Sydney - how far off UCV land valuations are from market value

Discussion in 'Property Market Economics' started by scientist, 31st Jan, 2020.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
Tags:
  1. scientist

    scientist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23rd Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    488
    Location:
    sydney
    The rated land value is apparently derived from actual market data by professional valuers contracted by the NSW valuer general. Look at this example below - 4.3m market value vs 1.63m rated value. Wow!

    upload_2020-1-31_10-27-50.png

    Yes I'm aware UCV valuations are 'for purpose of calculating rates' but they really should also reflect actual market value, and then the rates coefficient be adjusted down if it's excessive as a result - the current approach is inaccurate (i.e. rated land values artificially low to achieve the desired rates)
     

    Attached Files:

    John_BridgeToBricks likes this.
  2. Morgs

    Morgs Well-Known Member Business Member

    Joined:
    7th Dec, 2017
    Posts:
    1,041
    Location:
    Sydney NSW
    I guess the answer is "depends" on a myriad of variables, but UCV is usually substantially below market value...
     
  3. Thomacino

    Thomacino Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    9th Nov, 2018
    Posts:
    162
    Location:
    NSW - Sydney
    Mass valuation method is far from perfect and hinges on numerous factors..
    If the valuations of land is accurate the government appears predatory/revenue raising, hence a conservative approach.
    Note assigned land values by the VG and land values determined for mortgage purposes will display a notable difference.
     
    Rolf Latham likes this.
  4. croseks

    croseks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    9th Oct, 2018
    Posts:
    184
    Location:
    Melbourne
    It makes sense, the government wants its share (land tax) but still wants people to invest speculatively. Increasing the land tax along with market value would simply stop the housing market in its tracks, can't have that happening ;)
     
  5. spoon

    spoon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17th Nov, 2016
    Posts:
    1,014
    Location:
    Time-dependent
    I would ask the question in reverse. Should one invest in property which the sales price is very close to the gross/net land value? If one can buy a property with large land component very close to the gross land value, does it mean it has the potential to good gains in future?

    Or there is an intrinsic reason why sales price is very close to gross land value?
     
  6. Codie

    Codie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    6th Mar, 2018
    Posts:
    1,395
    Location:
    Brisbane
    personally that’s exactly what I’d aim for.. if you can pick up a block at land value that’s a year or two from being Re-rated in a moving market (rare but have seen it) A lot of unsophisticated buyers will take rating value as gospel
     
  7. Thomacino

    Thomacino Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    9th Nov, 2018
    Posts:
    162
    Location:
    NSW - Sydney
    Gross/net land value??
    Are you referring to improved/unimproved land value??
     
  8. spoon

    spoon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17th Nov, 2016
    Posts:
    1,014
    Location:
    Time-dependent
    I was referring to the photo of OPs. Unimproved land value in my dictionary, yes.
     
  9. Yann

    Yann Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    10th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    151
    Location:
    QLD
    Recently got land tax for Sydney units, and it shows on the last page land value down a good 10% for inner city / inner East subs. Almost a 4 digit savings so happy with it (now that property prices have more than recovered), this year and next 2 with the 3-year average. But it shows it has some correlation with market values, on the way up and down. Next year might be a different story though!