<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>

Joel Robinson

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

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 

<html><body>
The Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey has shrugged off the Reserve Bank call for a review of the negative gearing-capital gains tax regime.
"More policemen negatively gear than specialised tax accountants, management consultants or university lecturers," Mr Hockey told 2UE radio.
"This is a way for people on medium incomes, or even lower incomes, to be able to get into the property market in a way that they may not be able to."
The bank joined the debate over how negative gearing and the 50% capital gains tax discount are making housing less affordable.
"The bank believes there is a case for reviewing negative gearing but not in isolation," the RBA said in its submission to a House of Representative's parliamentary inquiry into home ownership.
Limiting negative gearing to new houses or a certain number of investment properties are among the changes Labor is reportedly considering.
The treasurers comments stem from analysis showng the vast majority of property investors taking advantage of negative gearing are “mum and dads” earning less than $80,000 a year, countering the long-held view that the property investment measure was a tax lurk for the rich.
Australian Taxation Office data shows that of the 1.266 million Australians who declared that the rental on their investment properties didn’t meet the interest repayment in 2011-12, 883,325 earned less than $80,000.
More than 70 per cent of people who accessed negative-gearing benefits only owned one investment property. 
About 60,000 clerical staff earning less than $80,000 benefited from negative gearing, as did 54,000 teachers, 46,000 sales staff and 35,590 nurses and midwives, the data showed as reported by The Australian. 
Nick Proud, the executive ­director of the Residential Development Council, which provided the statistics suggested investors incentivised by negative gearing would reduce the future reliance on the pension.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Policemen negatively gear property: Treasurer Joe Hockey

<html><body>
The Reserve Bank of Australia has called on the federal government to review the capital gains tax break for investment property suggesting it was directing too much money into residential housing.
The call came in its submission to the federal parliament's latest home ownership inquiry.
While the Reserve Bank acknowledged in its housing inquiry submission that negative gearing can assist in keeping rents down, it noted how it worked with other tax rules "may have the effect of encouraging leveraged investment in property."
"The bank believes there is a case for reviewing negative gearing, but not in isolation," the bank said.
"It's interaction with other aspects of the tax system should be taken into account."
The RBA's suggestions follows David Murray, head of the Abbott government's financial system inquiry, seeking a review of capital gains tax and negative gearing.
The head of the government's audit commission, businessman Tony Shepherd also recently recommended lifting the capital gains tax rate to a person's own income tax rate.
"I can't see any reason to treat capital gains any different from income gains," he said last month.
"And I think it does in fact probably lead to a greater emphasis in some respects on negative gearing." 
The RBA noted the proportion of the housing stock owned by investors looks to have risen over recent decades, offsetting the decline in the prevalence of public housing.
" The investor share is also likely to have risen a little further over the past few years, as investors have accounted for an increasing share of property purchases since 2012. 
"Data on the proportion of residential property transactions that involve investors as purchasers or sellers are not readily available, but loan approvals data give some guide as to the prevalence of investors as purchasers. 
"Investors’ share of loan approvals has risen from a little over 30 per cent in 2011 to almost 40 per cent recently, with the increase most pronounced in New South Wales. 
"As noted in 2014, prudent limits on loan sizes are less binding for property investors that have significant equity to deploy than for some other purchasers. 
"Typically the interest rate used to calculate allowable loan sizes does not fall as much as actual interest rates, or only up to a point; this practice has been strengthened recently in light of recent guidance issued by APRA (2014). 
"This means the marginal borrower has less scope to increase their loan size as interest rates fall. This practice is in the long-term interest of borrowers, as it helps ensure they can still service the loan once interest rates rise again. 
"However, it does mean that borrowers for whom these constraints are not binding appear to have a relative advantage during periods of low interest rates, since they can increase their loan size and make larger offers for specific properties. 
"In the Australian environment, the most constrained borrower is usually a first home buyer and the less constrained borrowers are investors or trade-up buyers with considerable equity. 
"As such, this might help to explain the low share of first home buyers in recent new lending for housing. 
"Reductions in state government incentives for first home buyers (of established housing) could also have contributed to this outcome. 
"It also implies that the increase in investor demand is likely to have contributed to the recent strong growth in housing prices, particularly in Sydney," the bank noted.
The submission can be downloaded <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/submissions/inquiry-into-home-ownership/index" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

RBA joins call for negative gearing - capital gains tax review

<html><body>
New research conducted by Newgate Research shows Australians dislike stamp duty when asked to rank taxes in terms of fairness.
Stamp duty comes last, closely followed by land tax. 
Over two-thirds of Australians support the idea of abolishing stamp duty completely, with over half saying it made it harder for them to afford a home. 
Some 65% of respondents also rated the GST fair or very fair, with 72% believing the GST will probably or definitely be increased over the next decade.
State governments could boost the efficiency of the economy by $9 billion a year if they adopted a wider tax on all property while phasing out stamp duty, a new policy paper suggests.
Property Taxes, the second working paper in Grattan’s Budget Repair series, finds that a levy of just $2 for every $1000 of unimproved land value would raise $7 billion a year with an annual charge of $772 on the median-priced Sydney home, $560 on the median-priced Melbourne home, and lower average rates in other cities and the regions.
The Grattan Institute has suggested a tax levied on the value of property holdings would be a fairer way of funding the burden of health and education services that are rising faster than gross domestic product.
Property taxes – which Grattan institute director John Daley concedes are politically difficult to impose – are positive economically because they don't distort incentives to work, save or invest.
"Unlike capital, property is immobile – it cannot shift offshore to avoid higher taxes," the report said. 
<a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/property-taxes/" target="_blank">The Grattan Institute</a> estimates that an annual levy of $2 for every $1000 of unimproved land value – or $1 for every $1000 of capital improved property value – would raise around $7 billion a year.
A homeowner living in a median-priced Sydney home of $772,000 would pay a levy of $772 a year. Their Melbourne equivalent would pay $560 and those on low incomes with no wealth would pay nothing, while low-income retirees with valuable houses could defer paying until their homes are sold, John Daley argues.
Mr Daley says that even higher property taxes could be used to pay for a reduction and eventual scrapping of stamp duties, which he described as among the most inefficient and unfair taxes still available to states, as well as being linked to property market volatility.
"Shifting from stamp duty to a broad-based property tax would provide a more stable tax base for states, spread the tax burden more fairly, and add up to $9 billion annually to GDP," Mr Daley said.
{mijopolls 121}
</body></html>

Scrap stamp duty for property tax for everyone: Grattan Institute

<html><body>
 
<img src="/images/2015/07/08/NBtax_PO_SponsoredLogoLink-01.jpg" alt="">
SPONSORED POST
Napier &amp; Blakeley this month are proud to launch NBtax, a breakthrough online property tax depreciation service to help property investors maximise their returns.  
Louise Hegarty talks with Chris Page, Napier &amp; Blakeley’s National Manager of New Projects about the revolutionary product that just had to happen.
“Over 70% of property owners under-claim their property tax depreciation allowances and many don't even claim them at all,” says Chris.
“It's a property investor's secret weapon for better cash flow yet sadly is widely misunderstood.  So we've created a simple solution that will help maximise a property investor’s return while making the whole process easier.”
Called NBtax, the online request service uses current technology to access Napier &amp; Blakeley's specialist property tax depreciation Quantity Surveyors.
“NBtax means investment property owners can start the process quickly and easily without the need to spend too much time going to and fro.
"Once you submit the required information, our expert teams get on with tailoring your property tax depreciation schedule, setting you up for the depreciable life of your investment.”
“We, Napier &amp; Blakeley, were the first in Australia to provide specialist property tax depreciation advice in the mid 80’s, and thirty years later we’re still the market leaders.
"A professional property tax depreciation schedule can boost your cash flow potentially by tens of thousands of dollars over the life of your investment.”
Yet many property owners stumble here, says Chris.
“A simple lack of knowledge and the specialist nature of depreciation means investors under-claim and at times even avoid the process often missing out on thousands. A poorly calculated property tax depreciation schedule is mostly likely costing you money right now!”
And no property is too old or small to benefit, Chris adds.
“Commercial, residential or industrial, brand new, renovated or just old, every investment property has the potential to further increase your cash-flow.
There's money sitting there waiting to be claimed. It's just a matter of taking the first step in the right direction, and that's where NBtax comes in.”
We all know that reducing our taxable income means one thing – more money in our pockets. It’s now easier and faster than ever before – with NBtax.
To find out more about NBtax, <a href="https://www.nbtax.com.au" target="_blank">click here</a>. 
</body></html>

NBtax is here, just in time for FY2015 tax time: Napier & Blakeley

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
In a recent address to the Economic Society of Australia, the Reserve Bank Governor Glenn Stevens hit the nail on the head when he remarked that “monetary policy alone can’t deliver everything we need and expecting too much from it can lead, in time, to much bigger problems”.
What was particularly important in this address was the (implicit) suggestion that the answer goes hand in hand with another question; what should we expect from fiscal policy?
Though at first sight it might appear to be a rather tenuous link, a decent review of the taxation system and more generally of the revenue side of the fiscal equation, may be a big help in taking some of the burden off monetary policy from its current constraints.
Stevens is not alone in suggesting that too much might be being expected of central bankers in promoting growth and reducing unemployment. Similar sentiments have come from former Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke.
It is useful to distinguish two aspects to the question of whether we expect too much of monetary policy. The first is whether we can expect it to work when the economy is on the downswing in the same degree as when it is on the upswing. In particular, can we expect an easing of monetary policy to stimulate growth as effectively as a tightening of monetary policy can choke it off.
Central banks for the most part have a brief of keeping inflation <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/inflation/inflation-target" target="_blank">within a certain range</a> and, with that done, to assist in keeping the economy’s growth rate near to trend; in the best of worlds, consistent with full employment.
Expectations about what more accommodating monetary policy can do for a sluggish economy have at times had to take a reality check here and in other parts of the world. Bringing interest rates down and making the assets side of bank balance sheets more liquid via “quantitative easing” can stimulate the real economy only to the extent that the binding constraint on spending by consumers and business is a financial one.
But in an environment where producers expect sluggish or even falling domestic or export demand, one would also expect to see sluggish investment demand, regardless of interest rates or the willingness of banks to lend. In other words, slow growth in demand may well mean expected rates of return from investment in new plant are revised down as much as interest rates.
As Stevens noted in his address, lower interest rates may not help consumption expenditure much either in present circumstances, since household sector’s debt burden means that it “has the least scope [compared with government and corporations] to expand their balance sheets to drive spending”.
And, as plenty of commentators have noted, injections of liquidity and easing credit conditions may be channelled into financial assets which don’t have significant stimulatory effects on the real side of the economy, which is where we need it for growth and reduced unemployment.
Some have even argued that a lengthy period of easy monetary policy has adverse distributional effects benefiting owners of stock and property. However the precise distributional effects of seem rather complex and less than clear cut, and will depend in part on whether or not accommodatory monetary policy stimulates the economy and hence employment growth.
The second and perhaps broader aspect related to expectations about what monetary policy can and should do is that it is often asked to effectively make use of a limited toolbox to deal with conflicting objectives. One could be forgiven for thinking that in this country we have only one macro policy instrument - interest rates – to both control inflation and manipulate growth in economic activity.
The obvious elephant in the room here is fiscal policy.
In his address Stevens actually raises an old and interesting idea about fiscal policy: that it can have a stimulatory role perfectly consistent with “sound financing” (to borrow a perverted phrase with which Keynes’ was forced to do battle); where stimulatory expenditure and any increased debt are on the capital or investment side of the budget.
Such fiscal stimulus may even have what some economists refer to as a “crowding-in” effect: a positive impact on expectations about growth, as Stevens notes. This idea also provides a bulwark against the nonsense about fiscal contraction or consolidation (as it’s euphemistically called) being necessary to stimulate the economy.
The caution here from the Governor is also sound it seems; that capital expenditure is not overnight, so the confidence boost is probably more important for the short-term than the actual direct impact on government expenditure.
In any case, if fiscal policy in general and government expenditure in particular is to come back into its own as a macro policy instrument, reform of the revenue base and thus the tax system is paramount.
But note here, a significant driver of tax reform should be the sustainable funding of an expenditure side which fulfils its macro economic role as a generator of demand growth and its social role in generating infrastructure.
Tax reform should not be seen exclusively as code for a lower taxes, this being an end, the means to which to point of is government withdrawing from its expenditure responsibilities. Unfortunately, this latter view seems to dominate much discussion in this country.
From a macro policy standpoint, looking at tax or more appropriately at the revenue side of the fiscal equation may well have a positive spin-off for monetary policy, leaving it to focus, if that is the continued wish of the political masters, on inflation.
And if one is worried about complex adverse distributional effects of monetary policy, expenditure on infrastructure, done properly, would surely help redress inequality by lifting the social wage.
Graham White is Associate Professor, School of Economics at University of Sydney. He can be contacted <a href="https://sydney.edu.au/arts/economics/staff/profiles/g.white.php" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

When monetary policy reaches its limits, what of fiscal policy?

<html><body>
NSW land tax revenues are forecast to rise at a faster rate than stamp duty revenues, according to the NSW state budget papers.
<div>There is an expected 5.7% annual average boost in land tax paid by NSW investors over the four year forward period, rising from $2.49 billion to $3.11 billion in 2018-19.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>No change in the tax rate, just reflecting growth in land values.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Home purchase stamp duty revenues are forecast to rise 4.2% over the period, from $7.29 billion this year to $8.6 billion in 2018-19..</div>
<div>In 2015-16 transfer duty is expected to increase by $551 million, up 7.6 compared to 2014-15, with residential duty tipped to be 11.8% higher.</div>
<div>Stamp duties remain a levels mostly introduced three decades ago.</div>
Duty is calculated on the total dutiable value of the property subject to the transaction.
<table style="height: 160px; width: 428px;">
<thead><tr valign="top">
<td>Value of the property subject to the transaction</td>
<td>Rate of duty</td>
</tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr valign="top">
<td>$0 - $14,000</td>
<td>$1.25 for every $100 or part of the value</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>$14,001 - $30,000</td>
<td>$175 plus $1.50 for every $100, that the value exceeds $14,000</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>$30,001 - $80,000</td>
<td>$415 plus $1.75 for every $100, that the value exceeds $30,000</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>$80,001 - $300,000</td>
<td>$1,290 plus $3.50 for every $100, that the value exceeds $80,000</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>$300,001 - $1m</td>
<td>$8,990 plus $4.50 for every $100, that the value exceeds $300,000</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>over $1m</td>
<td>$40,490 plus $5.50 for every $100, that the value exceeds $1,000,000</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>
Premium Property Duty: over $3m</td>
<td>$150,490 plus $7.00 for every $100, that the value exceeds $3,000,000.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div>  </div>
<div>Investors paid $2.49 billion in land tax during the current 2014-15 fiscal period, up from $2.33 billion in 2013-14. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>The benchmark tax base is the average of the last three years unimproved land value of all land owned, on 31 December of the previous year, that is above the indexed threshold for that year (as defined in the Land Tax Management Act 1956), excluding land used for owner-occupied residences, or by the Commonwealth or NSW Governments.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The benchmark tax rate for the 2015 land tax year is $100 plus 1.6 per cent of the land value between the thresholds of $432,000 and $2,641,000, and 2 per cent thereafter.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The government's lesser known property tax, the inner city parking space levy revenue will rise 2.3% over the period, grossing $105 million this year.   </div>
<div> </div>
<div>The recent strength in the Sydney property boom was being especially driven by properties <a href="/expert-insights/less-revenue-growth-ahead-but-nsw-state-budget-benefits-from-7-29-billion-stamp-duty-bonanza">valued over $1.2 million, the NSW State Budget revealed</a>, but the housing boom longevity is not being assumed by the NSW Treasury.</div>
<div>
No change to NSW first home buyer grants in the state budget <a href="/expert-insights/no-nsw-state-budget-first-home-grant-changes-so-5000-january-2016-reduction-deadline-looms">could intensify activity before the grant's 1 January 2016 reduction</a>. 
</div>
</body></html>

NSW land tax revenue % increases to outdo stamp duty revenue growth

<html><body>
SPONSORED POST
Investing in rental property through a self-managed superannuation fund offers tax advantages which, for many people, will be even greater than the tax benefits of investing in property directly. 
The first advantage stems from the fact that money going into superannuation is taxed at a low rate. 
Most people receive 9.5% of their employment income as contributions to superannuation. In addition to these employer contributions, individuals can voluntarily add up to $30,000 in pre-tax wages to their super fund through a salary sacrifice arrangement.
These types of contributions are taxed within the super fund at 15%, rather than the marginal tax rate that applies to income taken outside of the fund.
Say your annual salary is $120,000 plus 9.5% superannuation, which comes out at $11,400. 
In the 2014-15 financial year, the marginal tax rate on an income of $120,000 is 39.5% including the Medicare levy. You will pay tax of $33,347 on your salary.
The $11,400 contributed to superannuation is taxed at 15%, so the fund pays $1710 in tax. 
The total bill for income tax plus tax the superannuation fund pays is $35,057. 
If you were to salary sacrifice $30,000 of your pay into superannuation, leaving you with $90,000 outside of the fund, you’d pay $21,497 in income tax and the superannuation fund would pay $4500 in tax on the $30,000 salary sacrifice contribution. Add that to the $1710 on the $11,400 compulsory contribution and the total tax bill is $27,707.
That’s a tax saving of $7350 a year, giving you more to invest.
Tax in the fund
Earnings and capital gains made inside a superannuation fund, like contributions, are taxed at 15% while the fund is in its accumulation phase, where members are adding to its balance. 
Capital gains are also taxed at a discounted rate if the property has been held for more than 12 months. While a 50% discount applies to capital gains made on directly-owned property, the CGT discount for property owned through an SMSF is lower, at one-third of the gain. However, the total tax bill may end up being less as the following example demonstrates.
If an SMSF sells a property it has held for five years and makes a $150,000 capital gain, it would have to pay tax on $100,000 of the gain. At the 15% SMSF tax rate, the CGT tax bill is $15,000. 
The same property held outside superannuation would qualify for a 50% discount on the capital gain, so tax would be payable on $75,000. If the owner earned more than $80,000 in the tax year, putting their marginal tax rate at 39.5%, tax on the gain would be $29,625. That’s $14,625 more than the fund had to pay. 
Where SMSFs have the biggest advantage over holding property in your own name is when the property is sold after retirement. 
Capital gains and other earnings are tax-free when the SMSF members have retired and are drawing a pension from the fund. 
If the SMSF member whose property made the $150,000 capital gain above had sold the property after they retired, the fund would have paid no tax on the gain. 
In contrast, a retiree who sells a property held in their own name making a $150,000 capital gain would still have to pay tax on the gain, even if they had no other income. In this case, after the CGT discount, the person’s taxable income for the year would be $75,000 and their tax bill would be $16,682. 
Expenses and deductions
SMSFs can claim the same deductions for property expenses and depreciation as individuals who invest in property in their own name.
Deductible expenses included charges such as agent fees, body corporate fees, council rates and maintenance costs. Draft legislation released in January confirmed that if the property was purchased with borrowed money, the SMSF can also claim interest costs as a tax deduction.
In general, assets valued at over $300 must be depreciated. The fund can also claim depreciation costs for the building itself if it was constructed after July 17, 1985.
To claim depreciation, the SMSF needs to obtain a depreciation schedule, usually prepared by an independent valuer. 
Expenses and depreciation costs are deducted against the income the property generates, reducing the tax liability. 
Property held inside an SMSF can be positively or negatively geared. If it is negatively geared, it’s important to make sure the fund has sufficient cash flow to service the debt without help from outside. This can come from other investment income within the fund, or through member contributions as long as they don’t exceed the maximum amounts.
</body></html>

Tax advantage in rental investment through SMSF: Forrester Cohen 

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Australians know that adequate savings can help provide for a rainy day, help a family put down a deposit on a home, or ensure a comfortable retirement.
Debt also offers a way for households to make purchases that would otherwise be impossible and to achieve a higher current standard of living. Debt invested into an asset that will also grow in real value and is able to be serviced without placing too much ﬁnancial pressure on a household, is generally considered to be good debt.
The key is balance. Since the 2008 financial crisis, Australians have actually decreased their propensity to take on debt and have increased their savings. But debt rates still remain uncomfortably high and there is evidence that this savings discipline is beginning to fade. Have we grown too comfortable with debt?
<h2>Saving more, but more indebted</h2>
Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre’s second ‘Focus on the States’ report, <a href="https://business.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/BCEC_Beyond_Our_Means_Report.pdf" target="_blank">Beyond our Means? Household Savings a Debt in Australia</a> finds Australians have more debt and are more comfortable with it.
While household savings portfolios have seen an increase of 54% in real terms since 2005, household debt has risen by 51% in the same period. Many households are able to access and service this debt, with higher debts associated with higher incomes. On average, Australia’s estimated 9.1 million households have savings in the form of ﬁnancial assets of $340,900 and debts of $148,700.
However, there is a gulf between those at the top of the distribution and those at the bottom. The inequality in the distributions of household savings and debt are considerably worse than the much talked about inequality in incomes.
The average household disposable income of the top 20% of savers is less than four times those in the lowest savings quintile. However, their savings at an average of almost $1.3 million is 200 times the bottom 20%. This top quintile may receive one-third of all income, but they own three quarters of the total value of savings in the form of ﬁnancial assets.
 
<img src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/85216/width668/image-20150616-5810-145cq3d.JPG" alt="">
Average household savings by savings quintile, Australia 2015 (mean $‘000)
The trifecta of debts, low (or no) savings and low incomes presents many low economic resource families with an unenviable challenge to maintain an acceptable quality of life for themselves and their families on a day-to-day basis.
Since the global financial crisis, the household savings rate have risen, with households exhibiting discipline in their expenditure at a time when the economic outlook was uncertain. In an economic downturn income can decline quickly while reining in spending can be more diﬃcult, for both households and governments. Debts can quickly get out of hand and become unmanageable in this situation.
<h2>Becoming used to debt</h2>
While Australian households have decreased their propensity to take on debt and have increased their savings in the post-GFC period, household debt still remains three times higher now than what it was 20 years ago. Australians are now more comfortable with debt and currently hold debt equal to 1.5 years of income, whereas in the past they had only debt equivalent to six months of annual income.
The share of debt associated with investment property loans has tripled from one-tenth to three-tenths between 1990 and 2015.
Unlike previous generations accustomed to more rigid ﬁnancial products, current households can access a greater number of ﬁnancial products, which have arguably become more complex and more ﬂexible.
This flexibility delivers beneﬁts, but with complexity comes risk and it is important to promote good ﬁnancial decisions and encourage a longer term outlook. <a href="https://theconversation.com/your-home-as-an-atm-home-equity-a-risky-welfare-tool-22000">Mortgage equity withdrawal has become a popular tool</a> to derive a higher current standard of living by using the family home as collateral.
More households now use these schemes to smooth consumption or relieve short-term ﬁnancial pressures. But this may have contributed to the average mortgage debt as a proportion of property values almost tripling over the last 25 years, rising from 10% to 28% since 1990.
 
<img src="https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/85219/width668/image-20150616-5832-ijpxwv.JPG" alt="">Ratio of housing debt to housing assets, June 1990 to December 2014
 
Another issue is the use of superannuation savings to pay down mortgage balances, leading retirees to rely more on the pension.
So are we living beyond our means? With household debt to income ratios three times higher now than a quarter of a century ago, household debt up by over 50% in real terms over the last decade and the debt of those approaching retirement (55-64 year olds) up 64% in real terms, it would seem on the face of it to be true.
However, the reality is more nuanced. Household savings are growing faster than income and 8.5 cents in every dollar is being saved, and there is now $2 trillion tucked away in superannuation, while riskier investments are making way for more a more conservative approach. This is far better than we were 10 years ago, but with a note of caution that savings are again on the decline.
 
Alan Duncan is Director, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre and Bankwest Research Chair in Economic Policy at Curtin University. You can follow him on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/bankwestcurtin" target="_blank">here</a>.
Rebecca Cassells is Adjunct Associate Professor, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre at Curtin University. She can be contacted <a href="https://business.curtin.edu.au/research/centres-institutions/bankwest-curtin-economics-centre/staff.cfm/Rebecca.Cassells" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Australians saving more, but are more comfortable with debt: Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre

<html><body>
The developer lobby is the boy who cried wolf in Australian real estate. He’s actually right about something and desperately wants to be heard, but no one is listening anymore.
The recurring topic is the cost of housing. It’s absorbing far too much time and energy for stakeholders everywhere, because politicians find the obvious solutions unpalatable.
If politicians stopped taxing real estate to within an inch of its life, life for home-buyers would become so much easier. The cost of a new home for a first-timer could be massively reduced. One estimate suggests the typical new home in Sydney could cost $250,000 less.
The developer lobby argues that stamp duty is the single biggest problem. I have to agree that stamp duty is an obscenity. Having to cobble together a deposit is a big enough challenge for property buyers, without having to save to pay an exorbitant and unjust tax as well.
Stamp duty on the median priced dwelling in Sydney ($752,000 according to RP Data) is almost $30,000. It’s similar sum for the same purchase in Perth, while anyone buying a home at that price in Melbourne would pay over $40,000.
It’s tantamount to paying a fine for the crime of buying a home or an investment to fund your retirement.
The developer lobby has been targeting this issue with one of its endless campaigns. It wants stamp duty scrapped. It presents some compelling evidence, but I doubt anyone important will take any notice because builders and developers have been crying wolf on multiple issues (e.g. the mythical housing shortage crisis) for years.
And its proposal overall is a massive turnoff. Its argument essentially is this: everyone should pay more tax so that the development industry can make more money.
The Property Council of Australia, arguably the most self-absorbed group in society, is suggesting that stamp duty should end and the lost government revenue be recouped by increasing the GST. 
The proposal, therefore, is that everyone should pay more for everything they buy so that real estate can be exchanged cheaper. I’m sure that’ll go over well with the general public and the politicians they elect.
The council argues stamp duty is inefficient and "a runaway cash grab that's hurting Australia's economy and locking out potential home buyers". It says the community should be outraged at figures like these:
The cost of stamp duty to a home buyer with an average-sized mortgage has increased 795% in Melbourne and 749% in Sydney in the past 20 years. 
Property owners have become Australia's largest collective taxpayer, contributing 9% of total tax revenue.
Property taxes make up as much as 46% of state, territory and local government budgets. Stamp duty alone contributes more than 20% of the total revenues of the NSW,      Victoria, Western Australia and Northern Territory governments.
The cost of stamp duty over the life of an average mortgage is now $61,542 in Sydney, $56,616 in Melbourne, $49,701 in Darwin and $35,427 in Canberra.
The Housing Industry Association, another noisy member of the developer lobby, says property taxes add around $250,000 to the price of a new home in Sydney. That, it says, accounts for 40% or $1,350 per month for the life of a home mortgage.
"Taxes on new housing are a brake on economic activity, and represent a constraint on housing affordability and labour productivity," the association's head of industry policy Graham Wolfe says.
Wolfe says stamp duty is the most inefficient tax in the system. However, he says there are many other taxes on new homes, including developer infrastructure levies, which can add $70,000 to the cost of a new home-and-land package. GST is also levied on new homes, but not existing properties, adding tens of thousands of dollars to the cost.
The problem is: state governments will never give up their property taxes. They’re addicted to them.
We’ve seen what’s happened with the ACT Government. It went to an election promising to eliminate stamp duty within a specific time frame. Now they’re reneging on their promise. They just can’t let go of all that lovely money.
And, for them, the protests of the developer lobby are just background static. No one is listening.
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> 
Terry was recently joined by Property Observer editor at large Jonathan Chancellor for a webinar on why research is the key to successful property investing in 2015. You can download slides and audio from the webinar here.
 
</body></html>

terryryder-YECXbqmri2

State governments addicted to property tax: Terry Ryder

<html><body>
Calls to curtail negative gearing or other tax concessions need to be assessed in the context of the whole tax system, Shane Oliver head of investment strategy and chief economist at AMP Capital says.
"Every time Australian residential property prices take off, calls erupt for negative gearing on investment property to be restricted or scrapped.
"Such calls are getting added currency now as some see it as a way to help close the budget deficit with a greater proportion of the dollar impact falling on higher income earners," he told the Money website.
He said any such move was of dubious merit.
Firstly, he says negative gearing is not the reason housing affordability is so poor in Australia.
"It has been in place for a long time and Australia is not alone in providing some form of “tax assistance” to home owners, as most comparable countries do," adding Americans can even deduct interest on the family home from their taxable income.
"And yet our house-price-to-income ratios are much higher."
Second, removing or restricting the deductibility of interest expenses incurred in property investment will cause a distortion in the tax system because negative gearing would still be available on other investments (so unfairly biasing investors in favour of, say, shares over property). 
"Allowing deductions for expenses incurred in producing income is a standard and common-sense feature of our tax system," he says.
Thirdly calls to curtail negative gearing or other tax concessions need to be assessed in the context of the whole tax system.
"Australia already has a relatively high reliance on income tax and the top marginal rate at 49% is at the high end of comparable countries.
"Curtailing access to negative gearing will only add to the burden on this relatively small group and act as a disincentive for work effort at a time when we should be doing the opposite."
</body></html>

tax

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

tax