Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Negative gearing tax concessions are only one part of the story.
With stamp duty , land tax and capital gains I'd say that in most instances the property pays its fair share of taxes.
I know that is the case with our Sydney properties.
So, before you started buying (NG) properties 21 years ago, were the prices too high for you then, and were speculators and greedy LL's pushing up the prices outrageously?Not all property investors support negative gearing. I think it is a stupid tax policy, and I've been slightly negatively geared for most of the last 21 years.
Correct.House prices weren't expensive five years ago even though we had neg gear.
It's the property boom's fault not neg gear...other factors caused the property boom eg low interest rates , foreign buyers etc. leave neg gear alone I say!
I nominate Bargain Hunter.
This is a critical point. My tenants who are saving for a deposit love -ve gearing - for them it means that the govt & landlord are subsidising their rent allowing them to save more faster.
However, the longer term effect would be to ensure a that there were fewer rental properties available, consequently rents would rise, and the next generation of FHB would find it a lot harder to save for a deposit.
Bottom line - short term it may help current FHBs, longer term it would essentially lock a large number of FHBs out of the market.
You are assuming that just because there are 50% of the market represented by investors; it is them who are forcing up the prices.None of this makes any sense to me, as a FHB.
In the past 6 months it seems 50% of buyers in the FHB market are investors. I would imagine this wouldn't be so bad in the sydney house range once prices reach 700k-800k+
Unfortunately not many FHB fall into this bracket.
I disagree.So many these days are an investor simply because with the low IR and gearing, its hardly a risk when you're not too highly geared, like many are on here.
To me, property investment should be more risky, but also with great rewards for the people who do their research and buy investments accordingly.
So many these days are an investor simply because with the low IR and gearing, its hardly a risk when you're not too highly geared, like many are on here.
Perhaps i'm missing something, being a noob, but i'd like to see points against what wategos has posted.
It would be a brave person that takes the interview. All arguments in favour of negative gearing can easily be demolished, and ABC know what they are talking about here:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-06/hockey-negative-gearing/6431100.
That'd be no good; where's the victim sympathy theme in that?Can you do a piece on how most property investors will never claim a pension ?
And the 10 years before that ? when we also had -ve gearing.None of this makes any sense to me, as a FHB.
In the past 6 months it seems 50% of buyers in the FHB market are investors.
Prices have been stagnant in Sydney for the previous 10 years when we also had -ve gearing. As an aside, IRs are currently so low that many investors are no longer be -ve geared.... & we're mostly pretty happy about that!!!!You say your tenants are glad they're able to save for a deposit due to NG subsidising their rents? Well good luck to them when due to NG the prices are moving so rapidly their deposit will never be enough.
And the fantastic thing is that ANYONE can invest in a low risk property if they so choose.So many these days are an investor simply because with the low IR and gearing, its hardly a risk when you're not too highly geared, like many are on here.
If any of what he said is true, then one would expect Sydney house prices to be vastly more expensive than all other major cities where they don't have -ve gearing - they are not.Perhaps i'm missing something, being a noob, but i'd like to see points against what wategos has posted.
That'd be no good; where's the victim sympathy theme in that?
So, when Sydney was doing bugger-all earlier in this Century, and everyone was crying about the lack of growth; was that the evil NG investors forcing down/stopping the prices rising?
...
I still don't think its fair that I still have to pay land tax the the tune of 4.5k (Last bill) when my portfolio is making a loss. You don't pay that on shares.
Can you do a piece on how most property investors will never claim a pension ?