personal income tax in next month’s budget would unfairly hit small businesses.
<a href="https://www.afr.com/p/national/business_says_no_to_deficit_tax_aA1PXsBY1lVZrKsP834C9I" target="_blank">Fairfax reports</a> Prime Minister Tony Abbott has not ruled out a temporary increase to income tax to address the current budget deficit and a senior source has said that the levy is “on the table”.
The speculation comes as Abbott and Treasurer Joe Hockey continue their efforts to <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/legal/politics/41665-hockey-s-budget-roadmap-industry-assistance-age-pension-and-welfare-payments-on-treasurer-s-hit-list" target="_blank">soften the public reaction to the budget</a>. This year’s budget is expected to outline ambitious plans to dramatically reduce government spending in a bid to find a way back to surplus in the next 10 years.
Head of policy at CPA Australia, Paul Drum, told SmartCompany that “it should not be forgotten that the majority of businesses are unincorporated” and that “lifting income tax rates, even on a one-off basis, will hit small business hard and may act as a disincentive for consumer spending and business investment.”
Australian Chamber of Commerce chief operating officer John Osborn told Fairfax an increase in personal income tax would be inconsistent with the government’s plans to offer tax relief to businesses through the scrapping of the mining and carbon taxes and cutting company tax.
“This would be unfair and inconsistent for small business,” said Osborn. “Any income tax [increase] would be an unwelcome surprise from a new government that promised no new taxes and no surprises before the election.”
Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox also slammed the proposal, saying a tax increase would have a negative effect on private sector demand, which is already feeling the effects of below-trend economic growth and flat labour market conditions.
“Raising income tax rates inflects a heavy excess burden on the working of the economy and is likely to do more harm than good,” said Willox.
However, Drum said “speculating on hypothetical tax adjustments, in isolation, is very difficult and may not be helpful”.
“This pre-budget period, with all the leaks and unconfirmed initiatives – from <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/legal/politics/41533-are-you-ready-to-work-until-you-re-70-hockey-flags-plans-to-raise-retirement-age" target="_blank">pensions</a> to health co-payments to the ABC and CSIRO – is wearing us all down. The idea of a budget is that all measures are taken together [and] that’s what we need to see,” he said.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.SmartCompany.com.au">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

tax

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

tax