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.

Joel Robinson

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

Malaysian developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/s-p-setia">SP Setia</a> is the latest to jump into St Leonards booming Transport Oriented Development precinct.

The developer, which has previously delivered Sapphire by the Gardens apartment development in Melbourne, identified the Atchison Street site in 2023. It filed a Scoping Report around 12 months ago, and now has revealed the designs for the new&nbsp;40-storey mixed-use tower.

The State Significant Development Application covers <a href="https://next-portal.urban.com.au/projects/14650/summary">20-22 Atchison Street</a>, a 1,374 sqm site positioned between St Leonards Station and the new Crows Nest Metro station.

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cox-architecture">COX Architecture</a>, the project would deliver 181 apartments, above a four-storey commercial podium, five basement levels, and new public domain works along Mitchell Street. The apartment mix comprises 35 one-bedroom apartments, 39 one-bedroom-plus-study apartments, 85 two-bedroom apartments, and 22 three-bedroom residences.

The proposal has been lodged as a shop-top housing development under the NSW Government’s TOD planning pathway, which allows increased density around key transport infrastructure. The site sits within the recently rezoned Crows Nest Accelerated TOD Precinct.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b799673d-48e2-46b0-801a-0e33a9330100" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/atchinson%20site.png?VersionId=dPh0UfwfaHpbFL1R7H1cbZNbIW0CHbCC" />

SP Setia acquired the Atchison Street site as part of its continued expansion into the Australian apartment market. In comments made to City &amp; Country (The Edge Malaysia) in 2023, SP Setia President and CEO Datuk Choong Kai Wai described the acquisition as “a strategic move” aligned with the group’s post-pandemic market recovery strategy.

“Our target for this exceptional development is local and overseas buyers, including first-home buyers, downsizers and investors,” Choong said.

The tower has been designed as a slender vertical form rising from a mixed-use podium, with COX Architecture positioning the development as a response to the evolving St Leonards and Crows Nest skyline.

“The purpose of the project is to facilitate the delivery of high-quality housing at a strategically located site and deliver a built tower outcome that is consistent with the desired future character of St Leonards and aligns with the TOD controls,” the design report stated.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b1a85eee-76f7-436c-a6da-73ba827b9b13" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/atchinson%20entry.png?VersionId=dA9jHGPMcm.dDbwk4QfxqWiY5bfh3UVt" />

The podium would incorporate retail uses fronting Atchison Street, commercial tenancies, landscaped communal areas, and pedestrian improvements along Mitchell Street. Vehicle access and loading would be consolidated via Atchison Lane.

Residents would have access to more than 665 sqm of communal indoor and outdoor spaces, while the development proposes 96 parking spaces across five basement levels.

The proposal also includes a commitment for 10 per cent of residential floor space to be allocated toward affordable housing through a monetary contribution.

COX said the tower form responds directly to the emerging high-density character of the precinct while seeking to maximise solar access, cross ventilation, and outlook from apartments.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2163f85c-f63b-4be3-aafa-f8763976cec5" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Article%20Feature%20Image%20%28Grid%29_5.png?VersionId=WiAmtIKJ6.ZQ41EtYEQ1fol7AeorKBlL" />

“The building is orientated towards north,” the Apartment Design Guide compliance report noted, adding that the tower’s slim form was driven by the constrained inner-urban site dimensions.

The design also incorporates landscaped setbacks and communal open space at podium level, intended to soften the interface with surrounding streets and improve pedestrian amenity.

The project adds to a growing wave of redevelopment proposals reshaping St Leonards and Crows Nest following the opening of the Sydney Metro City line and the NSW Government’s push for higher-density housing around major transport nodes.

Last week Stockland filed plans just down the road. They want to build a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/601-pacific-highway-st-leonards-nsw-2065">52-storey tower on Pacific Highway</a>.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-stockland-plans-52-storey-538-apartment-st-leonards-tower">First look: Stockland plans 52-storey, 538-apartment St Leonards tower&nbsp;</a>

First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/urban-property-group">Urban Property Group</a> has revealed plans for a new mixed-use tower at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham, advancing a proposal that would reshape the southern gateway to Newcastle’s city centre with one of the city’s tallest residential buildings.

The State Significant Development proposal, now on exhibition, seeks approval for a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/bowline-10-dangar-street-wickham-nsw-2293">43-storey tower</a> immediately adjacent to the Newcastle Interchange. The project would deliver around 200 apartments, including 42 affordable housing dwellings, alongside 99 co-living units, a 171-room hotel, retail space, and new public domain integrated through the site.

The scheme marks a significant escalation of plans previously approved for the site. Urban Property Group took over the prominent 2,904 sqm parcel, where excavation and demolition had already commenced under an earlier consent for a 14-storey mixed-use development.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="58a96dd9-407f-4d20-86b4-94e4bfeef74b" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20podium.png?VersionId=LGlf08pdFGAZDzvx_CXC4XakHNZRuEE0" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/sjb-architects">SJB</a>, the tower has been conceived as a landmark transit-oriented development anchored to the Newcastle Interchange precinct. The proposal includes 245 build-to-sell apartments across a mix of one, two, and three-bedroom residences, as well as two penthouses. Fifteen apartments and one operational unit are earmarked for NDIS housing. The co-living component would add a further 99 units, while the podium would accommodate retail uses and hotel facilities.

SJB said the site presents “a valuable opportunity to anchor the precinct by setting the standard for design, active ground planes and character at the key southern gateway.”

The architecture responds directly to the site’s position beside major transport infrastructure and within one of Newcastle’s fastest-evolving urban renewal precincts. The tower form sits above a sculpted podium designed to frame new public spaces, including a through-site pedestrian link connecting Station Street to Hannell Street, landscaped plazas, and activated retail edges.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a7bd6ff0-f7db-4ce8-a6dc-ea56e72c6149" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20lanne.png?VersionId=xzf39VADyhj7zBQY2I9fx9vI62u2tuSb" />

The design report describes the project as part of the broader transition of Wickham into “a vibrant, high-quality mixed-use urban precinct” that leverages proximity to the station, open space, and regional connectivity.

A detailed public art strategy has also been prepared for the development. The strategy positions the project as “a transit-oriented development of state significance at the gateway to Newcastle’s city centre” and outlines a series of integrated artworks responding to Newcastle’s industrial and transport heritage.

Creative Road’s curatorial framework for the project, titled Unveil, draws on “stratified surfaces, carved volumes, and light-filled apertures” while referencing Newcastle’s transformation from an industrial city into a contemporary education and technology hub.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="77a882bb-14b1-4d28-99ff-9438e39508c0" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20site.png?VersionId=cevgo_vN0eKPK78P8YcEu3mKPLkpFqE7" />

The proposal is being advanced through the NSW Housing Delivery Authority pathway after being declared State Significant Development in June 2025. The accompanying scoping report states the development aims to “maximise the site’s proximity to the Newcastle Interchange by delivering transit-oriented development” while increasing housing supply and affordable housing provision within the Newcastle LGA.

Urban Property Group’s plans align with the long-term strategic vision established under the Wickham Master Plan, which identified the interchange precinct as suitable for substantial uplift in height and density. The current proposal would significantly intensify that vision, positioning the tower among the tallest developments proposed for Newcastle.

The site sits immediately north of the Newcastle Interchange, bounded by Dangar Street, Hannell Street, and Charles Street. It is surrounded by a rapidly growing cluster of residential towers and mixed-use projects that have emerged following the completion of the light rail and transport interchange.

First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s latest tower at Wickham interchange

Bottega House has completed settlement of a landmark riverfront site in Macquarie Street, St Lucia, representing its first major Brisbane development.&nbsp;

Positioned on the banks of the Brisbane River, the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/180-macquarie-street-st-lucia-qld-4067">premium site at 180 Macquarie Street</a> features uninterrupted river frontage in one of Brisbane’s most tightly held residential precincts.&nbsp;

The proposed development, currently under assessment with Brisbane City Council, has been designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/plus-studio">Plus Studio</a> with interiors by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/interior-designers/mim-design">Mim Design</a> and will deliver a boutique collection of premium residences positioned specifically for owner occupiers and downsizers.&nbsp;

The residences are set to redefine luxury apartment living in the area, with a focus on architectural quality, refined finishes, landscape integration and elevated amenities including curated wellness facilities, resort-style pools and recreation spaces rarely seen in the local market.&nbsp;

Exclusive sales for the project will be led by Keenan &amp; Byrne, ahead of an anticipated launch later this year.&nbsp;

Bottega House Managing Director Nick Malloch said the project reflects the group’s ambition to deliver a highly curated residential offering within one of Brisbane’s most tightly held precincts.&nbsp;

“This is an incredibly rare riverfront opportunity and one we have approached with a long-term perspective,” Malloch said.&nbsp;

“Our vision from the outset was to create a boutique collection of residences that feel more like private homes than traditional apartments, with generous proportions, refined finishes and exceptional amenity throughout."

Malloch says there is a&nbsp;lack of premium owner-occupier stock of this quality in the market, particularly for downsizers wanting space, privacy and a true lifestyle offering without compromise.&nbsp;

"Demand is expected to be strong given the scarcity of premium riverfront opportunities of this nature within Brisbane’s inner-west."&nbsp;

Bottega House secures landmark riverfront site in St Lucia 

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-6" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-2" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-2" dir="auto">
<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-2" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:5a5ab36c-8dd3-454c-b456-c501f22f0eb4-0" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:5a5ab36c-8dd3-454c-b456-c501f22f0eb4-0" dir="auto">
The arrival of the first piling rig officially marks the commencement of construction at SIERA’s new beachside apartment development, Exhale, in Northcliffe.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/exhale-surfers-paradise-8-enderley-avenue-surfers-paradise-qld-4217">Exhale</a>, a glass-encased tower featuring 54 large-scale apartments at 8 Enderley Avenue, is SIERA’s third Gold Coast development. It follows the recently completed PIPIS Bilinga beachfront project, which achieved suburb-record prices, and the soon-to-be-completed Chevron Island development, Tapestry.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=359603]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/siera">SIERA</a> Founder and Managing Director Brent Thompson said the arrival of the piling rig represented a significant milestone for the development, which is scheduled for completion in late 2028.

Over the next month, around 260 piles are expected to be installed as work progresses on the basement structure. The building is anticipated to rise above ground level early next year, before unveiling its sculptural glass curtain wall, developed in collaboration with specialist façade engineers.

“The façade was designed to maximise panoramic coastal views while creating a distinctive architectural identity,” Thompson said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=355935]

Designed by BDA Architecture, Exhale will comprise just 54 two- and three-bedroom residences across 26 levels, a level of low-density living rarely delivered in this beachside pocket between Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach.

The project has been conceived as a resident-only building, with no short-stay accommodation permitted. SIERA says the model is intended to appeal to long-term owner-occupiers rather than transient holiday demand.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=361052]

Residences have been designed with large-format layouts and expansive glazing, with most apartments featuring more than 30 metres of glass frontage to maximise natural light and ocean views.

The amenity offering spans two levels and centres on wellness and lifestyle, including a heated magnesium pool, sauna, yoga and Pilates studio, gymnasium, private dining facilities, cinema lounge, and dedicated surfcraft storage.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=359607]

More than half of the apartments have already sold. SIERA has also opened a sales gallery for Exhale at its Chevron Island commercial premises, near its Tapestry tower and the site of its second Chevron Island apartment development, which is slated to launch in early 2027.
</section>
</section>

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=112661]

SIERA kicks off construction at Northcliffe tower Exhale

<html><body>
Property investments by SMSFs through limited recourse borrowing arrangements (LRBAs) could come under increased scrutiny of the tax office this year, says major accounting firm H&amp;R Block.
Last year, the ATO had expressed concern at LRBA loans that were not structured correctly, including incorrect registration of the ownership of property bought under an LRBA. It spoke of increasing its focus on the LRBA route.
Given the growth in the SMSF sector and the increasing popularity of strategies such as LRBAs, H&amp;R Block has tipped that property will remain a top priority for the ATO’s compliance work in the SMSF sector this year.
“I know the ATO always keeps a close eye on property investment and especially LRBAs,” H&amp;R Block's director of tax communications, Mark Chapman told SMSF Adviser.
This particularly applies to related party borrowings which may currently be structured on non-commercial terms, with a June 30 deadline to have these structures rectified, it said.
According to the ATO website, an asset purchased by an SMSF trustee through LRBA is held in a separate trust.
If the loan defaults, the lender's rights are limited to the asset held in the separate trust, but not to assets held in the SMSF.
In 2015, an ATO campaign saw 500 postcodes issued with warnings urging holiday home owners to ensure deductions were not made during periods a property was not available for let.
“With property rental a valuable source of extra income for millions of taxpayers, it can be expected that the ATO will follow up with some targeted reviews and audits this year,” Chapman was quoted as saying.
The “sharing economy” – “driven in part by the high levels of non-compliance amongst those driving for Uber or renting rooms through Airbnb,” would also be an area of scrutiny by the ATO, he said. 
</body></html>

prateek24-ezbwHMbNAk

ATO to focus on LRBA route to property investment by SMSFs

<html><body>
The Australian Taxation Office appears to have cast doubt on the emerging practice of property investors lending money to their self-managed superannuation fund at zero, or low interest rates, to get around the contribution limit.
The likelihood of future favourable rulings to taxpayers adopting the strategy appears in doubt, the Australian Financial Review (AFR) reported today.
It has been among the 30 tax minimisation strategies used by investors able to have incomes taxed at zero to 15%, instead of the current top rate of 46.5%, by using generous concessions through superannuation.
Adelaide lawyer of Suzanne Mackenzie of DMAW Lawyers noted while at least one Tax Office ruling appeared to accept, or not reject, the strategy, there had been two other rulings rejecting it.
Raising the prospect of penalty taxes, Mackenzie forecast future private rulings on the strategy would now be knocked back.
However a Tax Office spokesman told the AFR the ATO will continue to issue private rulings "decided on the particular facts to which they relate".
The latest statistics show residential property within superannuation jumped in the year to March 2014 from $17.5 billion to $20.5 billion.
Commercial property holdings rose from $58 billion to $68 billion.
The Tax Office figures show there were 528,000 self-managed funds managing $558 billion in assets as at March 2014, up from 501,000 funds in March 2013.
These self-managed super schemes had $3.3 billion of loans, up from $3.1 billion.
The Australian Financial Review reported last month that around 9,200 self-managed super funds have a $5 million plus balance, a rise of 76% in the past three years.
The zero loan strategy has been used to get around the limit on post-tax superannuation contributions, which is $25,000 rising to $30,000 from July.
The loans were typically at zero or low interest with long repayment terms and the money was to be used by the self-managed superannuation fund to invest in property.
Following the recent private rulings, some tax advisers are now suggesting these loans ought now replicate loans from a financial institution in both the terms and the interest rate charged. 
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

ATO cast doubts on SMSF property zero interest loan strategy

<html><body>
The Australian Taxation Office has raised concerns that self-managed superannuation funds have been incorrectly reporting the details of limited recourse borrowing arrangements used to buy property.
The warning comes as the ATO prepares to take up new and more flexible powers to deal with SMSF trustees who fail to follow the rules.
From 1 July, the ATO will be able to impose a wider range of penalties on funds that breach superannuation law. Under the new penalty regime, trustees may be personally liable for penalties of up to $10,200 per breach. They may be forced to rectify the problem and complete an SMSF education course.
SMSF trustees are required to lodge accurate annual returns each year to the ATO detailing their fund’s assets, liabilities and income. Penalties can be applied to those that fail to lodge their annual returns on time, or incorrectly report the details of their fund.
The ATO said it had noticed some trustees had misreported details of limited recourse borrowing arrangements, which are used to borrow to buy property through an SMSF, in their funds’ annual returns for 2013.
To help trustees understand the requirements, the ATO has released a detailed guide describing how to complete each section of the annual return.
The ATO has recently released the 2014 version of the annual return for SMSFs. It has also clarified some of the rules that apply to the borrowing arrangements and assets they are used to acquire.
Strict conditions apply to borrowing money through limited recourse borrowing arrangements. There can be civil or criminal consequences for fund trustees that fail to follow the rules.
</body></html>

zfielding-GvX3Uq9KTa

ATO concerned that SMSFs are incorrectly reporting borrowing details relating to property purchases

<html><body>
As 1 July fast approaches, we take a look at how you can make the most of your self-managed super fund before the end of the financial year and how you can avoid being hit with a <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/superannuation/42288-self-managed-super-funds-top-tips-from-the-ato">penalty from the tax man</a>.
1. Be aware contribution caps are changing
On 1 July, the Australian Tax Office is changing the amount you’re allowed to contribute to your SMSF and the age you’re allowed to do it, for both concessional and non-concessional contributions.
Kathy Evans, principal of superannuation and SMSF at Crowe Horwath, said concessional contributions, or deductable contributions, are employer contributions that include those made under a salary sacrifice arrangement. For people who are self-employed, it includes personal contributions claimed as a tax deduction.
“At the moment with concessional contributions, anyone aged under 60 can currently put in up to $25,000 per annum, while those over 60 can put in $35,000,” says Evans.
She says the ATO is bringing the contribution age down to 50 for the next financial year (2014-15).
Evans says if you’re in that category, from 1 July your contributions cap will go up to $35,000. For those under 50, the cap goes up from $25,000 to $30,000.
Non-concessional contributions are personal contributions that you don't claim as an income tax deduction, and Evans says they will also go up from 1 July.
“Non-concessional and non-deductive contributions at the moment are capped at $150,000 per annum for everyone who’s eligible to make them,” says Evans. “That $150,000 is going up to $180,000 from 1 July.”
2. The superannuation guarantee rate is also going up 
Currently, employers must pay a minimum of 9.25% super guarantee to SMSFs. From 1 July, the rate will increase to 9.50%.
Brad Twentyman, director of superannuation at Pitcher Partners, said that rise has the potential to affect salary sacrifice contribution arrangements.
“You need to factor in that your employer will be obliged to contribute 9.5% instead of 9.25% and with an increased obligation on your employer to contribute, your voluntary component may reduce,” says Twentyman.
Graeme Colley, director of technical and professional standards at the SMSF Professionals’ Association of Australia, said: “If you want to maximise your contributions before 30 June, you need to talk to your accountant or professional adviser to make sure your salary sacrifice agreement with your employer allows the maximum to be salary sacrificed.”
Twentyman says it is also important for employers to note the change in superannuation guarantee, to protect themselves from any possible claims of compensations that may arise from over contributing.
“As an employer, if you’re aware that your employee might contribute above the contribution limits, it would be prudent to point out to the employee that they might want to seek some advice. If they think there’s a problem, employers should get on the front foot,” says Twentyman.
3. Watch out for the new penalty regime from 1 July
There has been a lot of talk about the new powers the ATO will have to penalise those who fall foul of its rules. The new penalty regime will be introduced from 1 July and will apply to breaches that remain outstanding as of 30 June.
“If you’re a trustee of a SMSF, you’ve always had obligations to run your fund the way it should be run or you run the risk of upsetting the ATO,” says Evans. “And they’ve also always had the ability to penalise you. But they haven’t had a regime that’s strong enough to stop some people doing the wrong thing.”
Of the 18,000 SMSF contraventions lodged with the ATO in the last financial year, approximately 50% could have incurred penalties based on the proposed new super laws.
“If you are aware there’s a breach within your SMSF and you’re in the position to fix that breach by 30 June, it’s a good idea to do so,” says Twentyman. “Because if you tick over into 1 July, you will be penalised and you’ll need to go to the ATO with cap in hand.”
These breaches include:
<ul>
<li>bank accounts going into overdraft;</li>
<li>failure to get accounts and returns prepared;</li>
<li>providing loans to family members from your SMSF;</li>
<li>investments being made into in-house assets which are not solely for the SMSF;</li>
<li>SMSF assets not being separated from personal assets;</li>
<li>taking money from the fund for living; and</li>
<li>incorrect borrowing structures being established for the purchase of assets by a SMSF.</li>
</ul>
“These penalties are mainly for the more serious breaches of investment restrictions, but they do also apply to the administrative functions a trustee is expected to complete,” says Evans.
The penalties for many of these breaches have gone up to $10,200 per trustee per transaction, so a SMSF with two trustees would be looking at a potential fine of $20,400. 
The penalty for lodging your SMSF accounts by 30 June has also increased.
“If you haven’t done your 2013-14 accounts by 30 June, there’s a possibility that the ATO will be imposing a penalty on trustees that could be up to $1700,” says Twentyman.
“At the moment the non-lodgement fee is a few hundred dollars, and in fact the ATO will probably be looking to impose that and then they’ll come along and impose this new penalty,” he says.
4. Don’t risk being declared a non-person
Non-lodging SMSFs will be declared a non-person for tax purposes if they’ve been slack with their lodgements.
“If you have a SMSF and you haven’t lodged a tax return for two or more years, they will classify your fund as a non-person,” says Evans.
“That means your fund won’t be able to receive contributions, rollovers or transfers,” she says. “In other words, if you’re in that situation and you’re well behind on your reporting, your fund will effectively stop being able to operate.”
The figure for concessional contributions for people over 60 has been corrected since publication from $30,000 to $35,000.
Story continues on page 2. Please click below.
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
5. Remember the ‘bring forward’ rule
With non-concessional contributions, if you are under 65, you can currently put $150,000 in a year to your SMSF, but the ATO also allows you to put in three years at once.
“So you can put in $450,000 in one fell swoop,” says Evans. “Then you just can’t do anything for the next two years.”
From 1 July, the bring forward rule becomes $540,000, or three times the new non-concessional contribution cap of $180,000.
Twentyman says Pitcher Partners are not big advocates of this strategy because in most incidences all it does is give a timing advantage.
“But if your marginal tax rate is going to be significantly less next year than this year, you may look at bringing forward a deduction, but from our experience not that many individuals fall within category,” he says.
6. Don’t exceed your minimum or maximum pension withdrawals
“If you’re on a pension in your super fund, make sure you withdraw your minimum pension that you’re required to take out each year,” says Evans. “In some cases, there’s also a maximum limit you can’t go over.”
Minimum and maximum pensions from SMSFs have to be paid by 30 June if you want to avoid paying tax on them.
“If you don’t pay by 30 June, the risk is the government will take away the tax exemption on the fund and that can be significant, there can be thousands of dollars at risk,” says Twentyman.
Colley says if you are eligible to draw amounts from superannuation, you may be able to defer receiving the amount until after you reach the age of 60, or until a later financial year when you may end up paying a lower rate of tax.
7. Get your trust entitlements paid by 30 June
“A lot of self-managed super funds have investments in trusts and those trusts owe the super funds money,” says Twentyman.
“Generally, it is a good idea for the trust to pay whatever it owes by 30 June because the tax office sometimes likes to view those as loans and that can cause compliance issues,” he says.
8. Employers beware of SuperStream by 2015
The ATO is putting in place a new system that aims to standardise the way employers pay super.
The new SuperStream standard will require all SMSFs to be paid electronically and is <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/superannuation/42145-smes-to-be-hit-by-super-delay" target="_blank">coming in gradually over the next few years</a>.
Evans says many employers still lodge their employee’s super by sending checks or banking it at the local bank.
Large and medium-sized employers, or those with 20 or more employees, must complete the implementation of SuperStream by no later than 30 June, 2015.
“If you’re a larger employer, you should have looked out for the SuperStream changes and made arrangements by May 31,” says Colley. Large employers were supposed to get new electronic service numbers to pay their employees electronically by the end of May.
Small employers, or those with 19 or fewer employees, have another year starting from 1 July, 2015 but must complete their implementation no later than 30 June, 2016. 
Small businesses may be eligible to use the Small Business Superannuation Clearing House, which is a free online service provided by the ATO that allows you to pay contributions to a single destination in one simple electronic transaction. 
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/" target="_blank">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Eight things you need to know to get your SMSF ready for the end of financial year

<html><body>
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released data mid-May which revealed that 48.7% of state and local government taxation revenue over the 2013-14 financial year came from property related taxes.
The data showed that over the year, state and local governments collected a record $40.485 billion in taxes from property related sources. In comparison, they collected $21.341 billion in taxes from employers, $11.208 billion in taxes from the provision of goods and services and $10.024 billion in taxes on the use of goods and performance of activities.
As this shows, at a state and local government level property taxes are the largest source of revenue. Although property accounted for 48.7% of total tax revenue over the year, it has previously accounted for as much as 50.6% of all revenue in 2003-04.
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4780" src="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Chart-13.jpg" alt="Chart 1" width="500" height="183">
The total value of property related taxes increased by 12.6% over the most recent financial year. This represents the greatest year-on-year increase in property related tax revenue since it rose 14.3% over the 2009-10 financial year. In comparison, taxes on employer’s payroll and labour force rose by 2.8%, taxes on the provision of goods and services rose 1.2% and taxes on the use of goods and performance of activities rose 3.5%. Overall, state and local government tax revenue increased by 7.2% over the year.
With home values nationally beginning to rise in June 2012, it is clear that state and local governments are a major benefactor of the strong housing market conditions. With higher home values, taxes such as land tax, municipal rates and stamp duty on conveyances all increase. Conversely when housing market conditions shift and value growth slows or values falls the largest source of tax revenue (property) is adversely affected.
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4781" src="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Chart-22.jpg" alt="Chart 2" width="500" height="513">
Of the $40.485 billion in property related tax revenue collected in 2013-14, 40% came from municipal rates and 36% came from stamp duties on conveyances. Land tax was the only other sizeable contributor to property related tax accounting for 17% of revenue. Over the year the most significant increase in property related taxes came from stamp duty, up by 24.4%. The amount of tax revenue collected from municipal rates increased by 5.3%, and land taxes increased by 2.8%.
Property related tax revenue is only collected by those who own properties. Ultimately every property is owned by someone, some as an owner occupier and some as an investor. The taxes levied against property are typically only payable by the owner of the property. Given this, those who choose to rent rather than own property pay no tax on property. Not to mention the fact that the cost of renting is typically much lower than the cost of owning.
State and local governments have clearly experienced a significant revenue boost via the improvement in the residential housing market over the year. Stamp duty in particular has seen a significant rise. With sales volumes and property values rising there have been more sales to receive stamp duty from and at a higher price which also increases the stamp duty collected.
Of course, the issue with stamp duty is that it is a tax only collected across those properties which sell. From a residential perspective this is just 5% to 7% of the total housing stock over a given year. Stamp duty also acts as a disincentive for home owners to transact property on a more regular basis because it is a tax paid on a new purchase.
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4782" src="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Chart-32.jpg" alt="Chart 3" width="500" height="182">
Looking more closely at stamp duty over time you can see just how inefficient the tax is, being heavily reliant on the performance of the housing market. The 2013-14 financial year was a bumper one for stamp duty revenue thanks to strong growth in home values and an increase in sales activity. As we’ve seen in the past, these good times won’t last forever and eventually state and local governments will feel the impact of a downturn in tax revenue as the housing market cools.
I have previously argued that the removal of stamp duties would encourage greater mobility of residents and provide less of a barrier to those home owners looking to upgrade or downsize. Of course state and local governments would lose 36% of their property related tax revenue and 17% of their total taxation revenue. 
Replacing stamp duty with a blanket land tax, another tax, would likely be unpopular and you’d have to consider how equitable that would be particularly for those who have recently paid stamp duty (if a blanket land tax regime were to be introduced it would likely be accomanpied by compensation or discounts to those who recently purchased under the stamp duty regime). 
To put a blanket land tax into perspective to cover the $15.976 billion in stamp duty revenue over the 2013-14 financial year, each residential dwelling would have to pay $1,705.60 based on the ABS estimate of 9,366,800 residential dwellings as at June 2014. 
Keep in mind that stamp duty isn’t just payable on residential property transactions and more revenue is available from commercial and industrial properties or the cost per home could be reduced.
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4783" src="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Chart-42.jpg" alt="Chart 4" width="500" height="149">
Over the year, stamp duty revenue was higher in each state and territory except for the Australian Capital Territory (-1.7%). Across the other states the rise in stamp duty revenues were recorded at: 32.3% in New South Wales, 27.9% in Victoria, 27.3% in Queensland, 2.1% in South Australia, 9.5% in Western Australia, 10.8% in Tasmania and 12.7% in the Northern Territory.  
According to the CoreLogic RP Data Home Value Index, home values rose across each capital city except for Darwin over the year with the largest rises in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. Clearly home value rises across the capital city markets have had a positive effect on stamp duty revenues.
The data highlighted shows that property related taxes are the most important source of revenue for state and local governments, accounting for 48.7% of their total taxation revenue. The issue of course is that these levels of government are looking to constantly grow their revenues. The two main sources of property related revenue are rates and stamp duty. Rates can be grown by encouraging a greater number of ratepayers into a region (create more housing) and stamp duty can only be lifted by changing the rates or encouraging higher prices and/or more sales. 
In certain regions increasing the supply of ratepayers is not possible so it is clear that stamp duty is an extremely important source of revenue.  With capital city home values continuing to rise throughout the 2014-15 financial year, we anticipate that stamp duty will be higher once again. The question is whether governments can continue to rely on property being a one-way bet?
The ACT has already announced a phase out of stamp duty over the next two decades, and there is also discussion around a move away from stamp duty in South Australia.  The major benefit to State governments under a broad land tax arrangement as opposed to stamp duty would be the consistency of revenue flows rather than the lumpy market driven revenue which is evident under the stamp duty system.
Cameron Kusher is CoreLogic RP Data’s senior research analyst. You can read his posts here.
</body></html>

ckusher-ujnxiKuFQs

Property related tax revenue surpasses $40 billion: Cameron Kusher

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
All too often we get calls or emails from clients and some non-clients even, who are late with getting important information back to their accountant, whether it is tax returns, information for their auditor, or engaging with their wealth planner!  So, we thought we would find out what is the right information and when it is needed.
We are focussing on audits of SMSFs and trading entities. We have captured here the key areas of process, or events where you must advise your auditor.
SMSFs
<ul>
<li>Make sure all SMSF transactions go through the fund’s bank account. 
</li>
<li>Put an investment strategy in place.  If you do not have an investment strategy, then please talk to our wealth planning team who will be only too happy to assist you. 
</li>
<li>Tell your accountant when anything significant happens so they can produce a minute of the trustees meeting. e.g. buying or selling a significant asset. 
</li>
<li>“I transferred money into or out of the SMSF bank account in error” - Tell your accountant straight away and agree the best way to I fix this. 
</li>
<li>One of the members/trustees is seriously ill – Tell your accountant. 
</li>
<li>A trustee is leaving Australia ‘permanently’ or for more than six months – Tell your accountant. 
</li>
<li>SMSF trustees should work with their accountant to ensure that they don’t do anything to prejudice the tax advantaged 15% tax or tax free pension income. 
</li>
<li>Maximum or minimum pension amounts must be drawn every year 
</li>
<li>If you receive an auditors management letter, you should act on any matters raised, before they become reportable contraventions 
</li>
<li>If you don't have much money invested in your SMSF - check with your accountant to make sure it is still viable to maintain.  It could be a good option to transfer your super monies into a public offer super fund. 
</li>
<li>Have you considered having life and income protection insurance inside the super fund? 
</li>
<li>SMSFs are not allowed to buy residential property from a member or related party. 
</li>
<li>In a SMSF it can't rent or provide a residential property to a family member or yourself. 
</li>
<li>If part of your investment strategy is to collect art, then it can’t be displayed or leased in a SMSF member’s home or property (sole purpose test).</li>
</ul>
Other Audit Clients:
<table style="width: 460px;" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="26">#</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Issue Description</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Reason</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Preferred course of action</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="26">1</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Not keeping full records in a business-like manner.</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">It makes performing an audit difficult as sufficient appropriate audit evidence cannot be accumulated by the auditor to support an audit opinion and allow for a ‘clean’ audit report to be issued.</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Full and proper record keeping needs to be employed – seek the advice of your accountant early.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="26">2</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">AGM timing – ‘Not for Profit’ organisations sometimes schedule their AGM far too close to the end of their financial year.</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Does not leave enough time for the financials to be compiled leaving enough time for an appropriate audit to be conducted.</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Liaise with your accountant and auditor on achievable time frames and preferred AGM dates.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="26">3</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">If your business has bank lending covenants that need to be maintained, an auditor may need to check these and report accordingly.The terms of your lending covenants might include not declaring a dividend large enough to create negative current assets. Or your interest coverage ratio needs to stay above a certain level.You should be aware of any loan or overdraft conditions imposed by the bank and work with your accountant to ensure they’re not breached.</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">If breached, at any time during the year, the bank may have the right to call in the loan. This could be inconvenient for you and require the loan to be quickly refinanced – if possible.</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Be aware of lending conditions, maintain monthly or quarterly financials promptly and have your accountant regularly checking that covenants are met.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="26">4</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Directors not being aware of other factors that would require an annual audit to be conducted e.g. ASIC requirements.</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">If a shareholder (holding 5% or more of the shares) requests an audit; if the company becomes a Large Proprietary company, if the company has  any two of the following -  more than 50 employees; Assets of more than $12.5M; and turnover of greater than$25m.</td>
<td valign="top" width="197">Keep your accountant informed of changes with your company so they can advise if ASIC regulations require an annual audit.</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Robert Edwards is a partner at <a href="https://www.chan-naylor.com.au/" target="_blank">Chan &amp; Naylor</a> Audit Services.
Disclaimer: This article contains general information. Before you make any financial or investment decision you should seek professional advice to take into account your individual objectives, financial situation and individual needs.
</body></html>

What you need to tell your accountant about your SMSF

<html><body>
Bill Shorten believes there’s an affordability crisis in Australia. He believes he knows how to fix it. But I’m sure he doesn’t believe the tax policy he announced is the solution. What he announced is the smokescreen.
The tragedy for Shorten, the dead man walking of Australian politics, and the Labor Party, is that he is telling Australian households that he is going to force down the value of their homes. And that, in reality, the most likely outcome is that the cost of new housing will rise.
Short-term Shorten and his advisors don’t appear to realise that the high cost of new housing is the key to the affordability situation in Australia. And his policy will probably make it worse.
Firstly, the issue of an affordability crisis. Shorten apparently believes we have one. I believe we don’t.
The Housing Affordability Index shows that national affordability today is considerably better than it was five years ago. Sydney, following three years of big price growth, is the only jurisdiction that doesn’t have a demonstrably better affordability situation that it did in 2010. Everywhere else in Australia does. Even Sydney is marginally better off than in 2010. 
There were improvements in 2015 in many parts of the nation, reinforcing yet again that most of Australia did not have a property boom any time recently.
Jurisdictions which have a better affordability position now than 12 months ago include Perth (11% better than a year ago), Darwin (13.5% better), Hobart (7% better), regional WA (13% better), regional NSW, regional South Australia, regional Tasmania (6% better) and regional NT (10% better).
Affordability is essentially unchanged in Brisbane, regional Queensland and regional Victoria, compared to a year ago.
Sydney’s position is 4.5% less favourable, Melbourne 7.6% less, Canberra’s 9% less and Adelaide 2.6% less. But in each of those locations, affordability remains better than five years ago, even in Sydney (just). 
What we have from Federal Labor is what we got from APRA: over-the-top policy impacting the whole nation to attempt to solve a Sydney problem.
There’s going to be a major backlash against Labor once people realise the essence of Shorten’s proposal on affordability. He’s going into the upcoming federal election telling the electorate that the value of their homes is going to fall.
The essence of the tax policy announced on 12 February is that his proposed changes to negative gearing will somehow make housing more affordable. He’s not proposing to force down interest rates nor to lift average incomes, therefore the only way homes can become more affordable is for home values to fall. This would be seriously unpalatable for voters in the 70% of households that own their homes. It’s the ultimate election loser.
But home-owners need not worry. Shorten’s announced policies won’t cause home values to fall. They won’t make a single home cheaper in Australia because they don’t address the real causes of poor affordability. They have targeted the wrong culprits. 
And I’m quite sure Shorten knows that. Like most politicians, he’s not interested in addressing the real issues. He simply wants to give the appearance that he is. And he has achieved that by taking cheap shots at an easy target.
There are many problems with the announced policy. The first is that it’s based on a false premise - that the 15% or so of property buyers who are negatively-geared investors have a greater influence on property prices than the other 85%. (That 85%, incidentally, includes the biggest and most influential chunk of the buying market – home-buyers other than first-home-buyers – the people who have the numbers, the financial capacity and the motivation to pay high prices for homes).
Shorten says typical houses cost about three times average annual income 30 years ago and now it’s six times. He’s claiming that the small number of buyers who are negatively-geared investors are responsible for that change. He doesn’t provide any evidence to support this outlandish and quite illogical claim. He doesn’t provide it because it doesn’t exist.
He further claims that eliminating the tax claims of 15% of buyers will make housing more affordable. He doesn’t explain how that would happen.
But he is claiming his policy will make prices lower. If he’s right, that would be alarming for most voters. It would be also alarming for the nation, because the family home is the core asset for most Australians and the basis of their ability to provide for their retirement. 
This latter point is crucial. It’s the most important issue in the whole debate about negative gearing but is never mentioned.
Successive governments have told Australians they have to provide for their own retirement, because the Government can’t afford to fund the increasing numbers of retirement age people through pensions. We know that superannuation doesn’t cut it, so Australians need to invest to be self-funded in retirement. Governments need to encourage that. 
Negative gearing is one way to encourage people to invest - keeping in mind that it applies to all forms of investment, not just real estate. 
Eliminating it will stop many from buying real estate. Long-term it will cost the Federal Budget more than it saves - especially as the claimed savings are not great. Shorten’s figures suggest it will save the Budget just $570 million in the first four years, although I doubt he has considered the overall impact through loss of revenue to state and federal budgets – given that people buying investment property pay stamp duty, land tax and capital gains tax.
Shorten thinks that keeping negative gearing on new homes will cause investors to switch to the new product. But many won’t - because new homes are too expensive. On average, they cost $100,000 more than the equivalent existing home. That’s why 90% of investors (and most first-home buyers) buy existing properties rather than new. The negative gearing tax deductions don’t come close to making up for the price differential.
But if he’s right – and investors do switch to buying new homes – it will make new dwellings more expensive. If he’s right that prices are forced up by negatively-geared investors competing with home buyers, then switching all investors to new housing will create massive competition for a finite product and force up prices. Keep in mind that state government grants for first-home buyers are available only to buyers of new homes – and current Federal policy forces foreign investors to buy new properties, not existing.
So, if Shorten succeeds, we will have first-home buyers competing with Australian investors and foreign investors for new properties. Everyone will be trying to buy a finite supply of new homes, given that Australia is in the midst of a period of record creation of new dwellings and doesn’t need more. Shorten’s policy won’t make housing cheaper, it will make it more expensive.
And that brings us to the real issue in the affordability debate - the one that politicians including Short-term Shorten don’t want to talk about: the reality that government taxes and charges are responsible for the high cost of new housing. Multiple research studies have confirmed that more than 40% of the cost of new house-and-land packages are taxes and other government charges. Eliminate those and suddenly new homes are affordable to most buyers. A $400,000 product can be sold for $240,000.
So the real problem is not tax benefits flowing from government to the real estate industry - it’s the money flowing in the opposite direction, the taxes that are ripped out of the real estate industry.
Politicians never discuss this factor. They’re addicted to the massive amount of revenue they rip out of the real estate industry - over $70 billion in a typical year. They would rather blame unpopular minorities - a standard political tactic - than address the real issue.
The Federal Government, after two very long and expensive parliamentary inquiries which achieved little, has decided to make foreign investors the scapegoats. But forcing a small number of foreigners to sell back their mansions won’t make housing cheaper for first-home buyers.
Now the Federal Opposition has decided to make negatively geared Australian investors the scapegoats. It’s dishonest, deceitful and, frankly, disgusting.
Terry Ryder is the founder of <a href="https://www.hotspotting.com.au/" target="_blank">hotspotting.com.au</a>. You can <a href="https://mailto:ryder@hotspotting.com.au" target="_blank">email him</a> or follow him on <a href="https://twitter.com/hotspotting" target="_blank">Twitter.</a>
</body></html>

terryryder-YECXbqmri2

Bill Shorten's Opposition makes negatively-geared investors the scapegoats: Terry Ryder

<html><body>
An annual land tax should replace the one-off financial sledgehammer of stamp duty on property purchases, the experts in this month's Finder RBA Cash Rate Survey™ said.
Of the 27 experts and economists that weighed in on stamp duty 9 in 10 experts (89%, 24/27) were in favour of the proposed stamp duty scrapping.
Earlier in November, the state government announced that NSW will lead the way on tax reform with its plan to make stamp duty optional, granting homeowners the ability to pay an annual land tax instead.
Graham Cooke, insights manager at Finder, said that stamp duty can be a dealbreaker for those looking to relocate, and this can impact property demand and supply.
“Buying a home in Australia is already an expensive affair and stamp duty makes it more so."
“It effectively raises the bottom rung of the housing ladder, burdens buyers with a huge up-front tax and inhibits the flow of property sales."
“In an ideal market, you buy when you can afford to and you sell when you want to. Stamp duty forces first-time buyers to save up for longer, and prevents current owners from upselling," Cooke stated.
Cooke said removing stamp duty may result in a short-term boost to property prices.
“Axing the tax now also means buyers who are currently saving can get more bang for their buck,” Cooke said.
All experts surveyed (40/40) are predicting the cash rate to hold this month.
Low rates are expected to stick around for a while, with 20% (8/40) of experts expecting the cash rate to increase within the next 2 years, and the earliest predicted rise occurring in Q3 2021.
According to John Rolfe of Elders Home Loans, we’re unlikely to see a negative cash rate in Australia.
"The Reserve Bank won't go to zero, but we will want to see a few quarters of positive growth before increasing the cash rate,” Rolfe said.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Experts overwhelmingly support axing stamp duty nationally: Finder.com.au

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-11/sa-to-introduce-electric-vehicle-user-charge/12869302">South Australian</a> and <a href="https://www.drive.com.au/news/victoria-to-tax-electric-and-plug-in-hybrid-vehicles-from-2021-124619?trackLink=SMH1">Victorian</a> governments have announced, and <a href="https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/motoring-news/electric-car-tax-spreads-to-new-states/news-story/172ac67ccd8974566e3c65dc26c07048">New South Wales</a> is considering, road user charges on electric vehicles. This policy has drawn scorn from <a href="https://nb.tai.org.au/no_ev_tax?recruiter_id=194711">environmental advocates</a> and <a href="https://thedriven.io/2020/11/21/shameful-victoria-follows-south-australia-and-imposes-electric-car-road-tax/">motor vehicle lobbyists</a> who fear it will slow the uptake of less-polluting vehicles. But, from a longer-term transport policy perspective, a distance-based road user charge on electric vehicles is an important step forward.
Superficially, a charge on electric vehicle use seems misguided. Road sector emissions are the <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.pnas.org/content/107/8/3382">worst contributors to climate change</a>. Electric vehicles powered by clean energy offer the promise of near-zero emissions.
As electric vehicle and renewable energy costs decline we can expect a shift to <a href="https://aemo.com.au/-/media/Files/Electricity/NEM/Planning_and_Forecasting/Inputs-Assumptions-Methodologies/2020/CSIRO-DER-Forecast-Report">full electrification of urban vehicles over the next 30 years</a>. Surely accelerating this transition is an urgent climate task?
The downside lies not in the carbon benefits of these vehicles, but in their use as private passenger transport in congested urban areas and <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-new-pm-wants-to-bust-congestion-here-are-four-ways-he-could-do-that-102249">the costs</a> this use imposes on cities. As renewable energy becomes cheaper, the marginal cost of every kilometre driven is likely to decline. As driving becomes cheaper, more of it is likely to occur.
More driving means more congestion. Inevitably, that increases demand for increasingly expensive road projects, such as Sydney’s WestConnex, or Melbourne’s Westgate Tunnel and North East Link. It certainly will run against the recognition in urban plans such as <a href="https://www.planmelbourne.vic.gov.au/">Plan Melbourne</a> that we must shift to alternative transport modes.
If we don’t have a pricing regime that accounts for the cost of car use in cities, the transition to electric vehicles is likely to work against the wider goals of urban and transport policy.
 
How would distance-based charging work?
Many urban transport policy advocates have called for distance-based road-user charging to be imposed on all vehicles in cities. This sounds great in theory, but in practice is difficult for technical and political reasons of privacy and surveillance. Such concerns will diminish over time as cars increasingly incorporate automated <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telematics">telematics</a> that necessarily track their movement.
Distance-based road-user charging efficiently matches road use to its costs – of infrastructure, congestion, noise, pollution and deaths. It improves on fuel excise, which drivers can nearly completely evade by using a highly efficient vehicle. It also goes beyond tolling to fund major roads, which typically apply only to specific links.
Second, road-user charging can be varied in response to demand that exceeds road capacities. Higher rates can be applied at peak times to ensure free-flowing traffic and shift travel to other times and modes. Various taxation reviews, including the 2009 <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-10/afts_final_report_part_2_vol_2_consolidated.pdf">Henry Taxation Review</a> and <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/productivity-review/report/productivity-review-supporting9.pdf">Productivity Commission</a> reports, have promoted such policies.
Exactly how big would the disincentive be?
Would imposing such charges on electric vehicles retard their uptake?
Based on our work with <a href="https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/science/article/pii/S0966692320309443?utm_campaign=elsOnboarding_Published&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_dgroup=STMJ_AUTH_SERV_PUBLISHED&amp;utm_acid=79567271&amp;SIS_ID=&amp;dgcid=elsOnboarding_Published&amp;CMX_ID=&amp;utm_in=DM82577&amp;utm_source=AC_">ABS Census journey-to-work data</a>, in Melbourne the average daily round-trip commuting distance by car is about 25 kilometres. The proposed Victorian charge is 2.5 cents per kilometre. Thus, in Melbourne the average daily commuter’s road user charge is likely to be 63 cents – $3.13 for a typical five-day working week. Over a 48-week working year that totals A$150, hardly a large sum for most people.
By comparison, a commuter in a conventional vehicle with the average current fuel efficiency of 10.9 L/100km will use about 2.73 litres of fuel on which they pay 42.3 cents per litre in fuel excise. That’s about $1.15 a day, or $5.75 a week.
The average tax saving for electric vehicles compared to conventional vehicles will be about 2.1 cents per kilometre. Electric vehicle drivers will be taxed about 53 cents a day, or $2.64 a week, less for their car work travel. They’ll be about $126 a year better off.
Commuting trips make up about 25% of car use, so electric car users’ overall savings are likely to be even greater.
It is difficult to see how such savings on excise tax are a disincentive to electric vehicle uptake. Fears of a “<a href="https://medium.com/@TheAustraliaInstitute/11-reasons-why-a-great-big-new-tax-on-electric-vehicles-is-a-bad-idea-6bf89c99e688">great big new tax</a>”, as the Australia Institute puts it, seem unfounded, as are concerns that road-user charges would “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2020/nov/22/tax-on-electric-vehicles-in-south-australia-and-victoria-would-slam-brakes-on-sales">slam the brakes on sales</a>”.
Let’s be clear, the big barrier is the upfront cost of electric vehicles, about <a href="https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/projects/electricvehicles/about/compare">$10,000 more</a> than their conventional equivalents. Advocates for electric vehicles should focus on that difference, and the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/22/well-be-left-behind-australias-electric-car-inertia-is-getting-it-nowhere">failures in Australian government policy</a>, not state road-user charges.
Why taxing actual road use matters
It needs to be recognised that, with lower marginal costs, electric vehicles are likely to be used more than conventional cars. That would increase pressure on urban road capacity. So while the new road-user charge of 2.5 cents per kilometre is flat across the time of day or the route driven, this will likely need to change.
Distance-based road-user charges have been politically controversial. Imposing a tiny charge on a <a href="https://theconversation.com/electric-car-sales-tripled-last-year-heres-what-we-can-do-to-keep-them-growing-131372">minority vehicle type</a> is an expedient way of introducing a needed reform. Fewer than <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/industry/tourism-and-transport/motor-vehicle-census-australia/latest-release">1.8%</a> of vehicles in Australia are currently electric or hybrid. But as all cars become electric, distance-based road charges will become an increasingly powerful policy tool.
Thanks to advancing telematics, transport planners will eventually be able to impose variable road-user charging by time of day and route, similar to ride-hailing companies’ “surge” pricing. We could then apply novel approaches such as a cap-and-trade system. A city could allocate its motorists an annual kilometres quota, which is then traded to create a market for excess urban road use.
The private car could also be integrated into <a href="https://theconversation.com/for-mobility-as-a-service-maas-to-solve-our-transport-woes-some-things-need-to-change-105119">mobility-as-a-service</a> models.
Road-user charges could be regressive for people with few alternatives to the car. But telematic tracking could allow for lower charges for less affluent households in dispersed outer suburbs with few other options.
Beyond fuel, private cars have high environmental costs in <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/green-guide/buying-guides/car/environmental-impact/">steel, plastic, aluminium, glass and rubber use</a>. And <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-elephant-in-the-planning-scheme-how-cities-still-work-around-the-dominance-of-parking-space-87098">about one-third of our increasingly valuable urban space</a> is given over to cars in the form of roads and parking.
To reduce this demand on resources and space, car use could be priced to shift travel to, and fund, more sustainable and city-friendly modes such as public transport, walking and cycling. We could even price the car out of cities completely. The most environmentally sustainable car, after all, is no car at all.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/150644/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jago-dodson-2359">Jago Dodson</a>, Professor of Urban Policy and Director, Centre for Urban Research, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/tiebei-terry-li-1180745">Tiebei (Terry) Li</a>, Research Fellow, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>
This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/think-taxing-electric-vehicle-use-is-a-backward-step-heres-why-its-an-important-policy-advance-150644">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Think taxing electric vehicle use is a backward step? Here's why it's an important policy advance

<html><body>
The world’s wealthiest people will transfer US$15.4 trillion in assets to their heirs in the next decade, according to a recent report.
Published by specialist data analysts Wealth-X, the report focused on the richest 0.1% (those with net assets worth over US$5 million), but it’s a similar story for the more modestly wealthy baby boomers.
With New Zealand’s average national <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/117903021/house-prices-shoot-ahead-again-as-majority-of-kiwis-say-ownership-unachievable" target="_blank">house price</a> now over $700,000, the heirs of home-owning boomers (as well as people born before 1945 whose significant wealth is often overlooked) will receive a currently untaxed bonanza.
Ignoring this unprecedented transfer of wealth from people who no longer need it to people who haven’t earned it would be absurd. But equitable tax policy must first overcome political timidity and rhetoric.
As New Zealand’s election approaches, forward-thinking politicians should take heart from Sinn Féin winning a majority in the 2019 Irish election on the promise of making the country’s tax system <a href="https://www.sinnfein.ie/a-fair-tax-system" target="_blank">radically more equitable</a>.
While a capital gains tax (CGT) is <a href="https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-will-not-implement-capital-gains-tax" target="_blank">off the table</a> for now, tax arrangements are never set in stone and voters can be open to change.
<h2>Taxing inheritance is nothing new</h2>
New Zealand first taxed inter-generational capital transfers in 1866. However, the rate of estate duty was reduced to zero in 1993 and gift duty was scrapped in 2011. <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2439053" target="_blank">According</a> to tax law specialist Michael Littlewood:
These taxes for many years enjoyed broad political support. Indeed, it was widely regarded as obvious that a significant part – perhaps as much as 50% or so – of every large estate ought to go to the state.
Taxing a person’s wealth when they no longer need it, provided a reasonable exemption is made to support dependants, has been usual since Roman times. In the modern era, inter-generational wealth was seen as eminently taxable, too. Indeed, progressive tax rates were applied to estate taxes before they were first used for income taxes.
In 1979 Australia became the first developed country to abolish estate duty (at both state and federal levels). As analysts Sam Reinhardt and Lee Steel <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/publication/economic-roundup-winter-2006/a-brief-history-of-australias-tax-system" target="_blank">pointed out</a>, support for estate taxes had declined despite “various tax review committees recommending refinements to improve the equity, efficiency and simplicity of the tax”.
<h2>Politics gets in the way</h2>
In New Zealand, Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University’s 2010 <a href="https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/sacl/centres-and-institutes/cagtr/pdf/tax-report-website.pdf" target="_blank">tax working group</a> didn’t consider reintroducing an estate tax or retaining the gift duty then in force. It argued that reforms in the late 1980s had “improved the efficiency and equity of the tax system”.
Certainly, stamp duty is an unlamented tax – although many jurisdictions try to use it to cool overheated housing markets. But it’s not clear why the working group considered estate taxes inefficient or inequitable.
Unfortunately, the <a href="https://taxworkinggroup.govt.nz/resources/terms-reference-tax-working-group" target="_blank">terms of reference</a> of the next tax working group, established by the Labour-led government after the 2017 election, specifically excluded an inheritance tax. While there were good theoretical reasons for such a tax, group member Geof Nightingale <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/106050956/inheritance-tax-good-economics-and-the-politics-may-be-better-than-they-seem" target="_blank">said</a>, it “breaks down at the politics”:
Inheritance taxes are intensely disliked, so if you haven’t got one it’s very hard to put one in.
The arguments against estate taxes are well rehearsed – usually accompanied by emotive references to “death taxes”. But, in the long term, the current ideological opposition to taxing inter-generational wealth transfers may prove to be an anomaly.
One simple reason for reviving the debate about such a tax is demographic: baby boomers, the wealthiest generation that has ever lived, will increasingly start dying during the 2020s.
Tax policymakers cannot ignore the opportunity – arguably the moral imperative – of taxing and redistributing those transfers.
<h2>Millennials and Gen X will be the winners</h2>
There remain three challenges to achieving a fairer tax based on inter-generational wealth.
First, the application of tax needs to shift from the deceased to the living. In other words, we need to focus on the recipient of the wealth transfer. Ireland’s <a href="https://www.revenue.ie/en/tax-professionals/tdm/capital-acquisitions-tax/cat-collector-general-district-guidelines.pdf" target="_blank">capital acquisitions tax</a> (CAT) applies a flat rate of 33% to accumulated gifts and inheritances over the relevant threshold.
Unlike a CGT, which can be perceived as penalising business owners, a CAT targets unearned windfalls from an accident of birth. This should make a CAT more politically acceptable than a CGT.
Second, the younger generations most critical of baby boomers’ “unfair” acquisition of wealth (Gen X and millennials) must accept that taxing this unprecedented transfer of wealth will promote both inter- and intra-generational fairness.
If we don’t tax and redistribute these transfers, wealth inequalities will be exacerbated and entrenched among future generations.
And finally, arguments in favour of a more equitable system have to overcome the rhetoric of “death taxes”. As far back as the 1960s, Canada’s Royal Commission on Taxation did this by popularising the idea that “<a href="https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/royal-commission-on-taxation" target="_blank">a buck is a buck</a>”, no matter how it is earned.
In other words, if you have the money you can pay tax, whether that money comes from labour, investment or inheritance.
So far, only the Greens are proposing any <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300044327/the-crucial-feature-of-the-greens-wealth-tax-that-would-exempt-most-family-homes" target="_blank">tax on wealth</a> as part of their election policy offering. But with the generational clock ticking, it’s maybe time for New Zealand to think about getting a CAT.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/143604/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jonathan-barrett-129387" target="_blank">Jonathan Barrett</a>, Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/te-herenga-waka-victoria-university-of-wellington-1200" target="_blank">Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington</a>
This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/forget-a-capital-gains-tax-what-new-zealand-needs-is-a-tax-on-inherited-wealth-143604" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

tax

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

tax