An entity directed by HSN's Rafi Assouline and Rebel Property's Allen Linz has filed plans for an impressive new precinct in Woolloomooloo.

The major mixed-use development would transform a prominent William Street site into a new residential village anchored by affordable housing and a large public park.

The proposal, submitted as a State Significant Development Application, covers 164-172 and 174-194 William Street, a 6,398 sqm site between Forbes Street and Dowling Street on the southern edge of Woolloomooloo.

Designed by fjcstudio in collaboration with Bangawarra, Studio Bright and Tribe Studio Architects, the scheme would deliver 227 apartments across four residential buildings ranging in height up to 18 storeys, alongside retail space, public domain improvements and a new publicly accessible park.

<img alt="Rebel" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="0eb59b7c-914a-4a5c-b849-3a56749f5e93" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-06-12%20at%2011.18.51%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=mxM6EEqeoLjrCiTlCzTKTvzpKuh6kSkH" />

It's another design scheme for Rebel, who took <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-rebel-property-group-takes-woolloomooloo-precinct-to-nsw-government">concept plans to the NSW Gov late last year</a>.

The latest plans will be a mix of 167 build-to-sell apartments and 60 affordable apartments, with the affordable housing component representing 15 per cent of the project's gross floor area. The apartment mix includes 12 one-bedroom, 53 two-bedroom, 89 three-bedroom apartments and 13 penthouses, while the affordable housing component would comprise 42 one-bedroom and 18 two-bedroom apartments.

<img alt="Rebel" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="3b3d4553-8a8c-4af5-aa8c-519ffb1e28c6" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-06-12%20at%2011.20.12%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=_Yb6ibN7eDnOtQjCNDK2eviORa4qzgv." />

Rebel Property is seeking to take advantage of the NSW Government's infill affordable housing bonus provisions under the Housing SEPP, which provide additional floor space and height in exchange for the delivery of affordable housing for a minimum of 15 years. The planning pathway allows a 30 per cent increase in floor space ratio and building height where 15 per cent of the development is dedicated to affordable housing.

&nbsp;

At the centre of the development is a 1,356 sqm sunlit public park designed to become a new community gathering space at the gateway to Woolloomooloo. The park would be complemented by a network of pedestrian laneways connecting William Street with the surrounding streets, improving permeability through what is currently a largely impermeable block.

<img alt="Rebel" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="257af931-a393-4007-8c6d-7219796df58d" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-06-12%20at%2011.20.51%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=KAHy94GrhaReFsWTGDKfy39EDJ8gEEv4" />

The design team says the public domain has been heavily influenced by the site's topography and Aboriginal cultural heritage, drawing on the escarpments, gullies and landscape characteristics that historically defined the area before urbanisation. The landscape design has been developed in partnership with First Nations consultancy Bangawarra.

The project would be delivered across four separate buildings. The William Street East and William Street West buildings, designed by fjcstudio, would contain the majority of the apartments. Melbourne-based Studio Bright has designed the Forbes Street building, while Tribe Studio Architects is responsible for the Dowling Street building.

Rebel had secured approval for the concept plans late last year.

Joel Robinson

First look: HSN, Rebel, advances Woolloomooloo precinct plans

A locally heritage-listed furniture showroom on Water Street is set to become the centrepiece of a new mixed-use residential development as local developer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/keylin-group">Keylin</a> seeks approval for <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/lotus-on-water-street-290-water-street-fortitude-valley-qld-4006">Lotus on Water Street</a>, a 15-storey project on the Fortitude Valley side of Spring Hill.

The proposal spans 290 Water Street and 137-141 Warry Street, combining several properties into a 2,869 sqm site that sits between Fortitude Valley, Spring Hill and the rapidly evolving Victoria Park precinct. Keylin's plans would deliver 132 apartments alongside new retail, hospitality and commercial space, while retaining and repurposing the historic Brunswick Home Furnishers Showroom that fronts Water Street.

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/jackson-teece">Jackson Teece</a>, Lotus on Water Street comprises a 12-storey residential tower rising above a three-storey podium and communal rooftop terrace. The development includes 76 apartments classified as multiple dwellings and a further 56 units proposed as short-term accommodation, designed to be flexibly used as either accommodation or permanent residences. The apartment mix comprises six one-bedroom, 54 two-bedroom and 16 three-bedroom homes.

<img alt="First look: Keylin unveils heritage-led Lotus on Water Street tower in Fortitude Valley" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="9822bb79-6c49-49c9-95ba-319e8c8d81c3" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/fortitude%20valley%20front.png?VersionId=ioW8zbN4UVebbLetTFuv92t.HkdgfR5e" />

Residents would have access to an extensive rooftop recreation level spanning more than 1,200 sqm of communal open space. Plans include a pool, gym, sauna, infrared sauna, yoga area, library, private dining room, barbecue facilities and landscaped entertainment spaces, making the rooftop the project's largest shared amenity offering.

At street level, the proposal focuses on the adaptive reuse of the heritage buildings along Water Street, where 518 sqm of retail and commercial space is planned across shop, office and food and drink outlet uses. A permeable residential lobby would be positioned between the retained heritage buildings, creating a pedestrian connection between the historic streetscape and the new tower behind.

<img alt="First look: Keylin unveils heritage-led Lotus on Water Street tower in Fortitude Valley" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="269cf3e0-7d13-48bf-a318-05a00deb5c10" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/fortitude%20valley%20podium.png?VersionId=DLXmTCLsp6GOcLpQ0h.0z7wKCw59EhN_" />

The heritage retention strategy is central to the scheme. The development application notes that the Brunswick Home Furnishers Showroom and adjoining heritage buildings will remain, with only non-significant structures on the site earmarked for removal under a previously issued Heritage Exemption Certificate. Levels one and two of the new podium are recessed behind the heritage façades to maintain their prominence within the streetscape.

Jackson Teece has drawn inspiration from the site's manufacturing history when designing the podium. The planning documents state that the façade incorporates perforated metal screening that references the woven and rattan furniture historically produced on the site. Cascading and climbing plants are integrated throughout the podium to soften the building's presentation and screen parking levels behind. The landscape strategy also informs the project's name, Lotus on Water Street, drawing on the historic Spring Hollow waterholes that once ran through Spring Hill and the blue water lilies associated with Meeanjin, Brisbane's traditional name.

The proposal also incorporates the neighbouring property at 141 Warry Street, currently occupied by a healthcare service. The existing building would remain, with nine dedicated parking spaces allocated within the new development to support its ongoing operation. In total, Lotus on Water Street proposes 117 car spaces, including 110 resident spaces and seven visitor bays, alongside 100 bicycle spaces.

<img alt="First look: Keylin unveils heritage-led Lotus on Water Street tower in Fortitude Valley" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="70cf07bc-4fd8-4e70-92dd-be8b21c4e4f0" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/fortitude%20valley%20site.png?VersionId=txlxrJImM0Sm_vTzHVKh5DDUkyL_CiiA" />

The site sits within the Spring Hill East Precinct of the Spring Hill Neighbourhood Plan and is positioned around 650 metres from both Fortitude Valley Station and Exhibition Station. It is also within walking distance of the King Street precinct, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston Quarter and Victoria Park, which is earmarked to become a major venue precinct ahead of the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Planning documents describe the location as a key gateway between Spring Hill and Fortitude Valley and highlight the area's increasing importance as new transport infrastructure and Olympic-related investment reshape Brisbane's inner north. The development team argues the project will contribute additional housing supply while activating a section of Water Street that has historically received less investment than other parts of the Valley.

Keylin has become increasingly active across Brisbane and southeast Queensland, assembling sites in strategic inner-city locations. They are currently selling and delivering <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/oria-spring-hill-447-gregory-terrace-spring-hill-qld-4000">Oria Spring Hill</a>, just over 140 apartments due for completion in 2027.

Keylin plans heritage-led Lotus on Water Street apartment development in Fortitude Valley

Roseville is poised for a wave of new apartment development following the NSW Government's rezoning of land around Roseville Station under its Transport Oriented Development program.

The new planning controls have unlocked significant development potential within walking distance of the station, with a number of sites expected to be amalgamated and redeveloped in the coming years as developers seek to take advantage of the increased density allowances.

One of the more restrained developments in the precinct, and set among the first to be delivered having commenced well before the recent changes, is Hyecorp's Juliet. The boutique apartment project is already well under construction and remains on track to welcome residents by the end of the year, offering a markedly different proposition to many of the larger-scale developments now likely to emerge across the suburb.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=7395 project_image_fid=278194]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/juliet-roseville-64-pacific-highway-roseville-nsw-2069">Juliet</a> will comprise just&nbsp;34 one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments opposite Roseville Station. For Hyecorp, which has delivered projects across Sydney's Lower North Shore for more than three decades, Roseville presented a rare opportunity to address a growing gap in the market.

"<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/roseville-nsw-2069">Roseville</a> has long been one of the North Shore's most tightly held and desirable suburbs, offering a unique combination of village charm, established greenery, excellent transport connections, and proximity to some of Sydney's best schools and lifestyle amenities," Hyecorp said.

"We recognised a growing demand from local homeowners seeking to downsize without leaving the community they have built their lives around. The location presented a rare opportunity to create homes that cater specifically to that buyer profile."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=7395 project_image_fid=278196]

The six-level development has been designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/pbd-architects">PBD Architects</a> as a collection of residences that feel more like homes than apartments. The brief centred generous floorplans, abundant natural light, quality finishes, and strong connections to outdoor space.

PBD Architects drew inspiration from Roseville's established garden suburb character, creating a building that sits comfortably within its surroundings rather than dominating them. The architecture incorporates natural materials, soft forms, layered landscaping, expansive balconies, and generous setbacks to strengthen the connection between residents and the suburb's leafy environment.

"The focus was on designing spacious, house-like residences for discerning owner-occupiers and downsizers who wanted to remain on the North Shore without compromising on comfort, privacy, or design," PBD said.&nbsp;

"Every apartment was to feel considered, timeless, and highly functional."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=7395 project_image_fid=278195]

Inside, residences feature engineered timber flooring, stone kitchen benchtops and splashbacks, integrated Fisher &amp; Paykel appliances, ducted air conditioning, and large outdoor entertaining areas designed to take advantage of district and treetop views.

Residents will also have access to a rooftop barbecue and lounge area, alongside practical amenities including parcel lockers, EV charging capability, bicycle storage, a dog wash bay, and a basement car wash facility.

The majority of purchasers so far have been local owner-occupiers from Roseville, Lindfield, Chatswood, Killara, and the broader Upper North Shore, many of whom are transitioning from larger family homes.

"Buyers are looking for spacious, house-like apartments that allow them to downsize without feeling like they are sacrificing comfort or functionality," Hyecorp noted.

"They value large kitchens, generous living areas, ample storage, quality finishes, secure parking, lift access, and low-maintenance living."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=7395 project_image_fid=278204]

Juliet sits directly opposite Roseville Train Station and within walking distance of Roseville Village, while Chatswood's retail and dining precinct is only minutes away. The development is also surrounded by some of Sydney's most established schools, including Roseville College, Ravenswood, Pymble Ladies' College, and Knox Grammar, as well as nearby parklands and golf courses.

Juliet is currently more than 75 per cent sold ahead of its anticipated completion in late 2026.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=7395]

Juliet to sit quietly amid Roseville apartment boom

Sherpa Property Group has unveiled the third instalment of its Flourish series, securing full approval for the two-tower, $500 million Flourish Soleira development in Palm Beach.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flourish-soleira-1150-1154-gold-coast-highway-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Soleira</a> will rise from a prominent site in the commercial heart of Palm Beach, the long-time home of Cash Converters and a range of local retailers.

The project will introduce a new retail and dining precinct at ground level, beneath 286 apartments.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=370959]

“We’re very committed to not only providing affordable residential offerings that are much needed in Palm Beach, but also delivering a vibrant new commercial heart that complements the extraordinary growth of the southern Gold Coast,” Sherpa Property Group founder Christie Leet said.

The development will sit under Sherpa's Flourish brand, which is aimed at providing a pathway into the beachside suburb for locals, first-home buyers and downsizers. In a move designed to assist first-home buyers entering the market, Sherpa has reserved all one and two-bedroom, one-bathroom apartments exclusively for eligible first-home buyers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=370964]

“Our vision through Flourish is to create a vibrant retail and lifestyle focal point within the Palm Beach centre zone, delivering thriving communities underpinned by lifestyle-rich locations,” Leet said.

“So far, Flourish has been an incredible success, and we hope to carry this momentum as we progress the next two Flourish projects in Palm Beach.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=371430]

Located across 1150-1164 Gold Coast Highway and 3 Sixth Avenue, the development will comprise two towers. The northern tower will deliver 154 apartments, while the southern tower will add a further 132 residences, helping address ongoing demand for new apartments in the tightly held coastal suburb.

Flourish Soleira will also feature the most extensive rooftop amenity offering ever delivered in Palm Beach.

The two towers will be connected by a skybridge, with residents gaining access to a rooftop recreation deck featuring a full-width swimming pool, hot and cold plunge pools, wellness spaces, a gymnasium, private dining facilities, massage treatment rooms, barbecue areas, a basketball court, golf simulator, indoor and outdoor dining spaces, sun lounges and extensive landscaping.

LPS Group is expected to start construction later this year.

Sherpa is already well advanced on construction of its debut Flourish project, Flourish Amargo, located just around the corner from Soleira. Meanwhile, Flourish Oasis, positioned opposite Amargo, recently commenced construction and has nearly sold out its collection of 47 apartments.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=150017]

Sherpa unveils $500m mixed-use Palm Beach precinct, Flourish Soleira

Are mortgage holders set to get a reprieve from the RBA in 2026?

Big Four bank NAB believes so. They are now expecting the next move from the RBA to be a cut, rather than a hike, which they had pencilled in for August. They are unsure of the timing of the cut however, they note in their latest&nbsp;NAB Economics RBA Watch.

NAB Chief Economist, Dr Sally Auld, said recent data suggests the economy has lost momentum and the outlook for rates has shifted, noting that the broader economic backdrop has changed since earlier in the year.

“The next move in the cash rate is likely to be down, but the timing is uncertain," Dr Auld said.

"In February, growth was above trend, the economy was operating above capacity and there was uncertainty over the restrictiveness of rates. None of these conditions exist today,” she outlined.

Dr Auld said recent data pointed to softer momentum across the economy while acknowledging that at the same time, uncertainty remains a key feature of the outlook.

“Both Q1 GDP data and the NAB business survey suggest momentum in the economy has slowed, meaning that growth has likely peaked for the cycle. That said, we are cognisant there is still considerable uncertainty around the outlook, both with respect to activity and inflation.”

Dr Auld said inflation risks and labour market outcomes would be important to watch.

“On the prices side, we are still forecasting above target core inflation through to mid-2027. Margins will compress and weaker labour market outcomes are a risk.”

She said tighter financial conditions are expected to weigh on housing and activity.

“Tighter financial conditions will be reflected in a slowing in house price growth and housing credit growth. In summary, we have greater conviction that the next move in rates is down, but less conviction on the timing.”

Mortgage relief? NAB forecasts RBA rate cut, not hike, after softer economic conditions

Election

<html><body>
The City of Sydney electoral rolls for the 2016 election will close on 1 August.
On this date, the City of Sydney will provide details from the non-residential register to the NSW Electoral Commission.  After this date, they will verify if each individual on the register is eligible for the non-residential electoral roll. 
If you are eligible, your name and address will be added to the non-residential electoral roll and you will be required to vote at the next City of Sydney Local Government election in September.
<h3>Checking your name on the electoral roll </h3>
From early August, you should check if your name is on the non-residential electoral roll before election day to confirm if you are required to vote.
You can check the roll by either:
<ul>
<li>checking <a href="https://www.votensw.info/" target="_blank">online with the NSW Electoral Commission </a>
</li>
<li>visiting the City of Sydney Customer Service Centre in Town Hall House, 456 Kent Street Sydney, where the roll will be available</li>
<li>calling our Customer Service team on 1800 101 667.</li>
</ul>
The address on the electoral roll will be that of the property you own, occupy or lease in the City of Sydney Local Government Area.
ad of the City of Sydney Local Government election on 10 September 2016, owners, occupiers and rate-paying lessees of rateable property in the City of Sydney area are required to register for the non-residential register and roll.
This is your final reminder to be on the register and be eligible to vote at the 2016 City of Sydney Local Government election.
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

Property 101: City of Sydney ratepayers election roll requirements 

<html><body>
Redfin says increasing numbers of United States homebuyers think the presidential election will negatively impact the housing market.
According to a recent survey 27 percent of homebuyers think the election will negatively affect the housing market.
The study was conducted on nearly 1,000 homebuyers across 36 states. 
<div id="div-oas-ad-article2">The 27 percent is up from 15 percent just four months ago, according to the report.</div>
</body></html>

Property 101: Presidential election set to unsettle US residential market

<html><body>
A poll by the property agency iBuyNew found by a narrow margin that 54 percent of respondents said the election was not influencing their decision on whether to purchase a property.
Some 46 percent of respondents to the online survey said they would wait until after the July 2 election because they wanted to weigh up the policies which will impact the real estate sector.
iBuyNew CEO Mark Mendel said one of the main concerns was the proposed removal of negative gearing on established properties by the Labor Opposition as well as the halving of the CGT discount for assets held longer than 12 months from 50 percent to 25 percent. 
Mark Mendel predicted prices will rise after the federal poll.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Property 101: Has the election delayed purchasing of property?

<html><body>
If you thought the election debate on negative gearing was interesting watch the new property debates get a whole lot hotter with the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO’s) latest bombshell announcement which guaranteed will send shockwaves through property markets. 
No doubt this is just the next step following the ATO being handed total ownership of the Australian property transaction register in mid – 2015, a role they had been champing at the bit to control for quite some time.
From Friday July 1 2016 (the day before the federal election) all sellers of residential and commercial property worth in excess of $2 million will be deemed as an overseas investor unless they can attain a special tax clearance. Failure to attain the special tax clearance certificate means the seller must deduct ten (10) percent from the purchase price which is immediately paid to the ATO.
No doubt lawyers, accountants and conveyancers would be rejoicing at these newly discovered revenue streams although what has not been announced is when a seller receives their compliant special tax clearance are the associated costs in receiving the compliance tax deductible?
This is all aimed at closing loopholes solely aimed at the leakage of tax revenues. Australian residents will get their tax clearance so long as they are up to date with tax returns, proving that they acquired the property within their declared earnings – which I see as a very good move.
When the ATO took over the property reins they quickly started extrapolating all property transactions back to 1985, so it will take a while to complete the register. This new legislation is simply closing the door on those who acquired property illegally either from proceeds of crime or as non – residents.
For the last five years foreign investors have been running amok buying Australian real estate. The federal governments have laid out the welcome mat when they raised off – the – plan purchase restrictions in 2008 from 50 percent to 100 percent.
This week Fitch Ratings warned that Australia clearly has a significant ‘hidden’ offshore property buyers risk. Andrea Jaehne, a director at Fitch Ratings, stated that she was shocked by the increase of foreign buyers since 2010, where the Foreign Investment Review Board experienced an eightfold increase in approvals up to 2015. She said that it was difficult to know the true number of properties being sold offshore because foreign investment rules did not require an approval for foreigners buying apartments off the plan.
The question that needs to now be asked is (with the recent property frenzy which conveniently replaced the mining boom) with all these new measures what will happen to property prices? Well foreign buyers will almost certainly now hold back and watch what happens to the Australian markets particularly Melbourne and Sydney – we can expect some big corrections in these investment markets.
With a further 250,000 apartments to hit the domestic markets within the next two years it is very difficult to see a happy outcome for these markets – more particularly as we have more evidence that these markets are significantly slowing. Then throw in the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics data which shows that Australian wages are growing at the slowest rate for at least 18 years.
Furthermore, we are now hearing that market analysts are now coming to the conclusion that low interest rates actually cause more damage to the economy. As one commentator said this week “very low interest rates around the world are inhibiting economic recovery rather than encouraging it.”
Australia is now just 44 days away from getting a clearer indication of what will happen to the markets more particularly with negative gearing. Now is not the time to start tinkering with investors clearly preferring existing properties. Agents will tell you that when an existing apartment comes onto the market the ratio of home buyers to investors inspecting is generally 50/50. Take away half the market and of course prices will come down – which in turn will drive rents up.
Of course the opposition treasurer could produce his modelling to show otherwise, however this has not been forthcoming so one can then conclude that no modelling is in existence.
With all that’s happening on the Australian property landscape the timing is a potential disaster. In the meantime, watch how many vendors try and offload their properties before the new ATO legislation comes into effect. No doubt the ATO will be watching too.
 
MOSMAN – 2088
Number of houses on the market this time last year – 65
Number of houses on the market last week – 55 
Number of houses on the market this week – 55 
Number of apartments on the market this time last year – 47
Number of apartments on the market last week – 50
Number of apartments on the market this week – 50
 
CREMORNE – 2090
Number of houses on the market this time last year – 5
Number of houses on the market last week – 7 
Number of houses on the market this week – 11 
Number of apartments on the market this time last year – 10
Number of apartments on the market last week – 23 
Number of apartments on the market this week – 22
 
NEUTRAL BAY – 2089 
Number of houses on the market this time last year – 6
Number of houses on the market last week – 8
Number of houses on the market this week – 8 
Number of apartments on the market this time last year – 29 
Number of apartments on the market last week – 21
Number of apartments on the market this week – 22
 
ROBERT SIMEON is a director of <a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/" target="_blank" title="RWM" rel="nofollow">Richardson Wrench Mosman and Neutral Bay</a> and has been selling residential real estate in Sydney since 1985.  He has also been writing real estate blog <a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/news/" target="_blank" title="Virtual Realty News" rel="nofollow">Virtual Realty News</a> since 2000.
</body></html>

robertsimeon-hRNTwJyXkQ

ATO quickly wields its big new property tax

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
It is well known that retail sales have regular cycles that can be disrupted by external events, such as federal elections. While anecdotally it has been suggested that uncertainty around elections causes shoppers to close their wallets and purses, there appears very little evidence either domestically or globally to support the claim that an election campaign will negatively impact consumer spending.
<h2>The Blame Game</h2>
Retailers are notorious at playing the “blame game” when it comes to their sales and profit reporting. They too quickly point the finger at Mother Nature, for being too hot or too rainy, the releasing of blockbusters that distract shoppers, and even customers themselves for being too price conscious, chasing discounts that erode their margins.
This month, Myer CEO Richard Umbers warned that the election campaign is expected to hit consumer sentiment and negatively affect Myer’s outlook.
Surprisingly, Australia’s other large department store, David Jones, remained silent. It appears David Jones is just getting on with business and delivering store sales growth twice the rate of the Australian department store sector. Seemingly, there are other factors affecting retail stores sales, other than an impending federal election.
<h2>Is there evidence?</h2>
Researchers from Princeton University and the University of Chicago found elections had little impact on how consumers actually spend. In their study, spanning four presidential elections, their initial findings identified a correlation between a voters’ “ideological opposition towards a winning candidate” (measured by a voter-ideology score) and a lower score on the Michigan Consumer Sentiment Survey.
However, the correlation did not prove causality. For example, when President George W. Bush was elected in 2000, negative sentiment had no effect on consumers’ self-reported spending plans or on their subsequent automobile purchases and credit-card use. Consumers ideologically opposed to President Bush were not happy about the election outcome, but this slump in sentiment had no effect on what they planned to spend, or actually spent.
It is a similar picture here in Australia, where commentators are looking a little more closely at claims elections stifle retail spending. A review of the ANZ – Roy Morgan Consumer Confidence Index demonstrates a similar phenomenon to that in the US. With the exception of September to October lead into the November 2001 election, marred by the 9/11 attacks in New York and the collapse of Ansett, in most cases, confidence remained positive.
Prior to the October 9 2004 election, the September consumer confidence grew by over 6 percent on August. Similarly, October 2007 was up nearly 6.5 percent on September in the lead up to the November 24 election.
<h2>Confident but deferred</h2>
The operative word used among consumers during times of uncertainty is “deferred”. IBISWorld chairman Phil Ruthven finds that shoppers tend to take a “wait-and-see approach” during election campaigns, which sees spending curtailed on big ticket items like cars, consumer electronics and high-end fashion, but household basics such as food and basics generally remain insulated. In most cases, consumer confidence tends to bounce directly after elections.
There are far too many variables in play to suggest that an extended federal election alone will derail consumer confidence and stifle retail spending. In fact, some consumers who expect to be the recipients of election sweeteners such as tax cuts, infrastructure projects and or job opportunities, may actually increase spending. The power of suggestion is strong with such consumers. Once consumers anticipate a specific positive outcome will occur, they believe their subsequent thoughts and behaviours will actually help to bring about that outcome.
<h2>What retail categories are most affected?</h2>
Food, groceries, fuel and basic clothing generally remain well protected during uncertain times. Despite increasing price competition between the players, the food and grocery division remain moderately strong.
Ultimately, shoppers still need to put fuel in their cars and food on the table. However, most exposed are “big ticket” retailers selling furniture, consumer electronics and automobiles. Fashion clothing and accessories are expected to struggle as such purchases are tied to discretionary spending.
<h2>Other factors?</h2>
Granted, the combination of unseasonable warmer weather across Australia and the growth of global fashion retailers like H&amp;M, Uniqlo, Zara, Forever 21 and Top Shop in the domestic market, will definitely pose a challenge for retailers.
This year incumbent players like Myer, David Jones, Premier Investment and Specialty Retail Group are not just competing with one another, but also these new entrants. This year, more than ever before, shoppers have more choice.
While most consumers remain confident, some retailers are certainly looking towards challenging times ahead. Granted, this is the first federal election held during winter in 20 years and timed “smack bang” in the middle of half yearly, stocktake sales. With an eight week election period well underway, shoppers will continue to buy the basics, but will defer upgrading big ticket items until an outcome is announced on July 3.
An unseasonably warm autumn and a glut of global fashion retailers in the market, will encourage incumbent retailers to cut prices little deeper this year. Great for shoppers, but tough on the books. It is looking to be a tough year ahead for retailers.
Gary Mortimer senior lecturer, QUT Business School, Queensland University of Technology and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gary-mortimer-1322" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Keep calm and keep shopping – how elections impact retail sales

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Australia votes on 2 July 2016 and never before has so much superannuation policy turned on one election. A Liberal victory could mean very different things than a Labor victory.
In this article, I explore some of the ins and outs of each party’s announced policies.
Labor
The policy
Labor has been consistent with their policies for superannuation (including SMSF) pensions. Its position is <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/fairer_super_plan" target="_blank">available here</a>.
… reduce the tax-free concession available to people with annual superannuation incomes from earnings of more than $75,000. From 1 July 2017, future earnings on assets supporting income streams will be tax‑free up to $75,000 a year for each individual. Earnings above the $75,000 threshold will attract the same concessional rate of 15 per cent that applies to earnings in the accumulation phase
… capital gains will be grandfathered …
The drawbacks
The key drawback I feel is that the above could be very difficult to implement for those with pensions from multiple funds. For example, consider an individual who receives pensions from two superannuation funds. The earnings from the assets supporting the first pension in the first fund might total $60,000. The earnings from the assets supporting the second pension in the second fund might also total $60,000. Accordingly, total earnings (ie, $60,000 + $60,000 = $120,000) exceed the $75,000 threshold by $45,000. This raises a tricky question: in which fund is the $45,000 excess subject to tax?
I suspect that the most practical way of dealing with this problem is as follows. I stress that this is only what I suspect what would happen. Again, I have no special inside information.
At the end of each financial year, each fund tells their pensioners what the associated pension assets earnings of the fund are by way of a document that is similar to a PAYG payment summary.
Each pensioner has to lodge an income tax return with the total of all associated pension assets earnings from all funds. These figures would not constitute assessable income of the pensioner.
If total associated pension assets earnings is greater than $75,000, the ATO sends the pensioner a tax bill calculated as the excess (eg, $45,000 in the above example) multiplied by 15 percent.
The pensioner must give this bill to one or more for their superannuation funds to pay. The superannuation funds can adjust the tax bill by any deductions/losses they have in the relevant year.
The pensioner can only pay the tax bill him or herself if there is insufficient money in any of their superannuation accounts in any superannuation funds to pay the bill.
Naturally, the above would be very paperwork heavy. Further, it would be mean that pensioners who might not otherwise have to lodge income tax returns would need to start lodging tax returns. However, I suspect the above — or some version of it — is what would be needed to make the Labor policy work.
Another drawback is the question of what happens in respect of the sale of ‘lumpy’ assets such as real estate. Real estate can be quite low yielding in rent meaning that in most years the $75,000 threshold might not be used up. However, when sold, there could be a large capital gain. If this capital gain is greater than $112,500 (ie, $75,000 grossed up for the one-third CGT discount that superannuation funds currently get if the asset is held for more than 12 months), then the SMSF would pay tax at usual superannuation fund rates on the excess of the net capital gain over $75,000. However, some of the harshness of this would be mitigated by the fact that ‘capital gains will be grandfathered’. Also, there is no suggestion that the $75,000 threshold will be indexed.
The pros
Firstly, ‘capital gains will be grandfathered’. On one construction, this could mean that pension assets already owned in superannuation funds will remain CGT free upon sale. Alternatively, on a more charitable/optimistic reading of the sentence, this could even mean that the second drawback doesn’t even occur (ie, that there’s no limit on the pension exemption that applies to capital gains). Alternatively, it also mean even other things.
Liberals
The liberals made three noteworthy policy announcements in the Budget.
The first policy
The first policy is to:
… [f]rom 1 July 2017 … introduce a $1.6 million transfer balance cap on the total amount of accumulated superannuation an individual can transfer into the retirement phase. Subsequent earnings on these balances will not be restricted.
This $1.6 million cap will be indexed in increments of $100,000 in line with the consumer price index. A fact sheet released on Budget night explains:
A proportionate method which measures the percentage of the cap previously utilised will determine how much cap space an individual has available at any single point in time. ― For example, if an individual has previously used up 75 per cent of their cap they will have access to 25 per cent of the current (indexed) cap
The drawbacks of the first policy
On its face, the Liberals’ policy is similar to Labor’s policy. Afterall, assuming that assets yield income of 4–5% pa, $1.6 million of assets will generate approximately $75,000 of income. However, I suspect the reality could be quite different. My reasoning is as follows. Firstly, remember that under Liberals’ policy ‘[s]ubsequent earnings on these balances will not be restricted.’ Accordingly, a taxpayer with greater than $1.6 million of assets will have a tremendous incentive to try to do a bit of ‘crystal ball gazing’ in order to determine which assets will experience significant capital appreciation and use those assets to fund their pension. This can work out in two ways:
If the crystal ball gazing is right and assets that will experience significant capital grow are allocated to the pension, then — contrary to the Liberals’ motivation — high wealth individuals could still experience significant tax free income, including net capital gains.
However, the opposite could occur (ie, the crystal ball gazing is wrong), and indeed I suspect the opposite will occur more regularly. That is, assets are allocated to commence pensions and those assets end up collapsing in value, for example, where the next GFC comes along. Because it very much sounds like the Liberals want to implement a lifetime cap of $1.6 million, if you pick the wrong assets (eg, if you started your pension with $1.6 million of shares in the next Enron), then it appears to be a case of too bad: even though the original assets might collapse in value down to effectively nothing, you can never use your pension exemption again.
This means that the income tax system would not be taxing income. Rather, it would be giving a tremendous free kick to those who are good at picking investments and it would be giving a tremendous kick in the guts to those who mis-predict future investment performance.
Other draw backs of this policy include:
It sounds like there will be a harsh penalty for exceeding one’s cap. This could occur if a fund miscalculates market values and starts a pension not with $1.6 million of assets but with what ends up being valued at, for example, $1.7 million of assets. The penalty would a tax on not just the earnings of the excess but also on the capital of the excess. Hopefully lessons from the poorly drafted excess contributions tax regime would be learnt and a sensible discretion will be given to the ATO (or even to taxpayers themselves) in order to avoid unfair and harsh outcomes.
It would require tracking of how much of each individual’s lifetime cap — as proportionally indexed — has been used.
The pros of the first policy
This policy would be conceptually easier to administer I think than the Labor equivalent.
The second policy
The Liberals have said that they will remove ‘the tax exemption on earnings of assets supporting Transition to Retirement Income Streams from 1 July 2017’.
The key point here is that to date, for those wishing to take no greater than 10% of their assets per annum, it has not made a huge difference whether they receive transition to retirement income streams or full account-based pensions. However, under this policy it would make a big difference. Accordingly, if this policy ultimately becomes law, those wishing to commence transition to retirement income streams will have an incentive to see if they can first ‘trigger’ a retirement event so that they can take a full account-based pension rather than a transition to retirement income stream and thus pension assets can access the pension exemption. It has been noted by many that — particular once someone reaches age 60 — ‘retirement’ as defined in superannuation law can occur in ways that are very unintuitive. For example, according to paragraph 22 of APRA’s Prudential Practice Guide SPG 280 Payment Standard, if a 60 year old works two jobs and quits one job (eg, to work even more in the other job) this constitutes retirement under the superannuation law.
The third policy
The Liberals propose to remove the ability to make a reg 995‑1.03 election that ‘allows individuals to treat certain superannuation income stream payments as lump sums for tax purposes.’
Succession planning
Both the Liberals and Labor’s proposals could have a massive impact on succession planning.
Currently, the legislature has been quite explicit that if a fund member dies in pension mode, so long as their benefits are cashed as soon as practical after death, the pension exemption at the fund level will continue and there will be no ‘back door’ death tax by way of CGT at the fund level.
This could change a lot regardless of who wins. I won’t give this full consideration in this article, however, I will note the following consideration in respect of the Liberals’ policy. Namely, unlike Labor where an infinite amount can support a pension, it appears that under the Liberals’ policy, someone can never receive pensions with assets that were worth more than $1.6 million upon their commencement.
This might mean in a mum and dad fund with real estate worth say $3.2 million, if dad dies and mum already has a pension, all of dad’s benefits (ie, a 50% interest in the real estate) might need to be cashed out of the fund by way of a lump sum with no scope of a death benefit pension to mum.
Therefore substantially more CGT may be collected in superannuation funds in respect of death benefits especially given the Liberals’ proposed removal of the anti-detriment deduction.
Disclaimer: The following is based on my view of materials publicly available as at the date of writing (16 May 2016). I suspect that when more details become known about both parties’ policies, some comments could become redundant.
This article is for general information only and should not be relied upon without first seeking advice from an appropriately qualified professional. 
Bryce Figot is director, DBA Lawyers and <a href="https://www.dbalawyers.com.au/">can be contacted here</a>.
</body></html>

Liberal v Labor: what different election outcomes could mean for smsf pensions

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
For committed urbanists, any sign of serious urban policy action by the federal government is welcome. Early announcements by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and his appointment of a minister for cities were cause for some celebration.
The subsequent appointment of Angus Taylor as assistant minister for cities and digital transformation continued the positive outlook; a relatively new parliamentarian with a good track record of business development and an analytical disposition was entrusted to advance this policy agenda.
April 29 marked the start of the next phase of policy development, when we got to see what a Smart Cities Plan looks like and whether it was worth the wait.
On first reading it contains all of the right words – smart, innovative, liveability and prosperity. It also advocated some sensible principles – collaboration, co-operation and partnership. But do these nice words and sensible principles add up to a real step change in urban policy thinking, or to a business-as-usual approach wrapped in the latest policy terminology?
At this stage we cannot be sure, but prospective partners in state and local government seem to have a fair degree of optimism about the plan.
Most sensible public bodies will profess their support, in principle, for any initiative that offers the prospect of new money to support development proposals in their area. They will commit, in principle, to working together for the common good in their locality. And, if necessary, they will rebadge their current plans to fit more easily with the rhetorical flavour of the new initiative.
The proof will, however, lie in the detail of partnership arrangements, in the implementation structures that are developed and in the way new money is allocated. Even more importantly, success will depend on whether the actual measures employed work in practice.
<h2>Partnerships in practice</h2>
In each of our cities – large and small – we need all three levels of government to work together if growth is to be supported and managed effectively. Intergovernmental partnerships have been proposed for as long as we have had different levels of government.
There is much research on what makes such partnerships work well and what does not. Where partnerships work, much of this success is based on mutual respect and recognition of the distinctive contribution of each partner.
It becomes more challenging where the reality of an urban area requires horizontal partnerships between local councils as well as vertical partnerships with state and federal bodies.
The patchy experience of Regional Development Australia committees across the country gives some indication of how well this has been achieved to date. Some have worked very well. Others have struggled in the face of varied and variable enthusiasm among partners.
<h2>Getting implementation structures right</h2>
I have argued previously that effective implementation of any policy initiative is often plagued by a lack of long-term commitment and bipartisan support.
Along with a seemingly irresistible belief within governments of any hue that policies need to be fiddled with (the technical terms would be refreshed, refocused or rebadged) every few years, carefully designed initiatives are rarely left to get on with their work and run their course.
Another problem is bureaucratic capture, in which early ambitions to work differently, with greater agility perhaps, are slowly but surely overtaken by implementation regimes that do the opposite in practice. The business experience of both the prime minister and his assistant minister for cities will be needed to prevent this type of sclerosis taking hold.
<h2>Finding and spending new money to best effect</h2>
As Taylor told Michelle Grattan recently, some partnerships between public bodies and private investors have been very effective in the past – the construction of the national rail network in the US, for example. But there is also no shortage of ones that have not gone well for any of the parties.
So, while there has been some enthusiasm for the potential role of value capture of late – and certainly in the new plan – we need to see the detail of particular proposals.
The UK City Deals model includes the principle of transferring some of the increased tax revenue associated with growth from the Treasury back to local partnerships. However, this has sometimes proved difficult to agree in practice. 
And it is here that bipartisan agreement in the urban policy field seems unlikely at present. The shadow minister for cities, Anthony Albanese, has come straight out with a ringing condemnation of the Turnbull-Taylor plan as a policy without substance.
Albanese also joined with the Property Council of Australia in invoking the spectre of Australian families being slugged with a new property tax to capture some of any increased value associated with public investment in infrastructure.
<h2>How will we know what works?</h2>
Tucked away on page 23 of the plan is a small section about measuring success. This acknowledges the importance of having good-quality data to provide a baseline against which future performance can be measured. It cites the need for “unambiguous targets, accountabilities and timeframes for city-level reforms”.
The plan recognises that, without these, it will be impossible for the government to hold itself and its investment partners to account. I would like to think that in five years’ time we will be able to read a National Audit Office report (like this one on the 2011-14 Liveable Cities Program) describing how this bold new Smart Cities Plan heralded a new era of productive intergovernmental collaboration.
That would mean it succeeded in attracting substantial new private investment, which set our cities on a clear path to being smarter, more productive and nicer places in which to live.
Let’s hope that if I shared this view with The Castle’s Darryl Kerrigan he wouldn’t tell me, or indeed Angus Taylor, that we’re dreamin’.
 
Paul Burton is professor of Urban Management and Planning &amp; Director, Urban Research Program, Griffith University and author for The Conversation.
He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/paul-burton-5155" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Smart Cities Plan offers signs of hope, but are Turnbull and Taylor just dreamin'?

<html><body>
During the life of the next Parliament — and probably by 2017 — Australia will fall into a prolonged recession, according to Steve Keen, the head of the school of economics, history and politics at Kingston University in the UK and author of Debunking Economics.
"For the last 25 years, Australian politicians of both Liberal and Labor hue have been able to brag that, under their stewardship, Australia has avoided a recession.
"Those bragging rights are about to come to an end," he blogged saying the recession has been set up by the sidestep both parties have used to avoid downturns for the past quarter century.
He claimed Australia’s most famous recession sidestep was during the GFC, when it was one of only two countries in the OECD to avoid experiencing two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth (the other country was South Korea).
"Since then, the private sectors of the advanced countries have collectively de-levered, reducing their debt levels from about 170 to 160 per cent of GDP. Australia, in stark contrast, has levered up.
"Our private debt to GDP ratio is now more than 20 per cent higher than when the GFC began, and more than 50 per cent higher than in the USA (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Australia has borrowed its way out of recession for the last 25 years
<a href="/images/2016/03/23/6cdbf509f2f9a18c8a88d8c79cf70910.jpeg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/03/23/6cdbf509f2f9a18c8a88d8c79cf70910.jpeg" alt="">
"The day of reckoning can be delayed by encouraging yet more private borrowing, which the RBA can attempt to do by cutting interest rates, and the government can reduce the crunch by running a large budget deficit.
"But these are likely to happen after a crisis rather than before it, because our Reserve Bank and our politicians are as oblivious to the dangers of private debt today as Bernanke was back in 2007.
"The 2016 election could be a good one to lose."
</body></html>

Election

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Election

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News