http://smh.domain.com.au/real-estat...ing-for-first-home-buyers-20120612-20768.html
On new homes only....
On new homes only....
NSW to double the first home grant to $15,000
- Thread starter christos
- Start date
more details here http://www.osr.nsw.gov.au/legislation/budget/2012/
The other big one is $5,000 bonus for buying new properties if an investor, second time owner etc.
the big whammy though is the existing $7000 on established homes will be wiped so the push is on new, new, new....
The other big one is $5,000 bonus for buying new properties if an investor, second time owner etc.
the big whammy though is the existing $7000 on established homes will be wiped so the push is on new, new, new....
Saw that - great news. Only for a limited time though so get in quick
Does that include vacant blocks of land you buy and plan to build on?
According to fact sheet does not include land or established home
http://www.osr.nsw.gov.au/lib/doc/factsheets/ofs_fhb7.pdf
Is it just me or does this seem like a stupid idea???
You buy a new unit at an even more inflated price, live in it for a day and instantly lose equity. Wouldn't this make the banks a little more nervous with a high LVR loan?
At least with the grant applying to all houses under a threshhold price (eg 500k), all prices in that segment are artificially inflated??
You buy a new unit at an even more inflated price, live in it for a day and instantly lose equity. Wouldn't this make the banks a little more nervous with a high LVR loan?
At least with the grant applying to all houses under a threshhold price (eg 500k), all prices in that segment are artificially inflated??
Yes - it will add 15K onto the price.
My intention is to buy something sub $550K, live in it for 6 months, take the grant, convert to an IP and then rent it.
I don't think the NSW state Govt announced the proposal to make the Banks happy.....that wasn't intention.
Listening to Mike as he delivered the Budget, he wanted to stimulate the NSW economy to get it out of the hole it's currently been left in from 16 years of Labor spending.
It's about construction, jobs and all the flow on effect from that. Real jobs that actually do something. Maybe some of the 10,000 public servants currently cruising the internet could apply.
I get the whole job stimulation and new construction part of the equation....
It just doesn't seem healthy to be encouraging people to buy a new place to take an instant equity hit.....at least when the grant is available to all places under a certain price, it artificially stimulates everything.
As for the jobs, they can do plenty to create jobs through public works etc, but thats for another thread.
It just doesn't seem healthy to be encouraging people to buy a new place to take an instant equity hit.....at least when the grant is available to all places under a certain price, it artificially stimulates everything.
As for the jobs, they can do plenty to create jobs through public works etc, but thats for another thread.
maybe they could put forward a better policy instead of unfairly incentivising new builds with taxpayer funds - and at that, what little NSW has left.
surely a better idea would have been to allow a GST exemption on new builds for FHO's for a limited time only....? or remove stamp duty for all FHO purchases until blahblah date?
something - anything - that doesn't involve the excessive recycling of state money.
surely a better idea would have been to allow a GST exemption on new builds for FHO's for a limited time only....? or remove stamp duty for all FHO purchases until blahblah date?
something - anything - that doesn't involve the excessive recycling of state money.
It is artificially propping up the price of new builds by 15k.
If Barry O'Farrell and Baird were serious about kick starting the building industry that they would get Brad Hazzard out of planning, put someone like Rob Stokes in his place and cut through the red tape that Hazzard has created by being solely driven by what local NIMBYs want (i.e. nothing).
Since the government came to power it is getting harder and harder to do development in this state. And it is getting worse and worse. There were great plans for Complying Development to be extended quite substantially. I'm talking new industrial buildings up to 5000sqm. Get an approval for one of those in 10 days.
That, as far as I am aware, is gone. It was supposed to be in place last year. But because some anti-development types in the Local Governments and Shire Association got in his ear it's been pulled.
Other things, like SEPP 65 panels should be removed. They are just an artificial, subjective panel made up of academics with no idea.
Give the development industry some certainty. We can work with certainty - hell, even the Carbon Tax provides numbers. Those numbers can be costed and incorporated into things.
What would create more development is a better approach to planning and development. You meet the criteria? You have approval. Not, well, you meet the criteria we set, but a semi-retired architecture lecturer doesn't like the proposed roof shape so you are rejected and you need to re-submit at great cost, and more importantly, extra time (which of course equals cost) which is the current situation.
If Barry O'Farrell and Baird were serious about kick starting the building industry that they would get Brad Hazzard out of planning, put someone like Rob Stokes in his place and cut through the red tape that Hazzard has created by being solely driven by what local NIMBYs want (i.e. nothing).
Since the government came to power it is getting harder and harder to do development in this state. And it is getting worse and worse. There were great plans for Complying Development to be extended quite substantially. I'm talking new industrial buildings up to 5000sqm. Get an approval for one of those in 10 days.
That, as far as I am aware, is gone. It was supposed to be in place last year. But because some anti-development types in the Local Governments and Shire Association got in his ear it's been pulled.
Other things, like SEPP 65 panels should be removed. They are just an artificial, subjective panel made up of academics with no idea.
Give the development industry some certainty. We can work with certainty - hell, even the Carbon Tax provides numbers. Those numbers can be costed and incorporated into things.
What would create more development is a better approach to planning and development. You meet the criteria? You have approval. Not, well, you meet the criteria we set, but a semi-retired architecture lecturer doesn't like the proposed roof shape so you are rejected and you need to re-submit at great cost, and more importantly, extra time (which of course equals cost) which is the current situation.
There isn't the environment to create those new dwellings.
The state government is anti development except for housing sprawl out in the western suburbs. And then everything needs to go through councils.
Which are lazy. And anti-development.
+1
The removal of stamp duty along with the cash in pocket grant removes entry barriers for first home buyers who have minimal deposit.
I don't know what rules the banks have around these grants and their use toward a deposit (perhaps one of the brokers on the forum can confirm it can be included as "saved deposit"?), but assuming they can include it as part of a 5% deposit toward 95% lend (with LMI capped) then they only need $10,000 deposit (along with the $15,000 grant) to leverage into a $500k property. This at a time when interest rates are at historical lows and developers will probably be marking up prices to target these unsophisticated buyers... recipe for disaster IMO.
Well more than that once you take into account the leverage the grant potentially allows (e.g. x20 for a 95% lend).
How about gst exemption for us developers as well! Geez, we're all in a slump for christ's sake!
I have a new build just going on the market so thanks for the link. I'll make sure the agent is aware of it. It was just a matter of time before stimulus would happen. Construction is in a hole at the moment in the east.
Temporary subsidy to pull forward demand for new home buyers that are not otherwise ready to buy and will default once interest rates go back up. Because what NSW really needs is more dodgy OTP spruikers in shopping malls. Excellent. Nothing like mortgaging the future to live in the present.
In other news I see the NSW govt is trying to securitise future lottery income to provide a current budget boost.
No mention anywhere of NSW trying to live within its means mind you.
In other news I see the NSW govt is trying to securitise future lottery income to provide a current budget boost.
No mention anywhere of NSW trying to live within its means mind you.
I listened to the speech he delivered in the NSW Parliament and distinctly heard the Treasurer say those exact words at least 5 times.
Similar threads
