"There's got to be a limit - it just can't go on forever" ... David Koch. NEGATIVE gearing was already on the nose when ''Kochie'' delivered his verdict.
Property manager Eddie Kutner of Central Equity Ltd had just finished putting the case for the rule that allows investors to write off losses made on rental properties against other income before selling the property and pocketing a capital gain taxed at only half their marginal rate.
It was "a responsible part of providing accommodation, a very defensible proposition".
David Koch, the finance journalist and Sunrise host, was at the summit as a community representative.
"Negative gearing on an unproductive asset? Does it just go on for time immemorial or is it time to actually put some limits on it - to say, OK for the first five years, but if it's not producing an income after that why are you there?
"It's done purely for the attraction of letting the taxman pay half. I'm not saying get rid of it all together, but there's got to be a limit - it just can't go on forever."
At last week's Tax Forum, David Koch, once finance reporter, now better known as Sunrise's Kochie, added his voice to the many speaking out against the tax loopholes that distort the property market and push up house prices.
What struck me about Kochie's statement was the example he gave of a TV advertisement that told investors to get into property and ''let the taxman pay half''. Hang on. Who's the tax man? Wayne Swan? No. We're all the tax man. What the ad should have said is invest in property and ''let your fellow Australians pay half''.
Not only are we all the taxman, we all, in one way or another, suffer from the high cost of housing in Australia, driven in part by the tax loopholes around investment housing.
I am sure, that among the 1.6 million taxpayers claiming negative gearing deductions, there are parents with adult children still living at home because they can't afford to move out and there are parents with adult children struggling in the rental market. And I'm sure there are people who would like to buy a home to live in, but can't afford to buy close to their jobs and family, so they have invested instead.
Join PricewaterhouseCoopers' Tim Cox, KPMG's Rosheen Garnon, Deloitte's David Pring and Ernst & Young's Alf Capito in a robust discussion on negative gearing and tax treatment of savings.
Anthony Keane National Features November 07, 2011 12:00AM
THE following words are not going to be pleasant reading for the 1.7 million Aussie landlords who own negatively-geared investment properties.
You're trying to build your wealth on dubious foundations. Negative gearing is not your friend. Negative gearing should be banned.
But wait. Don't shoot the messenger these are not my words (actually, I'm one of you).
They come from a growing band of critics - ranging from economists and newspaper columnists to property experts and bank bosses - who are questioning negative gearing, where investors claim a tax deduction when their expenses exceed income.
In a rising property market, negative gearing can be a good strategy to build wealth - but watch out when values fall. There are plenty of reasons why Australians love to borrow money to invest in bricks and mortar. Some people think the value of property never goes down; others like the fact you can see and touch it. But, mostly, it is the ability to offset the cost of owning the property - including the interest paid on a loan - against assessable income that makes it particularly attractive.
As long as the loan costs are greater than the rental income, then the Australian Taxation Office allows investors to offset the loss against their income. This strategy, known as negative gearing, is often considered more a tax strategy than an investment one. Since the aim of most investment strategies is to make a profit, investors with negatively geared property either hope that one day the rent covers the loan costs or the capital growth in the property is such that they make a profit when it comes time to sell. As soon as the rent covers the cost of borrowing, it becomes a positively geared property and the income might be subject to tax. Many, however, would say it is better to pay tax on a profit than make a loss.
For most of the 30-or-so years negative gearing has been around, it has been a reasonable strategy based on the capital growth rates of property across the country, says the founder of Smart Property Adviser, Kevin Lee. However, at a time of global economic uncertainty, betting on capital gains from property is a risky and outdated strategy for most people, he says.
For most of the 30-or-so years negative gearing has been around......
Dumb misinformed journalist.
Negative gearing has been around as long as income tax. It has always (apart from 2 years in the 1980s) been a natural feature of the tax system in Australia that aggregated legitimate personal expenses are subtracted from aggregated personal income.
Negative gearing has been around as long as income tax. It has always (apart from 2 years in the 1980s) been a natural feature of the tax system in Australia that aggregated legitimate personal expenses are subtracted from aggregated personal income.
Did he tell you something you did not want to hear or does his specification of the duration that NG has been in place negate the entire article? :banned:
Did he tell you something you did not want to hear or does his specification of the duration that NG has been in place negate the entire article? :banned:
Bina (he/she?) told me that he/she is misinformed.
With regard to the rest of the article they are wrong to imply that capital gains have been needed to justify negative gearing over the last 30 years. A property purchased 30 years ago, initially with negative gearing, for say $40k would now be returning about $20k a year in rent.
Bina (he/she?) told me that he/she is misinformed.
With regard to the rest of the article they are wrong to imply that capital gains have been needed to justify negative gearing over the last 30 years. A property purchased 30 years ago, initially with negative gearing, for say $40k would now be returning about $20k a year in rent.
You didn't just correct his error, you described him as "dumb misinformed". Full of hatred just because of a minor slip up.
Negative gearing has been around as long as income tax. It has always (apart from 2 years in the 1980s) been a natural feature of the tax system in Australia that aggregated legitimate personal expenses are subtracted from aggregated personal income.
lol, you didn't even get the abuse at the correct person... try reading the story more closely next time.
For most of the 30-or-so years negative gearing has been around, it has been a reasonable strategy based on the capital growth rates of property across the country, says the founder of Smart Property Adviser, Kevin Lee.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy