Search results

You assume that the majority of property investors have a sophisticated plan and outlook. My personal observations and the data would suggest otherwise: Although the states will probably vary somewhat in the timing and scale of correction I think in many cases we will see nominal prices...

That's some pretty nasty losses considering many are shelling out that $176 each week to hold an asset which is also depreciating in value.

So disguised moralism was the reason the Henry tax review recommended changes to negative gearing?

Pathetic post Dazz. Haven't you got something better to be doing with your time than exchanging views with an ex-single property owner? I could sell my current asset portfolio (not property related), leverage up and buy a handful of properties negatively geared if I really wanted... would...

In the real world the government will change rules and govern based on whatever pressures are currently prevalent. Sometime the biggest money will win. Sometimes the majority people will win. A single investors name on a title is of no consequence when it comes to changes in tax law. I don't...

I'm sure they could make specific exceptions to ensure that it was fair. Bit of a petty argument to try and make TBH...

And as well as encouraging development where needed my suggestions would also discourage over development which we have seen in Victoria, Gold Coast and elsewhere...

I'm sure someone with your experience has heard of land banking lizzie... how about you get real! If this land was more heavily taxed it would be an incentive for developers to either build or sell the land to those more likely to develop it sooner. You're also kidding yourself if you...

For the exact reasons I outlined a couple of posts ago. Landlords will ensure a property is maintained to maximise rent, turning property back to a holding for those who want an income generating asset rather than a favourite of speculators (those hoping capital gains will exceed negative...

I still don't understand. Explain the link between negative gearing on new housing only and how that discourages the maintenance of old properties... :confused:

What would? Removing negative gearing and adding land tax? In fact I think it would encourage upkeep of the property as without negative gearing benefits landlords would want to maximise rents (for a better yield) as well as avoid land tax by keeping the property tenanted. Further more...

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2011/03/calls-to-restrict-negative-gearing-grow-louder/

Either that or prices to halve ;) Council rates are not tax, it's a fee charged for services provided (whether you use them all or not), such as garbage collection, maintenance of council owned grounds and facilities, etc. Getting rid of land tax and negative gearing together is not going to...

Which do you think is a more important target/role for government: - Ensuring that there is a balanced set of tax rules that don't differ between properties and equities. OR - Ensuring there is an affordable and ample supply of property for all citizens regardless of whether they are an...