MB Radio: The rise and rise of negative gearing

soaring_ocean_from_wave_1_web

Find below or from our dedicated podcast feed (click the purple icon in the “Follow Us” sidebar to subscribe) a new podcast with Leith van Onselen and Gunnmatta examining recent released tax statistics covering the use of negative gearing in the Australian property market.

The discussion is drawn from a much more comprehensive report available in the May MacroBusiness Members Report by clicking here for the Member’s Pavilion forum thread.

If you would like to become a member then click:

support-mb-become-a-member-v1

Comments

  1. Not sure if its safari but I’m a paid member logged in but sais I don’t have access?

    Mod: hi Byron, fixed, you should have access now.

    • Tiliqua scincoidesMEMBER

      I’m also a member but get a message saying I don’t have access.

      Mod: fixed, it should work now.

      • same here. I just joined last week but get a message saying I don’t have access too.

        Mod: fixed, please try now, it should work.

      • me too. you guys really need to fix your membership processes.

        and please, please get rid of that horrible sign up for membership/email popup. 90% of the time I am on my mobile and that popup doesnt play all that nicely with mobile chrome.

        and one more. can you please add an option for members to choose if they get the daily email or not. If I look at the site I don’t really need more spam.

  2. TheRedEconomistMEMBER

    Yeah Likewise.

    I just became a member then.

    Will membership also remove the “pop up” ad that come up to receive regular emails. Can be frusterating when catching up the lastest MB exclusives on the smart phone.

    Regardless…

    Keep up the good work. MB is my daily hit and nightly read before bedtime

    Yep ….. I’ve got more “Issues” than some of our less fortunate Mag sellers on some street corners in Sydney and Melbourne.

    Maybe a future career path for me

    Cheers

    TheRedEconomist

  3. So Leith, does affable Joe’s strenuous denial that the Libs will mess with negative gearing make your choice on election day more difficult?

    Would you vote for a party that makes statements like this?

    The Australian tax system has a significant adverse impact on housing affordability in Australia. Tax breaks such as negative gearing and capital gains tax exemptions encourage investors to make speculative investments in the housing market. They also subsidise investors to compete with first home buyers. This activity pushes up house prices. The combination of negative gearing tax breaks and capital gains tax exemptions has led to a situation where housing investors went from claiming a collective income of $700 million in 1998-99 to a collective loss of $6.5 billion in 2008-09.

    • The Green’s stance on negative gearing is admirable. However, their complete opposition to expanding the urban area (i.e. choking land supply), whilst supporting ongoing high rates immigration outweighs it, in my opinion.

      • The Greens are pretty conflicted on immigration. On one hand they want to welcome in asylum seekers (on humanitarian grounds) but on the other they want to limit Australia’s population. I’m not sure how you achieve both.

        As for their opposition to expanding the urban area, I’m sure that would be based on environmental impacts and the carbon footprint of housing on the urban fringe.

        Still, I reckon if you have a party that’s against negative gearing and CGT concessions and wants to limit population growth, that’s more than Labor or the Coalition are offering.

        What’s the Mad Hatter and Big Clive’s view on negative gearing?

      • Where is the official Greens policy on NG? I don’t think they have one. I don’t expect them to have one either, because, frankly they have become an incoherent hysterical bunch lately.

        The Lorax – the answer is in the numbers . Asylum seeker numbers versus 457 visa numbers Versus perm migration numbers.

        Asylum seekers are a tiny fraction, but demonising them is a win-win for pollies – It is nasty enough to attract the xenophobic voter while also allowing them to keep the migration flood gates open and keeping the business vested interests happy.

        If 100,000 asylum seekers suddenly attempt to land on our shores, I’ll bet the BCA, MCA and all the acronyms will be up there welcoming them. Gina wants her $2/day indentured mine worker and she wants it now.

        EDIT: The Pat, thanks for the numbers – worth a 1000 words 🙂

      • The Patrician

        Lorax, Can you meet the current humanitarian intake and reduce the current pop growth rate?Yes.

        Current NOM = 200,000 pa of which 13750 is humanitarian intake.

        Simply reduce the non-humanitarian component to 100,000pa (where it had been prior to 2006)

        We could actually increase the humanitarian intake to 20,000pa and still reduce the pop growth rate back to a sustainable 1% .

      • Mav and Pat: Fair enough, but I guess the problem comes when you send the message that Australia has an open door policy for all asylum seekers. The wing nuts will be out in force talking about “pull factors” etc

        I don’t think the Greens have an explicit policy on negative gearing. Their website says this:

        Existing subsidies and incentives for property investment should be reviewed with a view to guaranteeing housing affordability across all tenure types.

        Which I read as negative gearing and CGT concessions, but no-one can say that in Australia!

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Mav and Pat: Fair enough, but I guess the problem comes when you send the message that Australia has an open door policy for all asylum seekers. The wing nuts will be out in force talking about “pull factors” etc
        As I understand it, we’re already legally obliged to have an “open door” policy on asylum seekers. Ie: if someone makes it here and has a genuine claim, we have to take them.

        The Greens, I imagine, want to increase the proportion of “legitimate” refugees (ie: not the boat arrivals) compared to other immigration types.

        I struggle to see a problem with that view, personally. Without actually knowing the numbers, I’d be prepared to bet that the typical 457- or other skilled-based immigrants is already quite well off and just looking to make more money before heading off to the next country.

      • The Patrician

        There is no “message-sending problem” Lorax

        We have met our international humanitarian intake commitments from refugee camps all over the world since WW2 without a threat to national security and without driving pop growth to unsustainable levels…and should continue to do so.

        Conflating these issues is a favourite tactic of the “Big Australia Lobby” and the “dog whistlers” alike and should be called out whenever it occurs.
        As Mav says the answer is in the numbers. Calm and rational discussion informed by transparent, accurate and timely monitoring is the key.

      • Calm and rational discussion informed by transparent, accurate and timely monitoring is the key.

        Do you anticipate that under an Abbott government? As I understand it the Abbott government’s immigration policy can be summed up in three words: “Stop the boats”.

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        ‘Do you anticipate that under an Abbott government? As I understand it the Abbott government’s immigration policy can be summed up in three words: “Stop the boats”.’

        I reckon that will be Tones illegal immigration policy. But I wouldnt mind punting he will want the legal migration taps running pretty heavily.

        Basically he is telling potential illegal immigrants to get a tourist visa and fly in rather than float over on an unseaworthy barge.

  4. I’m listening to the podcast. Can I get access to the report as well. What is the direct link? Cheers!

  5. Just subscribed to MB and I can’t get access to report… please advise why? cheers + thanks.