Search results

Id suggest subsidising rent would be more efficient. Its means tested, even if these rules were relaxed somewhat with the end of NG. It is tied to average rental prices, where negative gearing is available to all types of rental property, and covers all expenses, rental assistance only...

If ownership rates are broadly similar, then why are we (the govt) paying, in the form of lost tax revenue for NG? if we want to have affordable rental houses, we can either provide a subsidy to investors through negative gearing, or a subsidy to renters, like rental assistance. Why are we...

Quote I am not so sure as I dislike intervention too much. Sometimes market forces are better left to rest as too much intervention may cause more damage than good. Why did we have GFC? Please show me a perfect market? I suggest all markets have one kind of intervention or another. An...

I dont personally know this, I assume this based on economists modelling. While the science of economics has been compared to astrology, its the best tool we have so far. the point is, we intervene in the 'efficient' market all the time. Some of the consequences of intervening in the rental...

In my role I get to see a lot of FTB centrelink letters that show rental assistance, which varies substantially depending on income, and the amount of rent paid. The proportion of rent assistance varies with the amount of rent paid, just because someone is paying lots in rent doesnt mean they...

a more efficient and transparent market. Like how capitalism is sposed to be.

Still reckon if they got rid of NG, Stamp Duty and Land tax it'd be a lot better. I think you'll find yourself welcomed by our cousins in the land of the long white cloud......

you claim NG on shares where the dividend is less than the holding costs. The holding costs include, taxes and buy in costs, interest on loans (where the purpose was to buy income producing shares), bank fees, accounants fees, financial adviser/broker fees etc. What I think is interesting is...

rent control buildings like in the states.

these people, who I agree are not rich, but have high taxable incomes, would be better served negative gearing with a small business, or a share portfolio or buying an affordable rental property. as it stands at the moment, they are more likely to purchase an existing property somewhere in...

Id suggest the main argument around treating equities diferent to housing is simple. You cant have a PPOR share portfolio. If negative gearing were removed, or more likley tweaked to favour new home construction/affordable rentals, Im sure our friends who work in accounting and financial...