What do the other .91% own if they don't own, 0, 1, 2-4, or more than 5 properties?
Proportion of people who own multiple properties??
- Thread starter Rixter
- Start date
What do the other .91% own if they don't own, 0, 1, 2-4, or more than 5 properties?
Updated data on rental property ownership
You're too modest Rob! We hang off your every post at Somersoft
More recent data:
Anyway, I’ve tracked down some more recent figures. The ATO has since done a report 2007-8 financial year (refer to Table 2.6 on the 7th page of the report): http://www.ato.gov.au/content/downloads/cor00225078_2008CH2PER.pdf
I would think that the full 2008-9 full report should be out in the not too distant future.
In summary of the 12.64 million individual taxpayers, those with an interest in a rental property is as follows:
Property interests No. of individuals
1--------------------1,206,627
2----------------------303.359
3-----------------------91,698
4-----------------------33,552
5-----------------------13,765
6 or more---------------14,580
Total----------------1,663,581
The % of IP owning individual taxpayers is 13.2% (slightly up from 13.1% in 2006/7) which prima facie sounds quite high. As you can see those owning 6 or more + properties consist of around 0.9% of the IP-owning individual taxpayers, and 0.12% of all individual taxpayers.
The data is a reasonable guide to IP ownership in Australia, but there are a number of caveats.
1. These are statistics for individual tax payers, and I presume would leave out a great deal held in trust/company structures etc. I don’t know if this information is collated elsewhere in the ATO’s annual reporting. Offsetting this, however, would be the fact that many of the 1-2 IP owners wouldn’t be strategic investors e.g. obtained by inheritance, holiday homes etc. as Bayview alluded to earlier in the thread.
2. When we read the statistics and calculate percentages, we shouldn’t calculate the proportion of investment property owners as being based on Australia’s entire approximately 22 million population, because of course that includes children. Likewise, we shouldn’t be calculating by the number of individual taxpayers either (a total of 12.6 million in 2007-8), because quite a lot of adults (e.g. uni students, pensioners) may not earn enough to require a tax return, yet they are still legally eligible to own investment properties. Therefore, we should be looking at the total 18yo+ population, i.e. the legal age of ownership. I’m sure that sort of demographic information is available at the ABS. Taking a guess I would think that about 75% of Australia’s population is 18+. I’m sure someone cleverer than me can dig this information up.
3. If we really want to be finicky, then we actually should be talking about the % of property owning households, rather than taxpayers. This is particularly relevant where the IPs are all in one spouse’s name but not the other, yet of course, both spouses will derive the financial benefits of IP ownership. However, collating data by households is something more in the line of the ABS methodology. I suppose the ATO is mainly focused on taxpaying structures.
4. It says nothing about the value/quality of the properties owned or the type. More is not necessarily better.
Perhaps we should lobby the ABS to do another comprehensive survey? I don’t think they’ve looked closely at this issue since the 1990s.
Conclusion: 87% of individual taxpayers don't own IPs, so for their sake, I hope they have super or shares or another plan. Of the IP-owning individual taxpayers, 90% of these own only 1-2 properties. As alluded to elsewhere in this great thread by Spiderman: http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54325 with no other significant assets this is unlikely to provide a comfortable retirement. So while the data indicates a rising level of investment property owners over time, I may be drawing a long bow, but I feel that it will still only ever be 5-10% of people who ever have the comfortable retirement, achieve their goals (financial or non-financial) etc. through IP or other means. That’s one statistic that seems quite constant in human affairs.
So fear not Somersoftians! Our little property owning racket (I mean strategy) is quite safe!
You're too modest Rob! We hang off your every post at Somersoft
More recent data:
Anyway, I’ve tracked down some more recent figures. The ATO has since done a report 2007-8 financial year (refer to Table 2.6 on the 7th page of the report): http://www.ato.gov.au/content/downloads/cor00225078_2008CH2PER.pdf
I would think that the full 2008-9 full report should be out in the not too distant future.
In summary of the 12.64 million individual taxpayers, those with an interest in a rental property is as follows:
Property interests No. of individuals
1--------------------1,206,627
2----------------------303.359
3-----------------------91,698
4-----------------------33,552
5-----------------------13,765
6 or more---------------14,580
Total----------------1,663,581
The % of IP owning individual taxpayers is 13.2% (slightly up from 13.1% in 2006/7) which prima facie sounds quite high. As you can see those owning 6 or more + properties consist of around 0.9% of the IP-owning individual taxpayers, and 0.12% of all individual taxpayers.
The data is a reasonable guide to IP ownership in Australia, but there are a number of caveats.
1. These are statistics for individual tax payers, and I presume would leave out a great deal held in trust/company structures etc. I don’t know if this information is collated elsewhere in the ATO’s annual reporting. Offsetting this, however, would be the fact that many of the 1-2 IP owners wouldn’t be strategic investors e.g. obtained by inheritance, holiday homes etc. as Bayview alluded to earlier in the thread.
2. When we read the statistics and calculate percentages, we shouldn’t calculate the proportion of investment property owners as being based on Australia’s entire approximately 22 million population, because of course that includes children. Likewise, we shouldn’t be calculating by the number of individual taxpayers either (a total of 12.6 million in 2007-8), because quite a lot of adults (e.g. uni students, pensioners) may not earn enough to require a tax return, yet they are still legally eligible to own investment properties. Therefore, we should be looking at the total 18yo+ population, i.e. the legal age of ownership. I’m sure that sort of demographic information is available at the ABS. Taking a guess I would think that about 75% of Australia’s population is 18+. I’m sure someone cleverer than me can dig this information up.
3. If we really want to be finicky, then we actually should be talking about the % of property owning households, rather than taxpayers. This is particularly relevant where the IPs are all in one spouse’s name but not the other, yet of course, both spouses will derive the financial benefits of IP ownership. However, collating data by households is something more in the line of the ABS methodology. I suppose the ATO is mainly focused on taxpaying structures.
4. It says nothing about the value/quality of the properties owned or the type. More is not necessarily better.
Perhaps we should lobby the ABS to do another comprehensive survey? I don’t think they’ve looked closely at this issue since the 1990s.
Conclusion: 87% of individual taxpayers don't own IPs, so for their sake, I hope they have super or shares or another plan. Of the IP-owning individual taxpayers, 90% of these own only 1-2 properties. As alluded to elsewhere in this great thread by Spiderman: http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54325 with no other significant assets this is unlikely to provide a comfortable retirement. So while the data indicates a rising level of investment property owners over time, I may be drawing a long bow, but I feel that it will still only ever be 5-10% of people who ever have the comfortable retirement, achieve their goals (financial or non-financial) etc. through IP or other means. That’s one statistic that seems quite constant in human affairs.
So fear not Somersoftians! Our little property owning racket (I mean strategy) is quite safe!
Last edited:
So while the data indicates a rising level of investment property owners over time, I may be drawing a long bow, but I feel that it will still only ever be 5-10% of people who ever have the comfortable retirement, achieve their goals (financial or non-financial) etc. through IP or other means. That’s one statistic that seems quite constant in human affairs.
Keeping in mind that we are hurtling towards becoming the 51st State of the USA, I heard that in the United States of America the average retirement amount in peoples' 401K (like our super) is $50k.
Also keeping in mind that they are probably still the richest Country in the world (at least for a bit longer); this is a very, very bad figure, because there are many, many millionaires and very high income earners who would have a lot in their 401k (as well as other investments).
Even so, the % of wealthy to poor is small, so if the average super is only $50k, then there are a very big number with next to nothing.
Given that our younger Gen seem to be worse than their predecessors at saving and managing money - your Hardly Normal deals et al bombarding their senses 24/7 (24/7 - another annoying Americanism), it would be fair to assume that our next gen of retirees are not going to be any better off than the current ones.
Thanks little stranger, top find....
So, the change from 05/06 to 07/08 is ;
Property interests No. of individuals
1--------------------1,206,627..........up 11.6% on 05/06 numbers
2----------------------303,359..........up 11.2% on 05/06 numbers
3-----------------------91,698..........up 11.4% on 05/06 numbers
4-----------------------33,552..........up 12.8% on 05/06 numbers
5-----------------------13,765..........up 13.9% on 05/06 numbers
6 or more---------------14,580..........up 17.2% on 05/06 numbers
Total----------------1,663,581..........up 11.6% on 05/06 numbers
Couple of observations ;
1. I reckon it would be reasonable to assume that same escalation rate if you wanted to project the 05/06 numbers --> 07/08 numbers ---> 09/10 present day numbers if the ATO didn't have them as yet.
2. It is clear that the number of individuals who own multiple properties is accelerating faster that those who only own a few. Definite pattern there.
3. Looks like the Investor Club members really have been busy. Big Kev must be proud.
So, the change from 05/06 to 07/08 is ;
Property interests No. of individuals
1--------------------1,206,627..........up 11.6% on 05/06 numbers
2----------------------303,359..........up 11.2% on 05/06 numbers
3-----------------------91,698..........up 11.4% on 05/06 numbers
4-----------------------33,552..........up 12.8% on 05/06 numbers
5-----------------------13,765..........up 13.9% on 05/06 numbers
6 or more---------------14,580..........up 17.2% on 05/06 numbers
Total----------------1,663,581..........up 11.6% on 05/06 numbers
Couple of observations ;
1. I reckon it would be reasonable to assume that same escalation rate if you wanted to project the 05/06 numbers --> 07/08 numbers ---> 09/10 present day numbers if the ATO didn't have them as yet.
2. It is clear that the number of individuals who own multiple properties is accelerating faster that those who only own a few. Definite pattern there.
3. Looks like the Investor Club members really have been busy. Big Kev must be proud.
Though if I have 2 in my name, 2 held in trust, and 2 in a pty ltd then I may show as only owning 2 IP
So I'd say that list is skewed on the higher side, ie less people own more IP's.
You forget that they also make up 87% of votes, and we currently have a govm who's shouting "those FRCs in mining should share the wealth around" and even though mining is likely paying the highest tax rate already as an industry, many of that 87% have beer in one hand, a cig in the other saying "yeah f#@#^&rs the resources belong to us too!".
And though Kevin Dudd is part of the FRC club, he's still instigating that people should takes someone else's rather then get their own.
The same argument is always raised on Real Estate investors in every RE boom.
Yeah I know I'm such a happy chap lol, I call it downside risk assessment.
And ftr FRC is a song by the Screaming jets.
So I'd say that list is skewed on the higher side, ie less people own more IP's.
Conclusion: 87% of individual taxpayers don't own IPs, so for their sake, I hope they have super or shares or another plan.
So fear not Somersoftians! Our little property owning racket (I mean strategy) is quite safe!
You forget that they also make up 87% of votes, and we currently have a govm who's shouting "those FRCs in mining should share the wealth around" and even though mining is likely paying the highest tax rate already as an industry, many of that 87% have beer in one hand, a cig in the other saying "yeah f#@#^&rs the resources belong to us too!".
And though Kevin Dudd is part of the FRC club, he's still instigating that people should takes someone else's rather then get their own.
The same argument is always raised on Real Estate investors in every RE boom.
Yeah I know I'm such a happy chap lol, I call it downside risk assessment.
And ftr FRC is a song by the Screaming jets.
