NSW Government Proposal to Scrap Stamp Duty and Replace It with Annual Land Tax

So finally liberal government in NSW introducing land tax similar to the United States of America and replacing one-off stamp duty with yearly tax that one has to pay until they own the property in addition to council and all other tax. This will also have major impact on those living on rent as the extra cost will be passed on to the tenant by the landlord.

Without going to the election they are introducing such a massive change is nothing but betraying the trust of people who voted for them..! Also, note that Mr Murdoch and lot of other people like him with vested interest support American property tax system and hence over coming days you will see many articles on radio, news and media in favour of the lifelong property tax system.

Yes, land tax is low upfront but the individual will end up paying way more than stamp duty over the life of property ownership as the land tax will increase every year once introduced, similar to what they have in the US.

This land tax will increase every year similar to increase in your medical insurance or increase in council rates which is always higher than CPI but your wage increase will always be lower than CPI.

Liberal wants to make sure that working-class people remain poor and rich remains rich.

Instead of taking it to the election, they are taking it to a consultation where all opinion will be reviewed by highly paid liberal mates who runs PR services and do community consultation business. They will pick and choose which feedback they publish and the outcome will be manipulated to make people believe there is massive support from the community…😎

Ozbargain community let’s vote and see what is a real bargain… a lifelong tax for your future generations or pay a one-off and never pay again stamp duty 🙂

Please make sure you provide feedback to your local Labor, Green and Independent MP to oppose this American system.

Liberal sees this as opportunity to make future changes to our health system to education system. If this passes through then you will see liberal after next election may introduce a system with option either opt to remove Medicare and save on Medicare levy …or pay high Medicare levy to get free Medicare….and slowly Medicare will be out of Australia..!

Update thanks to Mindsetraveller

This land tax means Investor can purchase a property without needing to pay stamp duty up front, 1,000's of other investors would feel the same; appetite for property increases whilst supply remains stable which only means prices go up.

As an investor, now that I know capital growth is likely, plus with low entry cost (no stamp duty upfront), rental income (might increase it $20 or so a week to help offset my yearly land tax), tax (negative gearing) considerations is good for me.

Those young and less wealthy purchasers who find it hard now - will likely find it more harder."

In addition Yearly tax means those young with poor income will now have to allow for extra expenses for the tax that means less shopping or holiday or spend on other activities which will have direct impact on businesses and hence deeper impact on socio-economic of entire system.

The winner of this new tax system is wealthy, property investor and real-estate agent !


External links

Please sign & share petition https://www.change.org/p/gladys-berejiklian-stop-nsw-liberal…

Treasury NSW

Consultation page

Poll Options expired

  • 192
    1. Life long yearly tax is better than one off stamp duty
  • 564
    2. One off Stamp duty is better than life long yearly tax

Comments

        • It means there will be more supply

          • +2

            @Quantumcat: @Quantumcat34 - It may not work like that. If people have more funds since they don’t have to pay stamp duty, prices will hold or climb.

            Those who bought prior to this may not want to sell. As they won’t want to pay an annual amount or up front. E.g people more older.

            Once a Covid vaccine is out the government will have mass immigration. So you’ll have much more demand, low interest rates, no/minimal up front costs, people unlocking equity. All will drive prices up.

            We’re in the middle of a pandemic and in a lot of parts of Sydney, prices haven’t come down by much or at all.

            Like all policy, some will benefit and some won’t. My overall belief is this won’t drive prices down and will only line the state governments pockets.

            They could have done more to improve transport/road network/high speed rail to allow people to commute further distances much faster.

  • Wow I Hope They Don't Start Taxing Capitalised First Letters Of Every Word

  • Property tax is much better than stamp duty. But it has to be designed as an ultra progressive tax with a reasonable tax free threshold.
    For example, a property valued under 300k should be tax free, and a thousand hectares property owned by just one person should be taxed exponentially. This will put a disincentive to not hoard a finite resources.
    Furthermore, all types of properties (in which the rights are regulated by the government) should be taxed, eg: intellectual properties.

    • +1

      Here is something from the mindset traveller "This land tax means I can purchase a property without needing to pay stamp duty up front, 1,000's of other investors like me would feel the same; appetite for property increases whilst supply remains stable which only means prices go up.

      As an investor, now that I know capital growth is likely, plus with low entry cost (no stamp duty upfront), rental income (might increase it $20 or so a week to help offset my yearly land tax), tax (negative gearing) considerations is good for me.

      Those young and less wealthy purchases who find it hard now - will likely find it more harder."

      In addition as I also said yearly tax means those young with poor income will now have to allow for extra expenses for the tax that means less shopping or holiday or spend.on other activities which will have direct impact on businesses and hence deeper impact on socio-economic of entire system.

      • +1

        Spot on SydBoy.

        Anyone who thinks this move towards a land tax is a good thing is just nuts.

        It’ll artificially inflate housing prices even further. Those at the lower end of the market or trying to get into the market will be priced out by investors and upsizers who now no longer have to fork out to pay stamp duty all over again.

        • +3

          How will it inflate house prices? Now it will be more expensive to own a house. If people are considering what they can afford each year in interest and other costs, they'll be able to afford less.

          • +6

            @Quantumcat: Because people will have more cash available upfront, which will mean 1 of 2 things.

            1. They’ll have a larger deposit. (Which will allow them to borrow more)
            2. They’ll be able to buy a property sooner.

            With no increase to the housing supply, it means there’s more buyers in the market. More buyers = more demand = higher house prices.

            • @Extreme: agree

            • +1

              @Extreme: The people that it will help will be first home owners. Other people have equity in existing homes. So that's a good thing.

              • +1

                @Quantumcat: There will be plenty of first home buyers who will be priced out of the market, because they don’t have the income/loan serviceability to compete with upsizers and others with equity.

                It’ll artificially inflate housing prices in a similar fashion to when first home owners grants were first introduced.

            • +3

              @Extreme: They might have more cash upfront, but they will be able to borrow less with brokers calculating affordability with the land tax included

              • @Quantumcat: The majority don’t tend to max out their borrowing capacity as it is. That’s unlikely to be a major factor.

                Having a sufficient deposit is usually what stops people from buying.

                • @Extreme: Your profile says Sydney - is that true? To even get a foot in the market with a unit in the sticks you are looking at 800k in Sydney. I can't imagine most 20 somethings in the beginnings of their careers being able to afford that easily

                  • +1

                    @Quantumcat: You can buy unit or house below $650k in many suburbs of Sydney so your $800k figure is true if you are looking to buy within 10km… but if you go just further west or south then there are many suburbs where you can buy within $650k.

                    • @SydBoy: 650k would still be a stretch for most first home owners

                  • @Quantumcat: Considering my investment 3/1/1 townhouse in western Sydney is valued at <500k, you’re far off the mark.

                    There’s plenty of properties available for sub $800k.

                    Borrowing capacity is dependent on income.

                    A couple with a combined average wage of $150k/yr could easily afford to buy in Sydney.

                    The fact is, you only need a 5% deposit to purchase property. That’s only $25k.

                    But too many people want their first home to be their forever home.

  • +3

    Option 3 NO TAX ON LAND PURCHASES! Especially now the government has embraced 'modern monetary theory' and started QE back in March.

    • MMT is killing the value of the currency.

      • +2

        That ship has sailed long ago. More like death by a thousand cuts.

        • The easy fix is to not hold fiat.

  • There is no right answer, as it depends how long you end up living in the property.

    For a transient person I’d rather pay the proposed fee.

  • +4

    If anyone thinks this is a good idea they’ve got rocks in their head.

    Whilst stamp duty is a large chunk upfront, it’s a once off payment. Own your property for 50years (or even longer) and you walk out well in front.

    This new land tax will artificially inflate housing prices even further.

    Don’t be surprised when future governments decide to increase the rate of land tax payable. Or if they decide to apply it to properties who had previously paid stamp duty.

    • Own your property for 50years

      Land tax may discourage the practice of long term hoarding of properties. Peg it to inflation and make it even more interesting.

      • +2

        I know so many 80/90 year olds who won’t sell their 4/5 bed home due to this, and why would they

        • Then they'll keep paying taxes. More revenue for the state.

          • +2

            @whooah1979: And then our premier's mates buy more land using tax payer money and make back door deals with developer… so it will be tax payer who loose it big time not anyone else… and it will be politicians, wealthy, real estate agents who wins out of this deal.

          • +2

            @whooah1979: what tax? they pay none, they live in million dollar houses and use 1/5th of it, and refuse to sell as they would have to pay 30k in sales comission then 60k in stamp duty to downsize. no icentive for them to do so. Some of them even get the pension, and are quite happy getting $400+ a week in pension to spend on lawn bowls and pots of beer, thats all they can be assed doing.

            • @Donaldhump: https://www.revenue.nsw.gov.au/taxes-duties-levies-royalties…

              Rates and thresholds
              Land tax is calculated on the total value of all your taxable land above the land tax threshold.
              The thresholds for land values change each year and is applied as follows.
              General threshold: $100 plus 1.6 per cent of land value above the threshold, up to the premium threshold.
              Premium threshold: $60,164 plus two per cent of land value above the threshold.

              • @whooah1979: Your link also says "Your principal place of residence is exempt" but with current new proposed tax everyone will pay including owner occupier.

                • @SydBoy:

                  "Your principal place of residence is exempt"

                  I missed that.

                  Owners have a choice.

                  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8956189/Bye-bye-sta…
                  Under his proposal, which will go to public consultation in March, home buyers will be able to chose whether to pay stamp duty or an ongoing annual land tax.

                  This will stop people complaining about pensioners not paying tax in on their PPOR.

                  Land tax already applies to vacant land, holiday homes, investment properties and commercial properties over $755,000 but could be expanded to primary homes under the proposal.

                  • @whooah1979: You also missed that this proposal will phase out stamp duty similar to ACT but with major difference that in NSW owner occupier will have to pay it !

                    land & houses are not cheap in Canberra so someone thinking that this will reduce housing price is just imagination or support to covert NSW government agenda.

                    http://chng.it/466rvtP8Ks

                    I am not sure if we are allowed to post change link in to forum description but Mod can delete the link if not allowed.

              • @whooah1979: this is in place now? or the proposed. these properties are not in qld too.

                unless you mean council rates, which i guess is true, but the growth in property covers it.

                point being when it is a 50-100k exercise to downsize many cant be bothered.

      • +1

        Land tax also means it’ll be easier for governments to stick their hand into homeowners pockets in the future.

        A little increase here a little increase there.

        People will end up paying more compared to stamp duty in the long run.

        • Only if they buy and hold. Buy at the beginning of the year and sell before December 31 the same year.

          • @whooah1979: My guess is that settlement adjustments will be the norm, so selling in December the new buyer doesn’t get lumped with the whole years land tax.

            The same way council rates/water rates is done.

      • +1

        Actually, as explain earlier land tax will encourage wealthy investor to invest more into property but working class people has no choice but to stay in their home keep paying tax or buy new home/property with higher inflated prices and also keep paying tax.

        In USA people do lot of flips and that's because of land tax … but result was clear in 2008 when GFC hit the property market economy was compromised as people can't pay the land tax so end up selling whatever they got .. !

        This is just new way government want to keep taking money out of everyday working class Australian and make them suffer more… for all their future generation…. it won't impact wealthy as they can afford it and will continue to afford it.. !

        • +3

          but working class people has no choice but to stay in their home

          The opposite actually. Stamp duty stops working class people from moving as it is a penalty for selling and buying. Having land tax instead actually helps people be able to move to houses that are better suited to them.

          Also, more expensive houses will of course have to pay more land tax - might even be a higher percentage. It is actually bad for wealthy people. Wealthy people can structure their income so that they don't have to pay income tax, but if they own property in Australia they can't escape land tax. It is like the GST (a consumption tax) in that it is a good progressive tax that the wealthy cannot avoid paying.

          • -1

            @Quantumcat: Here is something from the mindset traveller "This land tax means I can purchase a property without needing to pay stamp duty up front, 1,000's of other investors like me would feel the same; appetite for property increases whilst supply remains stable which only means prices go up.

            As an investor, now that I know capital growth is likely, plus with low entry cost (no stamp duty upfront), rental income (might increase it $20 or so a week to help offset my yearly land tax), tax (negative gearing) considerations is good for me.

            Those young and less wealthy purchases who find it hard now - will likely find it more harder."

            So the wealthy people support this scheme including Mr. Murdoch as they can accumulate more wealth, buy more & sell more… so it is not so wealthy people will end-up paying high prices if they can even afford it. Obviously real estate agent support this tax as there will be more investor buying and selling their property so more commission for middle man but the cost will be paid by working class Australian.

            In addition as I also said yearly tax means those young with poor income will now have to allow for extra expenses for the tax that means less shopping or holiday or spend on other activities which will have direct impact on businesses and hence deeper impact on socio-economic of entire system.

      • What's to stop landlords from passing the cost onto tenants by raising rents? We've seen before on threads here that landlords couldn't give a stuff about their serfs (I mean tenants).

        • The lease will stop them.

        • +3

          Supply and demand will stop them. Why do some people think landlords can just pick any price they want.

          Look at how dirt cheap renting in Sydney right now due to covid.

      • Ppl are forgetting that ppl need to live in a property their whole lives so if ppl choose to live in PPOR regardless of how many times they relocate, they will be paying land tax every single year of being alive… unless you rent or go homeless

  • +7

    Stamp duty is a disincentive for people to move and actually an unfair tax on people who genuinely need to move house. Land tax is a better option as it spreads the tax load more evenly across all homeowners - in the end the government is going to take the tax they need and the question is whether it is done fairly - stamp duty is definitely not fair at all. But if it is switched to land tax, it needs to be done fairly and with the appropriate amounts and tiers. Ideas would be to have a higher land tax on investment properties and/or leaving some duty also on investment properties, in order to reduce the land tax component for owner occupiers.

    • +4

      The states were supposed to abolish stamp duty 20 years ago when the GST was introduced. It's about time they honoured the deal.

      • Came here to say exactly this

      • +3

        Abolish. It's now being replaced. The way I see it is that we won't be owning our property anymore just like folks in USA. Don't we already pay a land tax called council rate? What's this new tax for? We already pay a transfer fee on top of the stamp duty. So this is just additional tax that is an open door for future abuse.

        • +1

          agree with you. stamp duty is one off fees while this one is ongoing life long yearly tax similar to your rego or council rates or health insurance which goes up every year. so after the election they can ask for 5% and closer to election may be 2.5% but once introduced this tax will take saving out of hard working Australian mom and dad for sure !

        • +2

          Own more assets pay more taxes. That sounds fair.

          • +1

            @whooah1979: but currently first home buyer don't pay tax or stamp duty and that helps younger people or people starting their family with kids.

            this tax system if applied only to investor then may be socio-economic impact would be different but they are implementing it on owner occupier and first home buyers as well… which means people has to pay tax instead invest that money for education, health, life style, holidays, kids etc.

            those who owns more property are wealthy investor and they get tax deduction but those who owns only one property don't get tax deduction and pay lifelong tax.

            • @SydBoy: Owners can stop paying land taxes by selling their asset and rent.

              People paying $1m for tangible assets in 2020 is overrated. They will spend the next 30 years in debt and slave 9-5 + overtime to pay off old bricks and sand.

  • +1

    I believe property prices will rise, as even with a 3-5% rise on current prices, it will be perceived as "cheap", if no stamp duty is payable up front. An illusion of course.

    • +1

      Exactly, same way construction prices went up when they gave all the redemption and funds… Anyone who thinks it won't happen is fooling themselves. This will just be a trick that REAs will use to reel in people with less financial knowledge 5o commit to something they cannot afford.

  • +11

    Stamp duty shouldn't exist at all that is why we have the GST!!!!

    No land annual land tax no stamp duty f**k the government

    • +2

      Came here to say exactly this

  • ** Please Sign the Petition **

    http://chng.it/7Xp6bSjZgw

  • +3

    Money is essentially free now. Assets are easier to obtain. You are witnessing the last gasps of air of a drowning economy.

  • Investment properties already pay stamp duty plus land tax. So what gonna changes for investment properties ?

    • +5

      investor won't pay stamp duty under new model , simply every one (incl. owner occupier) for rest of their life pay land tax which goes up every year… ! wealthy investor will benefit from this reform and young and future generation of Australian will suffer.

      • +3

        This is exactly what I thought.
        The stamp duty for houses everyday people afford us negligible. $33k on a $600k spend is nothing. But paying an ongoing fee over the years which will definitely go up is really bad for every day people as it's yet another stream that their money goes out. Subscription model for the property tax is so so bad.

  • What happens to people, who already have paid the stamp duty? They'll have to pay annual tax as well?

    • +1

      well currently they say no… once passed in few years time they will ask that as well… you can't trust government is looking to introduce new tax to everyday Australian.

  • +1

    Yes stamp duty is good but if you're looking at this from the perspective as a first home buyer the scheme i believe will be a god send. It'll incentivise people to downsize once their kids have moved out freeing up larger properties for those with families. No more 5/6 bedroom mansions housing 1/2 people. Although In the long run though this will be more expensive and not entirely beneficial to renters and home owners alike.

    But if you look at it from a first home buyer perspective it'll help to ensure that we don't end up with a generation forced to rent for their entire life. (provided they include the $20,000 rebate/subsidy)

    • -1

      well if you read description in the post it explains why it is not beneficial to first home buyers.

      currently first home buyers don't pay the stamp duty or tax even at this very moment and if they live in that property then they won't pay any tax forever but under the new tax rules those young and first home buyers has to allow for tax every year after year and also allow for increase that will break their budget and limit how good life they can live without lifelong tax.. !

  • Reading the comments from others, I wish the system could allow you to choose either of the option. That way, you can make a decision based on your circumstances.

    • not really, this is a clear proposition to phase out the stamp duty so for many be next few years you may get the option to choose but if liberal comes back again then they will remove the option and no one can stop them .. !

    • Luckily that's exactly what the proposal is. Purchasers can choose to pay the stamp duty OR the land tax

      • no that is not true. the proposal is to phase out stamp duty completely and there won't be any option after few years.

      • that is only in the short term. longer term that choice disappears.

  • Land tax makes sense if you don't expect to stay there for a long period of time.

    Gonna have to see more details.

    • yes it makes difference, if you are property investor then you can buy more property but families with moderate to low income struggle with their budget for rest of their life.

  • -1

    Just lift GST by 2%

    • +2

      Raising the GST is a horrendous idea, especially during a recession.

  • stamp duty better for your forever home and want to live 20 years plus

    Land tax better if for first home buyers, stepping stone houses or quick flip house projects and also better if you plan to move around the country for work opportunities

    • +1

      Land tax better if for first home buyers

      I thought first home buyers don't pay Stamp Duty? How would they be better off?

      • No specifics but

        Replace the current stamp duty concessions provided to first home buyers with a new grant;

        · The proposed model includes a property tax rate that would support and incentivise home ownership with a lower rate for owner-occupiers and higher rates for investors and commercial properties.

        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8959123/NSW-tax-ref…

        • +1

          that grant will straight into the pocket of vendor / developer… looks like you forgot what happened when Rudd handed over free money in 2008/2009… property prices gone up more than the grant with families and young people owning more mortgage then what they can afford… !

      • +1

        First Home buyers have to pay full stamp duty if the property is sold for more than 800k, that is lower than Sydney's median house price.

        • +2

          Well they don't pay anything for property is below $650k and yes that price is below median price of Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide and Canberra. Not sure what point you are making.

          Fact remains currently first home buyer don't pay any ongoing tax on property, with this tax they will for rest of their life.

          This tax will fuel property market with prices going upward so they will also pay way more.

        • Fair enough, I'd say majority of first home buyers aren't looking in that range, surely!

  • +1

    Stamp duty does create a less predictable and reliable tax base for govt to be fair.

    I think a better tax would be an inheritance tax. The intergenerational transfer of wealth is a major driver of inequality and keeps some rich and others poor.

    • +1

      inheritance tax.

      Why stop there? Make all properties leasehold.

      • Yearly property tax is somewhat similar to leasing the land from the government

  • Will depend on whether there is more passive investors or active investors, cause as I see it all tax is annoying. However unavoidable in life.

    My guess is it can't happen due to passive investor being huge, and yes I know you property flippers out there will be outrage at how much SD you pay this and that but when ASX is made up or large amount of REITs and a lot of huge blocks of real estate is owned by trustee or trust I doubt the powerful will allow it, unless there going to be loopholes.

  • It depends on what you're doing with your house - give you the choice.

    If you're planning on keeping the house short term - pay annually.

    If you're hoping to keep house 10+ years - pay lump sum.

    • This is about phasing out of stamp duty completely. So there will be no choice in few years time and every one will suffer with new tax on top of all other tax we pay… Yes wealthy investor won't suffer as for them this is tax deductible expense.

  • +3

    Reading all the comments about showing kind of "hatred" towards the wealthy elderly gave me such a funny feelings.

    As if it is their fault that they bought and lived in a property worth 200K in 1980's that are now 2 millions. They took the risk at that time, worked all their life, paid the mortgage and can now have the benefit of doing so! Now we want to demand that they keep paying for their wealth.

    Shouldn't then the same be claimed for anyone who made any kind of capital growth? Why should someone make wealth in a capitalist country?? Ironic, isn't it?

    • +1

      I don't think it's so much 'paying for their wealth' as it is the prospect of the younger generations paying what is essentially a life long tax for home ownership that the generation before didn't. I can only hope that in 20 years my property will have grown in value by $1mil - but if it does I dread to think of the prospects for my kids. I don't begrudge the older generation for being wealthy (or those that are anyway) but intergenerational wealth is going to create a massive divide between the haves and the have nots.

      • I think they should keep the option for paying it one-off, if someone chooses to do so. In that way, it remains same.

        I agree with what you said about widening the gap. Unfortunately, it is (and will be) the case. This is not about wealth only, but about almost every aspect of life. Children from a wealthy and/or educated family gets many kinds of opportunities that other may not…

  • Luckily this doesn't apply to home names titled home owners, your born here, so you own ya land, you bought it, ya families family own it, that land and home is yours baby, no cop(unless otherwise,)not paramedic (unless otherwise) johovas witness (unless otherwise) people climbing your (unless otherwise.)

    If it did apply then struth me timbers.

  • +1

    OP your post is one of the most misinformed I’ve seen to date regarding the change from stamp duty to broad based land tax.

    Stamp duty of property transactions is a highly inefficient tax that mostly penalises younger and poorer home buyers. Removing stamp duty has many benefits:

    • removes upfront costs to homeownership that is an obstruction for many people
    • improves mobility within the property market so it’s easier for people to downsize, move for work etc
    • land tax is calculated on unimproved land value which is often much lower than the actual market value / what was paid for purchase price
    • more efficient tax > consistent income for government and does not rely on volatility in the property market.
    • yes this will mean more tax in the long run but if you can’t find anything to do with the tens of thousands you save up front to invest/create value in other ways then I don’t know what to tell you
    • +5

      Your comments are misleading completely and very much similar to real-estate agent or mortgage broker or property investor. Let me respond to each one of them.

      1. First home buyer don't pay stamp duty so it is not the stamp duty that is stopping them to enter the market but it is high property value (which has nothing to do with Stamp duty) and minimum deposit required by the banks. Bank won't reduce deposit because all of a sudden there is change in the stamp duty.

      2. On the contrary, bank will now consider ongoing tax as a expense while considering how much they can lend and that will keep many people out of property reach as within their minimum income they now all of a sudden has to allow for new tax for rest of their life.

      3. Improve mobility for property investor as they can flip the house and move to next property and even they can buy more property as they won't be paying for rest of their life. They will be taking this tax as a deductible and keep pushing property prices high as more investor will be in the market.

      4. Unimproved property value in Sydney still 80% of actual market value so no there won't be much difference due to how you calculate property. also when more investor push housing prices the unimproved value will go up as well.

      5. Yes, agree this one Government will make more money out of this new lifelong tax on everyday Australian mom and dad. Sure they will make money no doubt about that one and that is the reason they wanted it in first place.

      6. Post is never about wealth people. The tax will kill the budget of lower to middle income earner. It will have socio-economy impact on businesses as well except mortgage broker, real-estate agent and wealth investors.

    • +3

      Stupid real estate agent spin. Government wants to bring land tax in because it will mean more revenue. Real estate industry supports it because they think it will stir up activity in buying and selling thus more commission. In the end it will cost everyone, including first home buyers more.

      • How is this real estate spin? It is literally the benefits of a broad-based land tax system. Any tax reform paper from industry leading economists including government research from the last 3 decades demonstrates this ( need not provide you with examples as a simple Google search will reveal this to you).

        Also believe it or not, greater government revenue is actually a benefit! And a broad based land tax will ensure that this revenue is fair and equitable across the populace.

  • Good for people who needs a living place,bad for using properties a high yield investment.

    Proletarians of all countries, unite!

  • +1

    Meh scrap these taxes all together.

  • -1

    Much better to have yearly than trying to save up for 4% land tax I am now. It's about $25k I need to find and spend on tax. And I don't even get a stamped certificate or anything!

    Yearly makes much sense, or no land tax or stamp duty. Raise GST instead.

    • -2

      And this clown is also using made up figures like 2.5% for home buyers which sound so draconian, but no responsible media outlet is using anywhere near those figures.

      Owner-occupied residential property
      $500 + 0.3% of unimproved land value

      Investment residential property
      $1,500 + 1.0% of unimproved land value

      Primary production land (farmland)
      $0 + 0.3% of unimproved land value

      Commercial property
      $0 + 2.6% of unimproved land value

      https://www.treasury.nsw.gov.au/budget-financial-management/…

      • +1

        Owner-occupier first home buyer pays no tax at the moment. This is new tax for all first home buyers.

        Again, for property worth $850k the unimproved value will be around $680k means yearly tax of $500 + $2040 = $2540 now multiply by 40 to 50 year of living life of individual if they buy at 30 then it will be around $101,600 to $127,000 over the ownership of the property for maximum 50 years. Now under stamp duty in NSW the one time payable duty will be $33,585 so a massive 300% extra TAX that one could use for so many other better purpose.

        Now work on different scenario and you will see general public end-up paying way more than what they are now.

        Now also add in that removal of stamp duty means more investor buying property pushing housing price upward which also means you will pay way more than what i calculated above.

        Now you also add the fact that 0.3% is not fixed, this is just a carrot to get in the TAX on people' life… as nowhere in the link you provided it says whether 0.3% remains same or changes every year…..!

        Bottom line it is a new Lifelong TAX on working class australian and it will make people's life measurable as the tax rate increases every year similar to your council rates, health insurances and every other tax.

Login or Join to leave a comment