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

Joel Robinson

CPG unveils Castile Newstead ahead of upcoming sales launch

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

How Australia Post Parcel Lockers changed parcel delivery convenience in Australia

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

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

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

Sammut secures approval for debut Brisbane apartment development in Toowong

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

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

National

<html><body>
Australia’s retirement income system is the most sustainable of 50 countries, according to a new survey by Allianz.
The Allianz 2014 Pension Sustainability Index report found that Australia’s combination of a public and private retirement income made it the most sustainable, placing it ahead of Sweden, New Zealand, Norway, the Netherlands and Denmark.
The annual report examined key elements of each nation’s pension system, both public and private, and the developments that influence them. It also evaluated the pressure on governments to effect reform to improve the fiscal sustainability of their systems.
Australia’s two-tier system, with a lean public pension and highly developed funded pension, means it is under the least pressure to reform.
New Zealand was also found to have a sustainable pension system, as it is not aging as rapidly as many other countries, and its labour force tends to work beyond statutory retirement age.
The report found that Thailand has replaced Greece as the nation with the most need to reform its pension system. Thailand has an extremely low retirement age and sporadic pension coverage.
Brazil was ranked second lowest, due to its high replacement rate and low effective retirement.
Allianz found that, in addition to Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Romania, Singapore, Turkey and the US were able to move more than five places up in the rankings from the 2011 report. It found a combination of factors led to this improvement, including improved aging perspectives and improved economic development.
Countries that dropped in ranking included Croatia, France, Hong Kong, Malta, Slovenia and Taiwan.
Allianz general manager of corporate affairs Nicholas Scofield told SmartCompany that one of the reasons Australia’s pension was sustainable was that it paid 42% of the average wage, while other countries paid much higher portions of their country’s average wage and had been slow to implement <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/finance/superannuation/35084-apra-statistics-reveal-huge-gap-between-the-best-and-worst-superannuation-funds" target="_blank">private superannuation</a>.
Schofield says that while the Australian system is sustainable, the report does not rank on generosity. In Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Japan and Korea, the portion of the average wage paid was closer to 60%, while in Spain it was more than 70% and in Italy it was 80%.
The findings of the survey appear to contradict perceptions that Australia’s superannuation system and pension is in need of urgent reform, and Scofield says it shows there is a lot Australia is doing well.
“Australia moved early on establishing a private contribution system … there are some countries that are still starting that journey,” he says.
He says that with superannuation contributions edging towards 12%, Australia’s pension sustainability should continue.
Allianz Australia managing director Niran Peiris said one area the report found concerning was that Australia’s superannuation system allowed people to give lump sum contributions.
“The report highlighted that allowing people to take all their superannuation savings as a lump sum to be used to repay home mortgages or other purposes risked leaving retirees with reduced incomes for their retirement,” he said.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/" target="_blank">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

moliver-7qYWqnHmyR

Australia’s pension system is world’s most sustainable, study finds

<html><body>
Taxpayers could be hit with an extra $32.5 billion in tax in the next decade, unless the federal government make changes to personal income tax brackets, according to a new report.
Research commissioned by The Australian and conducted by the University of Canberra found if there are no changes to the personal income tax brackets, the number of people paying the top tax rate would increase by 134% in the next 10 years to just under 900,000 people.
The number of Australians paying the second highest rate, 37 cents for the dollar, would jump by 85% to 3.7 million.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.SmartCompany.com.au">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

yredrup-o4Anfe78KF

Millions of Australians to face higher tax brackets

<html><body>
There’s a parallel universe in which Australian real estate has gone mad.
In this universe, the market changes almost every month. One month it’s white hot, the next it’s paused, the one after it’s rampant, the one following it’s off the boil and a month later it’s a bubble.
Not surprisingly, the citizens of the alternative universe Australia live in a state of constant flux and confusion. No one has a clue what’s really going on, least of all the people who write for the parallel media. In this world, you get to create your own reality by making things up.
Another significant difference in this parallel universe is that there are only two population centres in Australia, one called Sydney and the other Melbourne.
Actually, it’s not clear whether there are no other inhabits in alternative Australia outside the big two - or just that it’s been decided they don’t count, so anything that happens there is ignored.
Anyway, in parallel Australia the property market peaked back in October. That’s according to a company that mangles numbers called ridiculously premature data. But then the market surged again until, in February, it went off the boil, and ridiculously premature data declared another peak.
<blockquote>
It’s a relief to live in the real world where the information is real and not have to suffer the insanity of parallel Australia, where misinformation is as rampant as the property prices.
</blockquote>
Lo and behold, in this wondrous place of roller coaster real estate, the market re-surged and was rampant again in March – well, it was in the only two population centres that mattered.
Thank god we live in real Australia, where normality rules. Here it’s recognised that monthly data is misleading and therefore irrelevant, and that the long-term trends are the ones that matter.
In real Australia, it’s understood that two-thirds of the people live outside Sydney and Melbourne and that’s it’s wrong to extrapolate the Sydney experience to the whole nation.
It’s recognised that, in the past 12 months, six of the eight capital cities have had price growth of 4.8% or less – and therefore it’s wrong to suggest that price growth is rampant across the nation.
Things that happen in the parallel universe – such as journalists declaring that interest rates must rise because there’s “record-breaking” price growth everywhere and stating that “the surge in investors, including foreign buyers, has priced first home buyers out of the property market” – would never happen in real Australia.
In the Australia of the real universe, accuracy and balanced are cherished and only experts are allowed to write about important things like real estate.
Therefore, it’s acknowledged that the weight of evidence is that affordability is the best it’s been in 10 years and that foreign investors do not buy in the same markets as first home buyers and therefore have no influence on the prices paid by first-timers.
In this Australia, writers don’t give emphasis to month-to-month data, which is confusing and misleading, and they don’t give credence to publicity hungry organisations that spit dodgy data out of computers without proper scrutiny in their haste to be the first to publish, and accuracy be damned.
I must say, it’s a relief to live in the real world where the information is real and not have to suffer the insanity of parallel Australia, where misinformation is as rampant as the property prices.
You can contact Terry via <a href="https://mailto:ryder@hotspotting.com.au" target="_blank">email</a> or on <a href="https://www.twitter.com/hotspotting" target="_blank">Twitter</a>.
</body></html>

terryryder-YECXbqmri2

White hot? Off the boil? Bubble? The mad parallel world of Australian real estate

<html><body>
Modern governments believe that during budget framing, it is politically savvy to parade the pain. We saw it with Labor and the Coalition is doing the same.
There are scary scenarios of what would happen without remediation, with warnings about problem areas. Some surprises will be held for the night, but other measures will be strategically “leaked” beforehand.
Tony Abbott, in Perth campaigning for the West Australian Senate election, let it be known he was chairing Wednesday’s meeting of cabinet’s expenditure review committee.
Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen declared it was the first time in Australian history a PM had chaired the ERC, claiming it showed dysfunction at the highest level.
This was nonsense. The government could quickly counter that Bob Hawke, John Howard and Kevin Rudd had also done so.
But it was surprising Abbott gave such a high profile to this “razor gang” meeting.
The ERC is all about nasties and, after all, Labor is making the prospect of deep budget cuts a centrepiece of its WA Senate campaigning. Abbott seemed to be providing ammunition. On the other hand, he could take the view Labor had the bullets anyway so he might as well play the longer game.
Treasury secretary Martin Parkinson publicly chimed into the pre- budget debate with a speech reinforcing the government’s lines about spending growth in the big areas.
But Parkinson also sent a public message to the government for later about what it should do on taxation.
With Hockey shining attention on health and pension costs, Parkinson documented the escalation.
Total Commonwealth spending on health is set to rise from $64.7 billion in nominal terms in 2013-14 to $74.6 billion in 2016-17, and to $116 billion in 2023-24.
The Commonwealth’s three main pension payments - for the aged, those on disability support and carers – will grow at an annual 6% in nominal terms over the forward estimates, adding $13 billion to annual payments by 2016-17, and another $39 billion by 2023-24. “Of this nearly $52 billion in additional payments in 2023-24, compared to 2013-14, over half is a result of indexation with the remainder due to increases in the number of recipients.”
That seems a fair hint that both drivers are being looked at. It should be remembered that successive governments have been trying to curtail the numbers on the disability pension but it has seemed a losing battle. It’s never as easy as it looks in theory.
Parkinson then turned to the tax side. His argument, aimed well beyond this budget and directed squarely at the political masters he will leave in December, is crystal clear. Australia needs a tax system it relies more on indirect tax, less on direct tax. The king of indirect taxes is, of course, the GST.
Parkinson pointed to one rather surprising fact, given the tax debates we’ve been through over many years. “Despite reforms that broaden the tax base (such as the GST), and decisions that have lowered corporate and personal tax rates across the decades, the share of direct and indirect taxes (as well as Australia’s reliance on income taxes) has changed little since the 1950s.”
Australia had relatively high reliance on direct taxes as a proportion of revenue raised compared with other OECD countries, he noted, before observing that: “Research consistently says that reduced reliance on income taxes and increased reliance on other, more efficient sources of revenue, including indirect taxes, can support higher growth and higher living standards by increasing workforce participation and lifting productivity.”
The problem is that “without conscious change, Australia’s tax mix will move in the opposite direction as personal income tax increases through fiscal drag”.
“We will move even further in this direction if, as we anticipate, the relative share of total indirect taxes (including GST) continues its long-term decline. Contributing to this decline is the non-indexation of fuel excise (unlike other excise rates) and a rising proportion of consumption outside the GST net, for example, in increased health expenditure.”
Parkinson warned that “continued increases in the personal income tax burden will hit lower and middle income earners with higher marginal and average tax rates. This will have adverse labour force participation impacts, while sharpening incentives for tax minimisation by higher income earners”.
The globalised economy meant Australia would be under pressure to cut the company tax rate.
“Given the pressure to return fiscal drag and to reduce the burden of corporate income tax, it will be a challenge to maintain the current levels of revenue over the medium term, let alone the increases required to achieve the budget projections.”
In the past, Parkinson said, tax reform had largely been pursued through broadening tax bases as an offset for lowering tax rates.
“However, a key challenge for the upcoming White Paper on Taxation will be to consider the mix of taxes, including whether there is a role for a greater contribution from indirect taxes.”
The opportunity were there to plot a path to a better tax system and the dangers clear if it was not done.
“If we do not start making these changes and simply keep drifting along we will be increasingly vulnerable to the next global crisis and will also lose out on the opportunities presented by the rising Asian middle class. The exceptionalism of this ‘lucky country’ will become just a distant, ironic memory and our children may really end up ‘doing it tough’”.
So there you have it. Parkinson, axed by the government (though extended until year’s end) won’t be around for the battles after the white paper, which has a long time table.
But he has signposted another lot of unpalatable truths. In terms of painful decisions ahead, this budget is only the start of it for the Abbott government, which hates the idea of tax increases, fears the politics of a robust debate about needing a higher, broader GST and has promised to take any major tax changes to the election.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/25161/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="line-height: 1.3em;">
Michelle Grattan is professorial fellow at the <a href="https://www.canberra.edu.au/" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">University of Canberra</a>.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

jake-cSmGT7VXVf

Treasury boss hints at the need for a broader GST

<html><body>
We’ve now entered the traditional pre-budget softening-up period in which treasurers engage in expectations management ahead of the fiscal set-piece of the year in May. But even given that, Joe Hockey is treating us as complete idiots.
The line Hockey has been pushing for some days now, and which he gave a big push to yesterday in a flurry of media appearances, is that not merely did Labor hide the level of deficits in the current budget cycle, but that it left a series of hidden spending commitments in the unpublished years beyond forward estimates. Hockey has been circulating a document to journalists portrayed in the media as a “Treasury analysis” that shows how “the Coalition inherited an unsustainable budget position” and Labor “hid [expenditure] from the public”. Hockey would like us to see him as a budgetary innocent who has found himself in the middle of a fiscal minefield planted by Labor.
<a href="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/BRIEFING-NOTE.pdf"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-431677" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2014-04-01_11-33-411.jpg" alt="" width="520" height="180"></a>
Well <a href="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/BRIEFING-NOTE.pdf" target="_blank">here’s the document</a>, and it isn’t a “Treasury analysis” — it’s prepared by Hockey’s media adviser, former Australian Financial Review journalist Gemma Daley. And if Hockey seriously expects us to believe his latest argument, he must have nothing but contempt for us. This is Hockey yesterday: “We didn’t anticipate that everything else would be of equal or larger scale as a tsunami coming across the water. The fact is Labor’s left us with a massive forecast increase in foreign aid, a massive increase in defence – for example in one year, there’s meant to be a real increase in defence spending of 13%, a 66% increase in foreign aid.”
<blockquote>
Hockey would like us to see him as a budgetary innocent who has found himself in the middle of a fiscal minefield planted by Labor.
</blockquote>
At another media conference, he said: “If no action was taken on the budget, what the fifth-year deficit would look like, contrary to what both Labor promised was a surplus, if no action was taken, based on the approximately 6% increase in expenditure between the fourth year and the fifth year, which Labor locked in on NDIS, on Gonski, on overseas aid, on hospitals, on defence …”
Well, um, tsunamis are actually tiny when they’re on the ocean — but never mind that, let’s look at the detail. Labor in fact revealed the funding for the National Disability Insurance Scheme — or DisabilityCare as it had been renamed — in the budget last May, with new spending broken down out to 2019:
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-431667" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2014-04-01_11-24-28.jpg" alt="" width="501" height="179">
In addition to the numbers in the budget papers, there was a specific “glossy” with funding graphs for <a href="https://budget.gov.au/2013-14/content/glossy/NDIS_policy/download/NDIS.pdf" target="_blank">DisabilityCare</a> and one for <a href="https://budget.gov.au/2013-14/content/glossy/gonski_policy/download/NPSI.pdf" target="_blank">education funding</a> as well, which was still being finalised in deals with the states. The increase in foreign aid was also in both the budget papers and a <a href="https://budget.gov.au/2013-14/content/ministerial_statements/download/AusAid_MS.pdf" target="_blank">ministerial statement by Bob Carr</a>  — not that the government got any credit for it, because it was actually a reduction, with the government’s Millennium Development Goal commitment to lifting foreign aid to 0.5% of gross national income put back another year to 2017. The government spelt out its planned increase in foreign aid up to and including 2017-18.
In fact in question time last week, Labor invited the Prime Minister to spell out the government’s MDG policy, which he duly did: aid is to reach 0.5% of GNI when the budget returns to surplus. Which raises the question of why, in Hockey’s Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook in December, Hockey left Labor’s MDG aid funding increase intact, in defiance of the government’s own policy. The answer, of course, was that it would inflate the budget deficit for 2017 and beyond.
As for defence, the Gillard government <a href="https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2013/05/14/minister-for-defence-budget-2013-14-defence-budget-overview/" target="_blank">gave the portfolio a “guidance”</a> that it would receive around $220 billion in the six years from 2017-18, which Hockey’s document proposes to mean funding would leap 13% in 2017, when in fact the “guidance” reflects a growth rate in defence spending from 2017 lower than the average between now and 2017 of nearly 7%. And remember that Labor was repeatedly criticised fordecreasing defence spending — every armchair general and arms industry lobbyist in the joint was whinging about how we weren’t spending enough taxpayer money on buying gear from the US military-industrial complex. “Military spending slumps to 1930s level,” The Australian’s <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/military-spending-slumps-to-1930s-level/story-e6frg74x-1226352458112" target="_blank">Paul Kelly shrieked</a>. The 1930s theme — hint,appeasement!­ —  was picked up by the Coalition, including Tony Abbott and Barnaby Joyce. Abbott “aspired”, he said, to lift defence spending to 3% of GDP.
So, Labor were both neo-Chamberlain surrender monkeys for not spending enough on defence when in government and now, magically, reckless spendthrifts who committed too much to defence at the same time.
Hockey’s fiscal innocent act is a little hard to believe given we were told what an exhaustive, indeed exhausting, shadow ERC process Hockey was leading within the opposition at the time to establish its fiscal credibility.
And above all, there’s this point: if Hockey seriously believes his own claims about the budget beyond forward estimates, why did he remove Labor savings measures that offset future spending? Why did he remove the 15% tax on superannuation income over $100,000 a year, costing the budget billions beyond forward estimates, for the benefit of high income earners? Why did he restore the Fringe Benefits Tax rort on novated leases — remember Joe being photographed in front of a sports car? And why have Hockey and his leader pushed for the abolition of the mining tax, which even in its crippled form, according to Hockey’s own MYEFO, is worth more than $3 billion over forward estimates? Eventually it will be the only way of recovering some of the profits offshore owners of LNG and iron ore projects will make and ship overseas (over 60% of these projects are foreign owned or controlled).
Then there’s the silly decision to hand $8.8 billion of borrowed money to the Reserve Bank in one hit, when it doesn’t need the capital. And the sale of Medibank Private — a $4-5 billion contribution to the budget — will be spent on roads because Abbott wants to be an “infrastructure prime minister”, when it could cut the budget deficit or the debt. That could be $13-14 billion off the deficit and debt right there — or an interest saving of more than half-a-billion dollars a year.
Hockey is talking about sharing the budget burden around, but that’s only after the government plans to increase its own spending for political purposes and sought to hand billions of dollars in tax revenue back to foreign mining companies, large carbon emitters and the well-off in the community — revenue that would have offset exactly the spending on education, disability and foreign aid that Hockey is now claiming to have only just discovered.
This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Crikey</a>.
</body></html>

bkeane-XQ2u7CA6bB

Joe Hockey treating Australian public as fiscal fools ahead of the federal budget

<html><body>
Urban development policies do not reflect the needs of Australia’s wealthiest group of property buyers leading to a mismatch between the housing stock available and what is in demand, according to architecture and design firm Hames Sharley’s associate director Arun Broadhurst.
Speaking at the Urban Development Institute of Australia’s national congress in Brisbane last week, Broadhurst said public policy around the country was designed with an overwhelming desire to increase the density of capital cities. As part of that, developers were encouraged to build smaller types of housing with one to two bedrooms.
“The problem is that Generation X, which is our most wealthy generation, is of child bearing age and the policies don’t necessarily reflect what they need. They’re still going to need three, four or five bedroom houses,” Broadhurst said.
Most of the members of UDIA are large land developers that focus on green field sites on the city fringes. First home buyers form their main target markets.
Broadhurst told conference delegates that while some first time buyers were interested in one to two bedroom homes, many were still looking for three to five bedroom homes because they were planning to have children in future.
Broadhurst’s comments were based on the findings of The Housing We’d Choose: a study for Perth and Peel report, which was released last year. The research was conducted by Curtin Business School with Hames Sharley managing the project. The report analysed the compromises people in Perth were prepared to make when they bought a home.
The Grattan Institute had put together similar research in 2011 based on the Sydney and Melbourne markets.
The studies constrained people’s decision making by forcing them to make realistic assessments based on their own financial situations.
“If you asked people ‘What do you want to buy?’ people would say a five bedroom house in Kirribilli but we know this is unattainable for most people. [The research] constrains people’s choices by income and available stock to get a better feeling of how the real housing market works ,” Broadhurst said.
The Perth and Peel study found Perth was well catered for in three to five bedroom houses but had a large undersupply of one to two bedroom homes that suited people looking for smaller, more affordable homes. “It’s probably similar in Brisbane,” Broadhurst said. 
“In Melbourne and Sydney there’s a greater amount of housing diversity,” he said.
However, there were opportunities for developers to attract a greater variety of people to live out on the city fringes if they built homes that better suited wealthier growing families.
“Generation X tends to be affluent enough to live in the suburbs of their choosing,” Broadhurst said.
</body></html>

zfielding-GvX3Uq9KTa

Urban development policies leading to a mismatch between demand and supply

<html><body>
People who commit white collar crime in Australia are getting off lightly compared with those found guilty of similar offenses in other countries, a report has found.
Thousands of Australians have lost millions of dollars or been put at risk by the actions of financial planners and credit brokers who have committed fraud, provided inappropriate advice and operated without an appropriate license.
A report by the Australia Securities and Investments Commission has found the penalties that can be imposed for such offenses in Australia are limited in some cases compared with those available to regulators in other jurisdictions.
For example, people who provide financial services without a license in Australia can only be fined up to $34,000. In contrast, the report found that people guilty of the same offenses in the US face maximum fines of $5.6 million. In the UK, the maximum fine is unlimited.
The maximum civil penalty in Australia for giving inappropriate advice is $200,000, while in the UK the maximum is unlimited, and in Hong Kong it is the greater of $1.4 million or three times the benefit gained by the wrongdoer. 
Individuals who broke corporate rules in the US could be sentenced to prison terms of up to 20 years. In Australia, and most other jurisdictions studied, the maximum prison term was 10 years for criminal penalties such as fraud and insider trading. The maximum prison term for providing financial services without a license in Australia is just two years.
The report compared maximum penalties in Australia to penalties imposed for similar offenses in Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canadian province, Ontario.
It found that regulators elsewhere could, in addition to imposing fines and prison terms, remove financial benefits that wrongdoers had obtained through illegal profits or avoided losses. ASIC does not have that power, although it can ask other agencies to bring an action to confiscate the proceeds of crime.
The relatively low fixed fines that ASIC can impose and the fact that it cannot remove the proceeds of crime itself meant that wrongdoers may still profit from their conduct and not be deterred by the penalties, the report warned.
“The maximum fine that may be imposed may be substantially lower than the financial benefit obtained as a result of the wrongdoing,” it said.
The report also found inconsistencies between penalties that could apply to similar offenses under different pieces of legislation within Australia. For instance, offering a financial service without a license attracted a criminal penalty under the Corporations Act with individuals fined up to $34,000, while someone giving unlicensed credit advice could be subject to the same criminal penalty, or a civil penalty of up to $340,000.
Civil penalties in the Corporations Act have been eroded by inflation as they have not increased since they were set in 1992 for individuals and 2004 for corporations. In 2007, it was suggested that the penalties should be lifted following a Treasury review, although no increases were made.
The report is the first of its kind in over a decade and ASIC has recommended further work be done.
Its findings will be fed into ASIC’s submission to the Financial System Inquiry, which closes for comment on Friday, March 28.
</body></html>

Australia's white collar crime penalties pale in comparison to other jurisdictions

<html><body>
As many property investors know, the best investment opportunities sometimes lie a little beyond your doorstep.
Are you a Sydney resident priced out of your home market, but thinking of finding some capital growth in Brisbane? Or maybe you’re dying to buy in Melbourne, but are based in Western Australia for work. While searching, buying and settling – let alone maintaining – a property from a distance may seem impossible, it’s in fact entirely manageable and often a <a href="/expert-insights/investing/four-reasons-you-should-consider-investing-in-property-interstate-ed-chan">terrific wealth builder</a>.
Finding the right property
It may well be the Property Observer mantra: do your research. If you’ve heard that the Queensland market is undervalued, take the time to determine what you want out of your investment and look at area data to see which suburbs stack up. 
Purchasing property interstate can force you to be realistic about your investment prospects – remember, you won’t be living there, so keep your eyes on the numbers and <a href="/news/qld/the-five-most-overrated-queensland-markets-to-buy-in">don't buy into hype</a>. 
With online listing sites, you can always know what's available, no matter where it's available. So there's no excuse to limit your search to your state. Finding the right people                                  
Once you’ve figured out which suburbs and what sorts of properties you’re interested in, it doesn’t hurt to enlist a little help. If you have a property savvy family member in the area who doesn’t mind putting in a little time for you, you might be able to palm off some of the legwork, like attending auctions to see whether homes tend to go for more than their listed price, or scoping out buyer demand.
Better still, consider putting some money down for a <a href="/news/how-buyers-agents-pick-the-best-performing-properties">buyer’s agent</a> or a conveyancer. Their local knowledge will surpass yours in <a href="/news/the-argument-for-against-buyers-agents">almost every way</a>; good connections with agents, the inside scoop on what properties are really worth and an understanding of <a href="/expert-insights/investing/buying-interstate-the-information-you-need-to-know">state purchasing laws</a> can be invaluable.
A conveyancer, a specialist lawyer, can look after all aspects of the process for you, from researching properties, lodging your legal documents and putting your deposit in a trust account.
Once you’re really serious about a property, it’s worth a flight to walk through yourself and have a look at the neighbourhood. You might also need a builder to do a walk through and inspection for any faults in the property and to let you know if you’ll have any troubles with renovations further down the track. 
And once the property is purchased and settled, you will, as always, need <a href="/expert-insights/investing/six-things-to-look-for-when-choosing-a-property-manager">a good property manager</a> – one who can source good tenants and maintain your property and your flow of cash.
Key differences
There are three standout differences between the states and territories when it comes to buying property: information, cooling off and government support and taxation.
The changes in the level of information vendors must disclose may influence just how much help you need to engage to buy your property. In Victoria, all vendors are required to provide Section 23 documents, which include any mortgages or debt against the land, planning information and any registered works on the property. When purchasing a property in the ACT you will have access to similar documents which will also include a pest inspection report and an energy efficiency statement.
The other states and territories require varying but generally less comprehensive levels of disclosure: NSW and SA vendors must provide Schedule 1 and Form 1 documents respectively, which won't include details of building works. Vendors in Tasmania, Queensland, NT and WA can all sell properties without giving disclosure statements to buyers.
As for "cooling off" periods, if you're buying a property in ACT, NSW or Queensland, you'll be allowed a five day period to change your mind after a purchase. SA properties come with a two day cooling off period that commences either once the contract is signed or once the Form 1 documents are provided, whichever is later. There is no legal requirement to provide a cooling off period for property purchases in WA or Tasmania, or for Victorian properties purchased at auction.
Each state has its own rate of stamp duty or land tax that is applicable. Make sure that you factor this into your budget when considering a property purchase. Many state government websites provide stamp duty calculators. Grants and concessions also differ from state to state. If you're buying a new or substantially renovated property in the ACT before June 30 2014, you may be eligible to be charged duty at the concessional rate. Buying an off the plan land and home package will get you a concession from the Victorian government. Similarly, the NSW government offers a $5,000 grant for the purchase of new homes.
Purchasing a new build in SA could also make you eligible for a Housing Construction Grant of up to $8,500. Buying an off the plan property in the state before June 30 2014 could also give you a stamp duty concession in the state. For a run down of the concessions and charges you'll be subject to, see each state and territory's revenue office website (see below).
State and Territory Revenue Offices:
<a href="https://www.sro.vic.gov.au/sro/sronav.nsf/Home+Page/SRO~Home+Page?open" target="_blank">Victoria</a>
<a href="https://www.osr.nsw.gov.au/" target="_blank">New South Wales</a>
<a href="https://www.revenuesa.sa.gov.au/" target="_blank">South Australia</a>
<a href="https://www.finance.wa.gov.au/cms/section.aspx?id=209" target="_blank">Western Australia</a>
<a href="https://www.treasury.nt.gov.au/TaxesRoyaltiesAndGrants/Pages/default.aspx" target="_blank">Northern Territory</a>
<a href="https://www.osr.qld.gov.au/" target="_blank">Queensland</a>
<a href="https://www.revenue.act.gov.au/" target="_blank">Australian Capital Territory</a>
<a href="https://www.revenuesa.sa.gov.au/generic-pages/i-am-a-property-ownerbuyer" target="_blank">Tasmania</a>
</body></html>

jrichardson-uRX5hFdKfN

How to: Buy property interstate

<html><body>
Got a bee in your bonnet about an issue and want some national attention? Go harass the federal government and they’ll create an inquiry.
It’s not hard to achieve. The ruling junta will believe almost anything, particularly if there’s been a bit of media hysteria to put the issue front and centre.
Certainly the property industry is having no trouble getting federal politicians to waste time and taxpayers money on talkfests about some of their pet topics.
Last week there was a housing affordability roundtable. According to the “communiqué” issued from Parliament House in Canberra, this was prompted by the belief first home buyers can’t afford to get into the market. It also stated that: “a major driver of increasing house prices and declining affordability is the under-supply of housing.”
In other words, a major talkfest involving government and industry leaders was based on real estate’s biggest furphies.
These are (a) that the only explanation for the low levels of first home buyers is a lack of affordability, (b) that affordability is declining, and (c) that there’s a housing shortage and that’s been forcing up prices.
All are red herrings which have been dragged around by some of the industry’s representative bodies for the past several years. (The true reason for lower first home buyer numbers is a major demographic shift that everyone seems to be missing).
<blockquote>
It’s a stunt to talk politicians into making decisions favourable to the industry, such as reduced taxes, faster approvals and favourable development policies.
</blockquote>
The prime mover behind this monumental waste of time was the Real Estate Institute of Australia, which is determined to oust the Housing Industry Association as the voice of insanity in the residential property industry.
The REIA has a serious obsession with first home buyer numbers. The reasons for that are obscure, given that major markets around the nation are rising and the institute’s members are having their best time of it in several years.
The institute hasn’t bothered to do any research into why first home buyer numbers are lower than normal. It has simply assumed that the only explanation is that they can’t afford to buy. This is surprising because the REIA is joint-publisher of a quarterly index that shows affordability has improved markedly over the past five years and is currently as good as it’s been any time in the past decade.
Why do they bother producing the report if they’re going to ignore its findings? Especially as the findings (that affordability is particularly strong at the moment) is supported by a host of other research reports, including those by the Housing Industry Association, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canstar and CommSec.
Apparently federal politicians don’t read because, despite the weight of evidence that we don’t have an affordability problem, they’ve accepted the industry line that young buyers “are finding it increasingly difficult to enter the housing market”.
They’ve also swallowed real estate’s biggest lie – that we have a serious housing shortage.
Given that price growth over the past decade has been lower than wages growth and not much bigger than inflation, and that there has been negligible rental growth in most of our major cities in the past couple of years, it’s clear we do not have the much-touted housing shortage.
Indeed, the most serious current issue is oversupply in some of our major markets.
Unless the forces of supply and demand no longer apply to real estate, how can the REIA and other industry bodies explain the lack of price and rental growth (keeping in mind that only Sydney had major growth last year, its first growth year in a decade) when they’ve been claiming a “chronic housing shortage crisis” for the past five years or so?
It’s a stunt to talk politicians into making decisions favourable to the industry, such as reduced taxes, faster approvals and favourable development policies.
The housing affordability roundtable follows the recent announcement that elements in the industry have managed to talk federal politicians into an inquiry to examine how foreign investors (read Chinese) are forcing up Australian property prices and dooming a whole generation of young Australians to a lifetime of renting.
If the inquiry is genuine, it will discover that the impact of foreign investors on the mainstream market populated by Aussie home buyers is zero and that they’ve wasted a lot of time and money.
<a href="https://mailto:ryder@hotspotting.com.au" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">ryder@hotspotting.com.au</a>
<a href="https://www.twitter.com/hotspotting" target="_blank">twitter.com/hotspotting</a>
</body></html>

Major talkfests based on nothing but industry's biggest furphies

<html><body>
A recently launched investment tool is giving self-managed superannuation fund members access to invest in real property with a lower capital outlay.
The Fractional Property Investment Platform, released by DomaCom in early March, allows investors to buy shares in any property on the market through an Australian Securities and Investments Commission-registered managed investment scheme (MIS).
“We are targeting the SMSF sector because that’s the sector that we know wants to invest,” DomaCom general manager of sales and marketing Warren Gibson said.
The average SMSF balance was just over $1 million at the end of the December 2013, according to Australian Taxation Office data. The median balance for the funds is around half that figure.
Gibson told Property Observer that the high cost to buy real estate meant most SMSFs wishing to invest in the asset class had to borrow to do so or invest through a syndicate or managed fund. Funds that did not wish to borrow risked having an undiversified portfolio.
“Syndicates are costly to set up, once you are in the syndicate you are there for the duration and there’s no liquidity for the structure. What we set about doing was introducing equity market concepts into the product,” Gibson said.
Investors can choose from the 18,320 properties already been listed on the Fractional Property Investment Platform, or request that any other property for sale be included. Around 17,000 of the properties currently listed are residential, 1,000 are commercial and 300 are rural.
The company aims to increase the number of listing to around 100,000 by the end of the year and eventually have all properties for sale listed, Gibson said.
After selecting a property, the investor bids on what proportion they would like to hold and a price range they believe it is worth.
The platform allows them to create a book build to buy the property with other investors who also wish to purchase a stake. When enough investors have joined the book build to account for the expected full value, DomaCom engages a buyers’ agent to acquire the property. Property valuers and conveyancers are also engaged.
After purchase, the property is placed into an MIS with sub-accounts set up for each investor. Rent and property-related costs are allocated to each investor in proportion to their holding.
The minimum amount to open an account is $20,000 but investors can put as little as $2,000 into each property.
Management fees to DomaCom are around 1% a year.
Gibson said the DomaCom platform also offered a secondary market where investors could sell their holdings in the MIS to others.
Investors can only access the structure through financial planners, who must be accredited to advise on the products.
DomaCom is also working on a product that will allow home owners to sell part of the equity in their property to investors. Gibson said the company hoped to release that product in the third quarter of this calendar year. 
</body></html>

National

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

National

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News