FHB SHhh.... DONT TELL ANY ONE !

[craigb]

I have not searched thrugh the current threads, but i have a wisper so keep it quiet,SHhhh!
The FHB grants will be changed as follows:
7k to existing homes to remain.
21k for new homes.

I have not seen other threads so if this is a duplicate then mods can remove it .
But keep it a secret...Shhhhh.

 

[keithj]

That option makes the most sense to me. Maybe even boost the $21K for new homes a little to encourage jobs.

 

[craigb]

Makes me happy either way the new homes will boost the builders numbers, and bring up the values of renovated homes on real/ sized blocks, and some bargains may be had for older 3 beddies

 

[Aaron Sice]

this makes existing stock less desirable, lower in price which = worth me waiting.

i won't get my hopes up, because it makes too much sense fiscally from a labour POV to be real legislation.

FHB for existing stock creates about 3 days work - employs about 3 people for a day each - RE agent, settlement agent and duties officer.

FHB for new homes creates a ton of jobs - architect / draftie, earthworker, pest control, concretor, plumber, electrician, chippie, brickie, tiler, plasterer, fixing carpenter, cabinetmaker and the suppliers of each.

hmmmm - yeah makes too much sense craigb - needs more red tape.

 

[VYBerlinaV8]

I figured they would go for that type of arrangement. Means I'll be out bargain hunting later this year.

 

[beachgurl]

interesting to see that the FHOG bonus is being extended - in full for 3 months and half for the next 3. Wonder how many investors will be sitting on their hands for another 6 months.

 

[Property Meister]

alrighty... now im 10x as confused,

so for existing properties in VIC, the FHOG until Jun 30 09 was $7k+$7k+$3k.....

so what is it now????? or is this thread a joke?

 

[Electro]

alrighty... now im 10x as confused,

so for existing properties in VIC, the FHOG until Jun 30 09 was $7k+$7k+$3k.....

so what is it now????? or is this thread a joke?

I'll try and clear this up... anyone else feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

Currently (in VIC)

New Property - 7k + 14k + 5k = 26k (7k + 14k - From federal govt / 5k - state govt)
Existing Property - 7k + 7k + 3k = 17k (7k + 7k - From federal govt / 3k - state govt)

Jul 09 - Sep 09

New Property - 7k + 14k + 11k = 32k (7k + 14k - From federal govt / 11k - state govt)
Existing Property - 7k + 7k + 2k = 16k (7k + 7k - From federal govt / 2k - state govt)

Oct 09 - Dec 09

New Property - 7k + 7k + 11k = 25k (7k + 7k - From federal govt / 11k - state govt)
Existing Property - 7k + 3.5k + 2k = 12.5k (7k + 3.5k - From federal govt / 2k - state govt)

Jan 10 - July 10

New Property - 7k + 11k = 18k (7k - From federal govt / 11k - state govt)
Existing Property - 7k + + 2k = 9k (7k - From federal govt / 2k - state govt)

 

[tigerGT]

The most confusing budget ever! on one hand so much spending (and mind you nothing for sydney in terms of infrastructure!!!) and on the other hand broken promises and no real benefit to anyone. thats how i see it. 60 billion deficit and i dont see anything positive from it. grant to continue to inflate lower end of property and nothing else. see what happens,,,,

 

[Mindmaster]

Electro has explained the changes very well. This is an extract from The Age today...

To support the housing market and first home buyers, the Government will provide $539 million over three years to extend the First Home Owners Boost scheme.

But the current scheme will be wound back from October.

For first home buyers entering into contracts between July 1, 2009, and September 30, 2009, $7000 will continue to be provided for the purchase of existing homes and $14,000 for the purchase of new homes.

Combined with the existing $7000 under the first home owners grant, first home owners will receive a total of $14,000 for existing homes and $21,000 for new homes.

But for first home buyers entering into contracts between October 1, 2009, and December 31, 2009, the First Home Owners Boost scheme will provide only $3500 for the purchase of existing homes and $7000 for new homes. These home buyers will continue to receive the existing $7000 first home owners grant.

It is a federal budget so it does not mention the 2k extra in Electro's figures.

So basically for existing property in Vic there is 6 weeks left of 17k, 3 months of 16k and 3 months of 12.5k.

Meaning (to me) that the bubble in property prices in the sub 400k market will not pop or adjust until near the end of this year at the earliest.

What are other people's take on this?

 

[muppetFHO]

I personally don't believe the bubble will burst. Had the government discontinued the FHOB at June 30 then yes, i would've said prices will drop 5% pretty much overnight. However, the phasing out of the grant over two stages should ease the market back onto its feet but i think it will stagnate for quiet a while afterwards, allowing values to step back into line with correct levels

 

[BV]

and mind you nothing for sydney in terms of infrastructure!!!

It's their way of saying thank you to the people who pay the most tax
and who a large majority of them vote labor.

And the NSW state Government say it's a good budget.
It's a joke.

I am glad I didn't vote for any of them.

 

[craigb]

BV its a joke ! expecting a 60 billion def, we had a 20 billion surplus? what gives.
They havent been in that long.....
get all the gifted money back would be my first call? recall the bloody cash

 

[BayView]

It's their way of saying thank you to the people who pay the most tax
and who a large majority of them vote labor.

And the NSW state Government say it's a good budget.
It's a joke.

I am glad I didn't vote for any of them.

I had a meeting with my MB yesterday; we were looking at the Herald Sun (yes, I know - it's just a rag these days).

He is a capitalist pig like me, Liberal voter etc. Long live free enterprise.

We were having a huge laugh about all the comments by their "readers" about the budget.

Without fail, all the "marginalised" folk such as your single mum, your aged pensioner and anyone who may be suspectingly Left - teachers, thought it was a good budget, all the more well off and entrepreneurial, business owners - your suspectingly Liberal folk said it was bad.

Funny how that works.

 

[ffc1883_1996]

A nation of whingers

I like Michael Pascoe’s work and I just love this article. I think you guys will too.

The property related part is...

One is the astounding under-performance of the Australian housing industry. Australian dwelling investment has been doing stuff-all for the past five years, as this Treasury graph shows.

And it’s not expected to do anything for the next two years either – seven years on the trot of pretty much marking time when our population has been growing at a record rate. It’s overdue for a serious breakout, if developers can ever obtain finance again.

This is an area where there’s an argument that Treasury has been too conservative and, if the Federal Government was perhaps a little braver, it could be made to happen faster with greater immediate job-creating investment in new social housing instead of extending the home vendor’s grant.

 

[josko]

It's their way of saying thank you to the people who pay the most tax
and who a large majority of them vote labor.

And the NSW state Government say it's a good budget.
It's a joke.

I am glad I didn't vote for any of them.

I only know two peopple that did. What is really scarey is that if there were another election they would still get in. Reminds me of the Bush Administration. How that guy got two terms is anyone's guess.

Did anyone see The Cutting Edge this week? I had no idea GB was such a Political Prostitute..(there is a better word...)

George Bush/Kevin Rudd -

Both came into office with unprecedented Surplus at their disposal.

Bush sold his country for Political popularity and left it in unprecedented debt. Will Kevin go out in the same fashion?

What are anyones views on the popular fiscal idea of Obama's and Rudd's - that the economy must be stimulated by escalating debt to outrageous levels in order to ward off the depression/recession?

I have a mixed opinion on this. I can understand it but at the same time it doesn't make sense. Maybe I should start another thread, sorry Craig.

Regards JO

 

[BayView]

What are anyones views on the popular fiscal idea of Obama's and Rudd's - that the economy must be stimulated by escalating debt to outrageous levels in order to ward off the depression/recession?

Should only be done to stimulate long term investment, long term jobs and infrastructure.

Handing out free money to the financially uneducated will only result in more mis-spending by them.

Better to hand it over to people who know how to actually make money through sensible, safe, long term investments.

Obviously; not the Labor Gubbermint.

 

[bdc]

Obviously; not the Labor Gubbermint.

Not for some time it seems, but the Liberals are the ones who pushed vote buying payments and middle class welfare into the middle of political policies.

 

[BayView]

Not for some time it seems, but the Liberals are the ones who pushed vote buying payments and middle class welfare into the middle of political policies.

They're both pretty hopeless actually; but the Libs seem to be better at being LESS hopeless over the years - from a capitalist/employer/entrepeneur/business person standpoint.

What is "middle-class welfare"? I've heard of it, but never had it actually explained.

 

[bdc]

What is "middle-class welfare"? I've heard of it, but never had it actually explained.

All of the family benefits that are available to those who don't need it.

Family Tax Benefits, Child Care Benefits/Tax Rebates, Baby Bonus, etc.

Most will say they need it or feel they deserve it, but "need" and "need to not have to make sacrifices to existing lifestyle" are very different things.