Silly question about Negative Gearing?

Only 5% of Australians negatively gear. It is a different world outside propertychat.The link is from an organization that is lobbying to keep NG.
Don't Play With Property

 

ANZ_Research ‏@ANZ_Research 3h3 hours ago
Negative gearing is a focus again #ausbiz #Budget2016

 

Politics works in stupid ways. Sometimes people stuck with slogans with no substantial outcomes.
NG should be at the bottom of reforms.

 

Australia is an amazing country. It offers fantastic opportunity for all to improve their lives and rise above mediocrity if they so wish.

Ever ask yourself why so many immigrants in this country who came from nothing have done so well for themselves and their families?

They know how hard life can be outside this blessed and opportunity dripping country and they take none of it for granted. They work their asses off making endless sacrifices in order to create a better life for themselves and their families.

 

Oh, that all. Only 5%. I thought everyone was using it and it was pushing up property prices. If it is only 5%, we might as well as leave it as is.

 

Yes I am also a long time Coalition voter but will be voting Labor for the first time, primarily motivated by the issue of NG and the lies Turnbull is spouting about it. I have long recognized NG as an unfair and market distorting policy. Yes there will some pain at first (dropping prices) but in the long run Australia will be better without it. I am sure there are many tens of thousands thinking like myself and this could swing the election.

 

I'm another who has been a liberal voter historically that is on the fence. I do support both the super and corporate tax rate changes though so there is that at least.

Might just take a coin in at the current rate... although based on the Green's initial response to the budget maybe I should just vote on whoever separates themselves the most from them...

 

I believe you need a new abacus.

 

Problem when one posts in a hurry.

Thanks for the tip. Yep, I bought a new abacus. I used money out of my Offset account. Thanks to your tip, my NG just got larger.

As a result, property prices will continue to soar, more Aussies won't be able to buy property, my FY16 tax refund will be bigger, the National Budget is in more strife, ... I gotta stop doing this!!!!

OK, so it was 31 years ago. So, it was years and years and years and years and years ago, not in the last couple of years as @wategos was saying.

BTW,even Mark Latham tried to get rid of NG in 2004 (I think). Using my new abacus (thanks once again), that was 12 years ago. Even that is years and years ago.

Yep, Malcolm will get back in and NG will stay.

 

********. Write a paper and put your name to it. Other people do, it's easy to sit there and spout this stuff without real evidence. This subject has been analysed and the findings published, feel free to publish a dissenting paper.

I'll give you a clue. Search for Grattan institute negative gearing.

 

I find it ironic that a primary motive of getting rid of NG is that it overwhelmingly benefits 'the rich'. Yet, under Labor's model of removing negative gearing, a 'rich' investor, with a large and diversified portfolio, would still be able to effectively negatively gear residential investment properties by offsetting the loss from those properties against other investment income. This luxury will not be available to ordinary investors (middle income earners, mum and dad with an IP or 2, etc).

Effectively then, the Labor plan to make things fairer will penalise lower income earners while rewarding higher income earners with large investments.

On principle, I am opposed to negative gearing in it's current form and believe strongly it should be removed in it's current form. However, the Labor model for a new negative gearing will penalise ordinary workers and benefit 'the rich'. That is a model I will not be voting for.

 

I was very much opposed to voting Liberal at this election. However, I also agree re: the Greens policies overall, although I agree with some of them. However, something that has swung me is that my local Labor candidate is a Green. She has never voted Labor in her life and has vocally opposed many Labor policies. That is enough to motivate me to support my local Liberal candidate.

 

Kieren will you depreciate your abacus?

 

I've thought about this for a while & I think its because its so easy to be comfortably mediocre in Australia. We have plenty of safety nets so most people don't ever really have to face the risk of sleeping on the street or starving.

 

After the election NG might benefit those on 87k per year, but might benefit better those on 180k per year.

Even if Malcolm leaves it as it is.

Even if Bill grandfathers it.

 

Given that 62 people are as wealthy as half the world's population, it's not the number who neg gear that count- it's the size of the portfolios
I think there should be a limit to the number of properties myself, or remove it entirely .

 

And we should be grateful for this. Do you want to know how would be without those "safety nets"?... Poverty, social conflicts, crime, corruption..

I suppose you don't know what you don't know...

 

Agree with you.... I know what country you're from, most on the forum won't know that info but I can imagine how bad it could be.

 

I have no issues with NG but agree that the excesses of it need to be taken off. It's also an inherently unbalanced deduction (as are all) as for low earners it worth next to nothing and for high earners it's worth 49 cents in the dollar. Someone was talking about the UK the other have a deduction limit across the board, interesting concept.

 

I too assumed I would be voting this Liberal this election but now am undecided, leaning towards Albanese (my Federal member)..btw checked out the Greens candidate but thought he wrote some disingenuous comments about climate change.

I agree with @euro73 . I am slightly advantaged by NG but as a citizen I don't really see why I should be subsidised. This and $50 billion for some submarine drawing plans have made me question Turnbulls choices.

I also think that despite what the media would like to portray as a close election, its unlikely that the electorate will go back to Labour after a term and will want to give Turnbull a shot hopefully unencumbered by wayward Senators and hopefully with the removal of some of the more hardline Liberal members.