Australian Broker forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Cut tax breaks for investors, says welfare group

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 15 Aug 2012, 07:45 AM Agree 0
Australia's key welfare group is urging the government to cut tax breaks for property investors
  • Country Broker | 15 Aug 2012, 10:17 AM Agree 0
    If you cut tax breaks for investors there will be less investors in the rental market, that means more rental pressure on the ppor , go the other way and have incentives for investors on housing !
  • Tristan | 15 Aug 2012, 10:26 AM Agree 0
    Wouldn't cutting these tax breaks reduce the no. of investment property owners who can afford to purchase/sustain investment properties, and increasing demand, the increasing rents? So perpetuating the problem. Wouldn't a better idea increasing the incentives so there are more investment properties available in the market.
  • DB | 15 Aug 2012, 10:39 AM Agree 0
    What a rediculous request from ACOSS, An investment property is not a luxury, its a business which forms part of an investment strategy and retirement plan. In the event you are unable to operate this as a business with applicable expense & depreciation claims then it will not be a feasable investment. The roll on effect from this is who then will provide the majority of housing to the rental market ???? ACOSS talk about poverty & inequality, the poverty of our elderly & pensioners is extremely disturbing to me & the current government can assist here by directing money wasted on Ilegal immigrants back to the well being of our elderly who have paid taxes for the majority of there life. In regards to poverty & equality to younger people (or not at pension age) all I can say to ACOSS is these people need to start taking control of there life & stop bludging off the population who work their perverbial off .... In other words get off their perverbial and contribute to the economy & stop blaming everything else for there own inactions. If you of sound mind and a moving body then you can earn an income by guess what?? Oh yes thats right by working !! ACOSS I have one thing to say and that is people who work hard give themselves the oportunity NOT to be equal!
  • David | 15 Aug 2012, 10:50 AM Agree 0
    What we need to do is help those that can't help themselves, stop helping the bludgers and stop knocking the contributors in our society. Property Investors provide housing to roughly 1/3 of the population, generally at a loss. If the Government were to single out Property Investors and take away the tax deductability of these losses then I expect that emergency housing providers would be more than struggling.
  • anon | 15 Aug 2012, 10:52 AM Agree 0
    If you take away the negative gearing so that investors lose the benefeit do they really think investors will keep their rents at the same level? Or will investors increase the rents to make up for the shortfall? We need more incentives like NRAS and less government development red tape and costs to encorage investment in more housing if you want to solve the problem of a housing under supply. Not less incentives.
  • Terry | 15 Aug 2012, 11:34 AM Agree 0
    this was tried some decades ah=go by the government of the day and the bum fell out of the housing inducstry. investors syopped buy property and housing companies went broke. the housing shortgae got worse and so on. been there done that. it doesn't work. stop trying to knoble the people who are having a go to compensate the ones eother to lazy or dont want to commit to thebfinancial future and make a career out of live off hands outs. sure their are some genuine cases where people need a hand but mostly its people not having a go. socialist governments always get wrong, present government as an example. you need to encourage business and investors, we can't all be on social security looking for the next dole cheque.
  • Brian | 15 Aug 2012, 11:52 AM Agree 0
    Someone is not thinking, remove negative gearing and the government would have to build or buy a lot of properties to cover the shortfall as investors leave the market!
  • Chris Szigeti | 15 Aug 2012, 01:29 PM Agree 0
    Well said DB - are these people who make these things up in the REAL world.
  • Peter | 15 Aug 2012, 02:32 PM Agree 0
    Bo Chris, they are not in the real world. They are in Gillard's and Swan's world of left-wing ideology, socialism and distortion. The problem with this is they will eventually run out of other people's money and won;t there be a hue and cry when they don't get paid! This is all about protecting their cosy little nest eggs! Their theory will mean less investors leading to less rental property leading to more homelessness, more Housing Commission property, higher taxes to fund it and an increase in beauocracy (?) to manage it. Yep, another good idea ACOSS!
  • Patrick | 16 Aug 2012, 10:54 AM Agree 0
    Terry is quite correct. Keating as treasurer did not actually cancel negative gearing he only enacted that you must carry your losses forward and offset them against future rent increases. Result, rents rose 20 to 30% almost immediately and the outcry to every Labor member of parliament was a cacophony which resulated iun a rapid repeal of an uttely misguided policy. Cassandra, the definition of insanity is to do the same thing repeatedly and expect a different outcome.
Post a reply