Is this a good time to end negative gearing and taxpayer subsidised speculation in housing?
https://johnmenadue.com/a-good-time-to-end-negative-gearing-…
What do you guys think?
Will you give a vote for those who dare to cut a slice off Australia "sacred cow" and make the "under-water" investors pay their fair share of taxes?
The Federal election is looming and I am in touch with my area MP about this to hear her thoughts. If you support the idea, reach out to your representatives and let them know.
The funny part is that our brilliant-minded government used the taxpayers' money (real taxpayers who support this country) and poured it into the mud speculation that supported the non-taxpayers to increase the value of their investments through:
- TFF that basically gave banks $200 billion (with a B) free money to give away in ultra-low finance
- Home-grants to FHB that only poured fuel to the bonfire (and who have been front-run by investors buying sight unseen to then re-selling to FHBs)
- Generous "improvement" grants to increase the value of property at taxpayers expense
- Various stamp-duty concessions
- Finally, VIC government now is an official buyer of properties (you must be kidding me - state use taxpayers money to prop up the overvalued properties?)
This question has been debated to death over the last decade.
Bill Shorten and the ALP took to the last election 'modest' reforms to negative gearing and were pilloried at the ballet box. Since then Albanese has abandoned the policy as it's electoral suicide and both major political parties know it.
Because of this both parties have come to a tacit agreement that neither of them will touch negative gearing for at least the next decade. It doesn't matter how inequitable or how big a strain on the tax system and economy it is, the politicians only care about getting voted back in and the Australian people have voted that they want negative gearing to remain.
Now if people were pissed-off enough about housing inequality and negative gearing they would have voted for the ALP. The majority didn't, therefore it is not a first-order issue or important enough in their lives to warrant voting on it and forcing change. Therefore, everything from hereon on in just dinner conversation as the matter has been settled.
I personally don't agree with negative gearing as it favours incumbent owners over renters which in the long run will divide Australia into two distinct classes which is not good for society in general.
Disclaimer: I own an investment property.