24 hours is obviously a long time in the life of a real estate parasite.
Yesterday, we were greeted with shocked disbelief from the property industry that it might actually be required to perform eligibility checks for residency or FIRB approval before selling a home:
The Property Council’s Glenn Byres said putting any onus on lawyers to check the status of buyers was unrealistic, and the council was not convinced of the need for further changes…
Century 21 chairman Charles Tarbey questioned whether agents should be responsible for a government issue. “The government should be responsible for it, not private enterprises,” he said…
“One buyer backed out of an auction when I told them I had to see their passports,” McGrath’s Jake Rowe said…
Ray White chairman Brian White said there could be privacy issues with the suggestions.
Today, the industry seems to have softened its opposition somewhat to performing residency checks before sale:
Property experts played down the impact on the market but said the government’s stand would help deter illegal purchases…
McGrath’s Michael Coombs said it was “a good thing if we are catching people that are not running the right procedures. If it happens in properties with lower price ranges, then it might spread to all through Australia, because there are properties that are not only residential but also agricultural, commercial and other businesses.”
Earlier this week, the Property Council of Australia (PCA) also issued a statement strongly supporting the foreign investment regime:
The announcement that the current rules for foreign investment of property are being actively enforced is welcomed by the property industry.
The Property Council of Australia says there is strong industry support for the application of the current rules for foreign investors.
“We want foreign investment targeted towards new supply because new supply is the key to closing the housing affordability gap”, said Glenn Byres, Chief of Policy and Housing.
“We must be a country that encourages foreign investment in new housing because new housing benefits us all.
Given this regime explicitly punishes third parties from “knowingly assisting” a foreign buyer to breach the rules:
I can only assume that the PCA also supports explicit checks on the eligibility of buyers prior to sale to ensure that real estate agents do not assist in breaking the law?
As an aside, given the PCA wants “foreign investment targeted towards new supply because new supply is the key to closing the housing affordability gap” and because “investment in new housing… benefits us all”, then why did the PCA so strongly oppose Labor’s reforms to negative gearing, which would have also targeted new investment towards new housing?
Consistency is obviously not a hallmark of the property parasite.
