Data Breakdown of Who Uses Negative Gearing

I couldn't help myself.

 

Sorry, didn't get a chance to respond earlier because I have been finalising another positively geared property purchase.

Nonsense. I want to have a high income, some income from listed securities and then pick up a NG property and offset the loss against the income from the listed securities. This is not unlikely at all.

Evidence for this? Any HII embarking on investing in a corporate structure will forgoe the 50% CGT discount to both residential properties and listed securities if held for more than 12 months. This is a huge consideration and is the reason why many hold these investments outside a corporate structure.

Alternately, HII hires a fund manager to take care of the investments for them and has no skills at all. Not sure where you are coming from that these people will not willingly choose to undergo a regular loss on this income in another asset class (property). That's what this whole thread is about. People deliberately buying property to make a loss and the benefit of this overwhelmingly going to "the rich".

Or you just thought about the whole thing wrong. HIIs do and will offset investment losses against other investment income. I don't accept your argument at all that they invest through corporate structures and forgo the 50% CGT exemption.

You must be new to Australia. In Australia tax avoidance is a national sport. Many people spend many hours figuring out ways to legally minimise tax.

Not at all. Both properties are positively geared.

Nice try but I'm positively geared all round. Your accusation reeks of bad assumptions and faulty analysis to me

My existing properties are positively geared and I'm also building 2 new houses which will be positively geared. The labor policy is all up side for me. If I need to in the future, I will able to NG any of my existing properties (NG is being grandfathered) and can NG my new build houses if I need to (NG applies to new builds). I don't see any downside for me at all. So if I was "reeking of self interest", I would be all over this policy because it directly benefits me.

The reason I oppose this policy is because it benefits high income investors at the expense of lower income investors. Labor is supposed to be a party that reduces the gap between "rich" and "poor" but this policy does the opposite, hence my objection to it. It's really as simple as that.

Off topic but by building, I am finding out the real reason that housing is so expensive in Australia.. hint: it's not negative gearing driving up prices. But that is a topic for another thread.

 

Someone needs to tell this to the Perth property market. Properties are selling but prices are falling and falling. Someone needs to tell the market that the money being put into the market should be putting upward pressure on prices, not downward pressure.

 

I own 2 IP's (one to be a future PPoR though) - one in W.A, and one on the Mornington Peninsula.

I am stopping your kids from owning a property too.

Good on the Receptionist; she might get to retirement and not be a burden on your grandchildrens' pay packets.

I think it's great; gives me hope that more folks are out there with their hand UP and less with their hand OUT.