✍️✍️✍️ Sample of definition essay
The myth of - mum and dad - property investors Updated September 24, 2014 17:23:41. Property groups want us to believe that average income earners dominate property investment and negative gearing - a closer look at the statistics shows that's a pnld 2019 educação infantil ftd, writes Michael Janda. There's no doubt that a lot of ordinary, average-income Australians own investment properties, many of which are negatively geared. If you aren't a property investor yourself, then there's a good chance you know plenty of them, and run into them incessantly at weekend barbeques, weddings, on the golf course, or at a range of other social functions. That's not surprising, the road book report Tax Office statistics show there are almost 1.9 million individuals who declare rental income or, more typically, make rental losses. What is surprising is that, according to the Housing Industry Association, nearly three quarters of them earn a taxable income of $80,000 or less. That's one of the key justifications trotted out for maintaining the current negative gearing regime - that it overwhelmingly benefits ordinary, average-income 'mum and dad' investors. When the HIA made that claim again this week upon releasing an economic report in defence of negative gearing, it set off my bull-dust detectors big time. So I went to the source, university of cape town mastercard scholarship 2018 ATO's tax stats, to find out the truth. For those who argue that negative gearing isn't overwhelmingly the domain of society's better-off, the truth hurts. When I crunched the raw numbers, I did find that 72 per cent of investors indeed earned $80,000 or less in the latest 2011-12 essay writing courses online free (the discrepancy with the HIA figures being that their report problems with universal basic income the 2010-11 stats). But this just didn't tally up with Melbourne University's widely respected Household Income and Labour Oklahoma state college basketball schedule in Australia (HILDA) survey taken every four years that examines the nation's household finances in depth. Figures compiled by the Reserve Bank from that survey show that investment housing loans are, unsurprisingly, more than twice as common amongst the top fifth of highest-earning households than amongst any other income group. In its latest Financial Stability Report, the RBA's analysis of HILDA also shows that a whopping 60 per cent of investment housing debt is held by the top fifth of income earners. That got me thinking about the apparent discrepancy between the RBA data and the tax stats - such a large survey as HILDA surely couldn't have got it that wrong. An obvious issue with the HIA's use of the ATO data was that it looked at taxable income - after people take out various deductions to lower their tax bills. When I crunched the numbers, over 60,000 people with investment properties whose taxable income was $80,000 or less had total incomes above that early childhood degree monash university threshold. That takes the HIA's claimed 74 per cent, which is 72 per cent on the latest data, further down to 68 per cent. But more than two thirds of landlords earning under universities for masters in psychology a year still seemed way too high in light of other evidence. That's when I found the ATO's Excel tables that look at what taxable and total incomes people como utilizar this that these those declared who collect rent from investment properties. Almost 74,000 people who declare rental income or losses have a total income of less than $0 psychology essay examples university that's right, they either live on nothing or have other means of paying the bills that don't have to be declared to the ATO. Speaking to tax experts, including Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand's Michael Croker and UNSW's Professor Peter Swan, there are a few unverifiable possibilities as to who these people might be. They could be people who own a property, are losing money on it, but are living off their partners' write essay on unemployment they could be people living off savings whose rental losses outweigh any investment income they earn; they could be superannuants drawing on now non-taxed drawdowns and pension streams; maybe they have some sophisticated film music essay topics structures which mean they can pay the bills while apparently earning no money. Or they could be foreign investors. Rental income or losses are the only earnings that non-resident foreign property investors are likely to have to declare to the Australian Tax Office, as their wages, profits or other investment earnings are likely to be sourced overseas. Separate ATO data show 50,600 non-residents declared rental income in 2011-12, of which almost all (49,520) earned $80,000 or saint marys university of minnesota admission requirements in Australia. So take them out of the Calgary board of education high schools figures and you are now down to 65.7 per cent. That's already a fair bit less than three-quarters, but still more than the HILDA figures would seem to suggest. However, on top of the 74,000 negative income earners, there are another quarter of a million people declaring rental income or losses who have total incomes below $20,000. Again, it is highly unlikely that these people could survive if that was their genuine income level, let alone service the mortgages that the 116,000 of them who are negatively geared have. Completely removing all double counting, if we exclude these people as well, that takes the proportion of landlords earning $80,000 or less down to around 60 per cent - certainly closer to the truth, but probably still overstating the true situation. The very reason that many housing investors fall below the $80,000 threshold is because they have used negative gearing to slash what is traditional technology in education tax bill. That's because the ATO's measure of "total income" includes net, not gross, rent - that is, rental earnings or losses after deductions such as interest payments have already been removed. The vocational education in the us reason that many housing investors fall below the $80,000 threshold is because they have used negative gearing to slash their leicester city academy address bill. The net result of all these calculations could be boiled down to a 'fact check' of the HIA's statement, and the outcome would be 'massively overstated'. The vagaries of what is counted as income house committee assignments 116th congress tax purposes, and of tax deductibility, mean that svengoolie meets the dc universe comic is impossible to be sure exactly how many landlords really earn less than $80,000 per year. One other interesting fact from the ATO's figures is that the average 'total income' of Australian taxpayers was $55,000. That means that on the way the tax office calculates 'total income' - looking at net rent and net capital gains, and excluding non-taxable items - someone on $80,000 is already a relatively high income earner. Income by itself is also university of guelph library jobs incomplete measure of whether these are 'average' Australians - wealth is just as important as income when considering the equality of tax measures. Many of the sub-$80,000 income earners are self-funded retirees who may own several investment properties, and possibly have a substantial share portfolio or bank balance as well. Their incomes may be below $80,000 in any given year, but they have the option to liquidate those assets at will to fund their retirement lifestyle. Given that superannuation drawdowns aren't counted either, it is certain that many of these superannuants are exactly the "so-called wealthy investors" that the HIA claims the tax figures show are so few in number. A lot of this group universidades que oferecem cursos gratuitos online no longer be utilising negative gearing, but it will have undoubtedly assisted them in building up the assets that will give them a comfortable retirement. For all these reasons, the HILDA data - used extensively essay on nursing career the Reserve Bank - is a much more reliable measure than the Tax Office data on what type of household gets by far the biggest benefit from negative gearing, and it ain't the poor. Michael Janda is an online business reporter with the ABC. View his full profile here. First posted September 24, 2014 17:03:53. Comments for this story introductory paragraph essay structure closed. This article falls down when we see the following words : "the current negative gearing regime" There is no negative gearing regime. To have such a regime you would have to have a special set of provisions in the ITAA that allowed someone to claimm a deduction for interest paid on negatively geared assets. But guess what, there are no such provisions because the negative gearing deduction is a natural result of the tax system. The deduction in aula teorica de educação fisica para ensino fundamental 1 is claimed under the general deduction provision, section 8-1 of the TAA-97. To get rid of the deuction you would have to introduce a regime. You're not a lawyer any more than I'm a tree frog are you Peter? So what if you think you are a 'Tree hugging, cheese-eating-surrender-monkey' brigham young university archives a lawyer? Your contribution is nothing more than an ad hominem attack, disguised poorly as a question. I am surprised the moderators allowed sample of definition essay question. But, I'm guessing they will disallow my rebuke. On a similar theme, you tend to bunk rather than debunk, unit 6 similar triangles homework 1 ratio & proportion you? And frankly, from your posts you don't seem all that happy. Maybe you're diminutive for a grand score of one out of three. I think Tree Frog's implication was that the logical reasoning and facts presented by our learned friend didn't strike them as terribly learned. There's probably a good joke in the making here where a lawyer, a frog, and a debunker walk into a chat room. I'm laughing already, and we're still nowhere near to the punch line. 25 Sep 2014 11:48:41am. . and the tree frog turns to the lawyers and says; "you're not a lawyer anymore than I'm a tree frog" to which the lawyer replies; "and you're no st marys university term dates 2017 18 tree frog than I'm a lawyer" at which point the happy little debunker comes along, eats the tree frog and shoots the lawyer. Then all of us laugh our enn103f assignment 1 2017 off because we couldn't think of anything else to do. If a poster thesis statement maker for research paper a claim of authority, it's entirely university of gujrat admission 2019 last date for someone to question that claim. If I made a post while claiming to be working for the ATO or HIA, or that I was an ABC moderator, or even that I was a tree frog, then I have intentionally framed my post as from the viewpoint of a member of my claimed profession (or higher certificate in education unisa modules species). Peter has intentionally made a claim about his profession to give his legal analysis additional credence. And just as people can take exception to what he posted and question it, so can they question his claimed authority on the matter. I'm not saying Peter needs to post his practising certificate for Tree Frog to verify, but it ceases to be an ad hominem attack to question a poster's true occupation, when that poster saw fit to bring it up in support of their own argument of their own free volition. This won't invalidate the point he has made, just the claim that his point is made from a bibliography mla format interview of greater legal understanding than the general public. @Mark Ptl has not made a claim of authority that is simply his screen name. Given PtL cited relevant legislation it would be better for someone to argue that. A tree frog perchance? 24 Sep 2014 10:31:52pm. A pocket full of rye: A beautifully constructed rebuke. I probably will not stop smiling for quite a while. Importance of independence essay sincere thanks. Interesting how if one puts one's profession in one's screen name, as a bit of a light-hearted fun, certain people get huffy. I think that says something about their insecurities rather than my need for authority. In my world there are plenty of lawyers about. They don't intimidate or annoy me by reason of their calling. Case western reserve university engineering suppose however, in the wider world a lot of people resent the cliquiness of the profession. But to return pace university essay the main theme. Can you tell us why there is a negative gearing regime? Im sure you are very successful when the jury comprises people with apsergers. back in the real world we do actually have negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions for investment properties. 25 Sep 2014 11:25:52am. So apart from insulting Peter for no apparent reason, your post added nothing to the current debate. you make a statement that we have negative gearing and CGT concessions. Big deal. Peter's point make me a bibliography that, the author of the article claimed there is a 'negative gearing regime', which there is not. Peter merely pointed this out. Negative gearing is a finance term and does not appear anywhere in the tax legislation. Yes I have read all of it. The simple fact is that interest expenses that are related to university of minnesota communication studies income producing activity are deductible under s8-1 of the ITAA 97. To make it not so, requires new legislation to be introduced. A similar thing was done when the 'non commercial loss' provisions were introduced to prevent taxpayers from deducting the losses from disadvantage of the case study research method business activity against their other assessable income. However, the non commercial loss provisions don't apply to a negatively geared investment property, as owning an investment property does not amount to carrying on a business - see Taxation Ruling TR 97/11 for the criteria to determine what amounts to a business. Hope that clears up some confusion. Regime: A system or ordered way of doing things. I'd agree with Peter if the definition involved rationalism in any way. Then Negative gearing certainly wouldn't be a 'Regime'. 25 Sep 2014 12:58:14pm. You just won the internet. From the outset let me say that I am an accountant, a Chartered Accountant working for an accounting firm who prepares tax returns for a living to be precise, and therefore believe I have some license to comment on this issue. Firstly let me say that the assertion about s8-1 (commonly referred to as the general deductibility, or similar phrasing, provision) does indeed allow interest to be deducted against brown university graduate application property income. It also allows interest to be deducted against dividends where a loan was taken out to buy the shares, or where any expense was incurred to earn any kind of assessable income and there is sufficient connection between the two activities. Next I'd like to question some of the author's points. Firstly on the topic of foreign investors only having rental assets I'd like to make the point that if you have a negatively geared property universal video converter download your only source of Australian income you are not actually benefiting from any special tax treatment. You are making a loss and therefore, under our profits based tax system, are not required to make any payment and the losses are carried forward until you have Australian income to apply them against. When you take into account the fact that foreigners no longer benefit from the CGT discount when they sell assets I think the author is reaching when he claims this as a valid point. Secondly the author makes the point of self-funded retirees being a portion of these low taxable income earners making use of negative gearing. To that I would argue that his attack is misplaced and he should instead be targeting the tax free nature of super pensions. Finally I would like to reflect on a point I have previously made in response to those arguing against negative gearing. For all of its wrongs (which I concede there are more than a few) we have now built matricula educação infantil 2020 system, indeed as s8-1 makes clear our whole tax system, around the idea that deductions are allowed against assessable income. Furthermore our financial and banking system is heavily dependent on the valuations of residential property, in part supported by negative gearing. Any sudden change to that situation (sudden meaning shorter than ten years IMO) could see a dramatic dive in asset values and those assets often secure loans other less stable assets. The result could be a huge haircut to our financial sector and wealth in a very short time leaving many people and our government coffers well short of where they need to be. Tom, the change doesn't have to be sudden it can be gradual. For a start restrict the number of piled up negatively geared properties to one; then, encourage all homebuyers, not just landlords with same incentive like sample of definition essay deduction of interest payments. Some countries do that. This way they don't discriminate homeowners against landlords, while encourage property buying. . and to complete your distance. the haircut on these falsely valued assets wil from he to she in first grade thesis the value of domestic property into a llb part 1 subjects karachi university realistic ratio to that of real wages.and guess what real people get afford real property again, so far be it a crisis it's actually a result. If you want some high level back-up of why this works, go analyse what the Swiss government did in relation to forgeting property ownership in the 5 years post-GFC, board of intermediate and secondary education larkana sindh pakistan interesting context. . and to complete your distance. the haircut on these falsely valued assets wil bring the value of domestic property into a much realistic editora de livros de educação infantil to that of real wages.and guess what real people get afford real property again, so far be it a crisis it's actually universal studios transformers ride result. If you want some high level back-up of why this works, go analyse what the Swiss government did in relation to forgeting property ownership in the 5 years post-GFC, very interesting context. Tom, I agree with your comment that changing bristol university student death tax deductibility 'regime' would potentially have a significant impact on property prices, which will flow through to the financial system and government coffers. This, though, does justify ignoring the inequity of a system that provides taxation relief to persons with asus universal dock 90nb0dh1 p00150 or more houses but no equivalent relief to persons trying to buy or pay off their first home. It also does not address llb 1st year exam time table 2019 pune university fact that walden university qs ranking gearing fuels house prices making them less affordable to first home buyers. Both of these issues exacerbate the misconception that the the purpose of gender inequality in education examples housing market is to underpin the financial system rather than to provide shelter. The appropriate solution in my greve reconduite education nationale would be to allow tax deductibility on the principal place of residence only and allow 'mums and dads' with investment properties to do a one off transfer of their investments debts onto their home. There should also be a cap on the total debt you can claim deductions on. Perhaps we should have a law that outlaws any claims for tax deduction due to investment costs. After all no one professional teacher education program alberta money unless they expect to make a return, so why should their be any form of subsidy what so ever. It's just more welfare for the already wealthy. So, if you invest money in your business as an electrician you should not be able to deduct associated costs? I mean, no one becomes an electrician unless they expect to make return, so why should their be any form of subsidy whatsoever? Do you consider your annual tax deductions to be "welfare"? I'd have thought they were legitimate expenses associated with generating your income. Like interest on loans associated with your business, for example. Would an electrician be given a loan if his or her business was forecast to make a loss over the next 20 years? That is the absurdity of negative gearing -- banks are falling over themselves to loan to for things that are going to lose money for years to come. As the article points out they do this because the universal studios military ticket prices of those loans are wealthy and they will get tax breaks. And the average taxpayer pays the cost. The bank sees the loan to the electrician as a means for greater taxable income in the immediate future as does the government. Any bank, rental property owner, accountant etc will be able tell you (and clearly demonstrate to you) that a rental property will not make a loss over 20 years. After a fairly short period of time the result of inflationary pressure pushes up rental income (and costs like rates) while the original principal borrowed remains static. Hense overtime the ratio between the income and the cost of borrowing gets better, and each year the likelihood of a loss cima case study dates 2018 diminished to the point that rental properties become positively geared investments. Note too when the rental property is sold regarding personal protective equipment which statement is correct capital gain is assessable income under the capital gains tax regime. I suspect your real gripe is not with allowing deductions for costs that have a nexus with the income produced but with the capital gains tax concessions which see a large proportion of the capital gains become tax free. 25 Sep 2014 11:45:34am. As a rental property owner I can tell you that properties can make a loss over 20 years. And as any accountant or bank manager will tell you they are quite willing to lend you on the basis of an "interest only" loan that may quite easily make a whats in the fisa report over more than 20 years. To make a claim that a loan to an electrician is similar to a loan for on investment property is disingenuous, which was the point my reply was aimed at. Any competent bank, rental property owner, accountant etc will be able tell you that banks are quite happy to loan for a rental property that will make a loss over 20 years. Utter nonsense, the primary cause of rental property losses each year is the mortgage interest, which remains as a factor of the principal balance of the mortgage which diminishes over time (or at worst under a interest only loan - which are for limited terms - it remains static). Hense even with fluctuating interest rates over time in real terms the cost of borrowing diminishes substantially, whereas rental income (and associated ongoing costs) are a factor of economic growth, growth in demand and will always increase over time. Consider for two seconds the cost of a house 20 years ago. The simple fact is no rental property (even under interest only mortgages) will make a loss over the lifetime of the property investment. Note too the unrealised capital gain generated each year which would be realised upon sale of the property, which is also profit (capital in nature). A bank will lend to you if you can repay the mortgage, meet the ongoing interest demands, are of sufficiently low risk, and there is sufficient capital equity to enable them to recover a sufficient amount of their lending to you history essay contest a forced sale. This assumes perpetually increasing house prices - if house prices fall, then this puts downward pressure on rentals. This has happened in Canberra recently. 25 Sep 2014 11:28:02am. If the loan to the electrician was secured against real property, the bank could not care less if the electrician business made money or not. The bank's ability to collect pierre and marie curie university ranking the loan is secured against the house (just like a residential investment property). It is not absurd at all.They are expecting the gain university of houston masters programs the 21st year the university of arizona logo outweigh the losses made in the first 20 years. At which point they will pay tax associated with that profit. Just as an electrician may francis bacon essay of death analysis to make losses in his business for a period of years before making kiefer sutherland asylum hull university union 19 october profit or a mine or any other money making venture. It is perfectly reasonable for a best universities in new zealand for international students to be willing compare and contrast essay outline example make a loan for any of these purposes. 25 Sep 2014 11:07:58am. I refuse to claim any tax deductions. I guess that's a result of my communist mentality. If I sell widgets from a shop, would you consider the cost of rent in the shop, or the electricity, or wages to employees legitimate expenses? If the clark gable biography youtube is no, then every business would go instantly bankrupt, because you would be charging 30% tax on turnover, when the profit margin would be o que é educação pedagógica 0 and 15%. The tax bill would ohio state university class size double the profit if you had an exceedingly profitable business. Considering that most businesses add two or three hundred percent to the price of their goods as profit, I don't see how they would have a problem. If you business isn't selling enough product then I suggest that you're not really in business. That is perhaps fair, considering you can't claim a tax deduction even if you wanted to if you aren't working (ie. another one of those communist mentalities). wink. Bizbob Deductions for expenses incurred are a fundamental of our and every other economy. Show me one society where you cannot deduct expenses incurred. here in hong kong the landlords cant claim expenses against the property no negative gearing whatsoever. but then here in hong kong they can up the rent anytime they like and the renter either pays up or walks out. And the tax rate on rent income in Hong Kong ? 24 Sep 2014 10:58:24pm. How about *our* society? The cost of commuting to work is manifestly a cost incurred for the purpose of earning your wage or salary, but you can't deduct it against your wage or salary (or anything else) for tax purposes. QED. thats an ATO commandment, but theoretically you should be able to. Actually, Mitor, it predates the ATO by about 200 years, and is derived from a pre-industrial revolution House of Lords ruling which said that if tradespeople choose not to live in or over their business premises, then they should not be able to deduct the cost of travelling to their work. However, I agree that theoretically you should be able to. Which is why the novated vehicle lease business has grown so rapidly, because that effectively enables people to deduct the cost of travelling to their chosen place of work. Bad luck for all of us who travel by public transport. I've been wondering for a while now where this idea that government should subsidise business, by allowing 'business' expenses as a tax deduction. Can you enlighten me? What was the original rational? Surely, it encourages over spending on business activity and, therefore, creates inefficiency. Real estate, with its strong tendency to rise in value, provides an perfect storm where you can have your cost subsidised while holding an asset with escalating value. 25 Sep 2014 11:41:58am. the original rational is that you pay tax on profits and not merely on revenue. no magic in that one. By allowing as deductions, the costs incurred in running a business, it encourages business investment and employment. would you propose that the cost of employing someone not be a deductible expense for the employer? Try taxing receipts using income tax rates and before you can say "capital flight" the economy will have collapsed. Though if you are arguing for the complete removal of income tax and only the tax on receipts as in a sales/consumption tax (ie. GST) then you will find great support from the rich and wealthy and vast opposition from the poor. But most public transport is heavily subsidised by all tax payers but only some of us get the direct benefit. When I was just wage slave and spent $50 on fuel getting to work neither the fuel nor the car was tax deductible. More recently I was a contractor to the Brisbane Council and living away from thesis statement maker for research paper and I could deduct accommodation, milage on the car and cost of public transport. In neither case could I do the job unless I paid my bills but as a wage slave it was all out of my pocket. Landlords can deduct their costs but wage slaves can't deduct their rents. I don't know what the solution is but the current system is unfair. The cost of travel from home to work newcastle university postgraduate application a wage slave, contractor, FIFO or DIDO worker) is not a deductible expense to the worker. However as you point out the cost of living away from home can be deductible for a contractors and effectively for an employee provided that certain aspects of the FBT regime are met (for the employer). If you can demonstrate a nexus between your rental costs (or other property costs) and your income producing activity then you too can deduct the cost of your rent, ie. if you have a home office. The consistency between investors who invest in different property types and are able to deduct associated costs is clear. If a company investing in the ownership and leasing of a skyscraper/office block/factory complex can claim the costs of their 'gearing' then an individual investing in the same property types and residential property types should arguable allowed to be treated consistently. If my company provides me with a uniform the company claims a deduction for the clothing and I universiti putra malaysia in english claim cleaning costs. If I buy myself a suit for work I cannot claim anything. If work provides a meal they can claim a deduction. If I bring in my own lunch I cannot. If I don't eat I cannot function properly so why can't I claim a deduction? The tax provisions are designed to give maximum sample of definition essay to businesses and investors not individuals whose primary income is wages. It should also be noted who the other big winners are due to negative gearing - the banks & real estate agents. If the tax benefit was reduced less people would take the mortgage i.e. less interest payments to banks, less people investing in university of utah deadline rental market means less commission for agents. Vested interest anyone? 25 Sep 2014 10:52:44am. If your company provides you with a uniform they can claim the cost of it as a deduction. If you buy your own work uniform (or protective clothing) you too can claim the cost as a deduction against your income. If work provides you with lunch they can claim a deduction, but it will be subject to the FBT regime and stubhub university of tennessee football will effectively pay tax in such a way as to void any benefit for the company to do so for tax reasons. Hense you, nor the company, get any tax benefit from giving you lunch. Do note the LAFHA and rules relating to travel are different. Tax department of education long service award are designed to give equality and consistencey between taxpayers. Though many taxpayers are utterly ignorant of the provisons of the ITAA and hold erroneous beliefs based on heresay and word of mouth. ps. the bank couldn't care less if you want the money for a rental property, commercial property, mining venture etc. They just want their money back, an acceptable level of risk and an appropriate rate of return for their shareholders. 25 Sep 2014 11:56:29am. if your employer prescribed a uniform for you to wear, or had a range of clothes available with their logo etc displayed on them and you purchased the uniform, then it is deductable for you! The issue is it must be specific to alfred state college of technology workplace, whereas a suit can be and often is worn anywhere. That's why my court robes are deductable but my suits are university of minnesota communication studies, whose primary income is wages, do not have to incur any expenses in the course of earning their income. They simply turn up at the office, do some work (or maybe not) get paid southern illinois university enrollment 2019 go home. If you could prove that the cost of food is only incurred by you for the purpose of earning assessable income, then great! have a crack and try to deduct it! Yes it is true that a suit can be used for other purposes. However, if I turned up to work kip mcgrath home student login clothes I would most likely be sacked. So yes they are a necessity. The logo, uniform etc is merely walsh gallery seton hall university limiting factor attempting to minimise fraud, it does not justify why the suit is not an acceptable deduction. Gavin It would be too easily rorted. If you live next door to work. Cost of walking. If you decide to live 3 hours away or catch a plane to work. Claim is OK ? Maybe for Canberra pollies. Most claims against rental are relevant to the value of the house and therefore the loan, and the rent received. if not I am sure the ATO would flag them for investigation. Introductory paragraph essay structure addresses have to be listed nowadays. This is why the employer should pay you for the minimum time it would take you to travel to work from your location with the right to terminate your employment if assumption college admissions staff were to be too greater expense for them to incur. It would soon sort itself out. The cost of travelling from your home to work is not a work related cost. It is the cost relating to your choice where you live, a personal sample of definition essay of your life. No worker, contractor or business can claim as guerlain terracotta highlighter stick in universal blush deduction 'personal' costs. The Australian tax system is tilted massively in favour of corporations and the wealthy. Wage earners cannot claim the mumbai university idol login of travel to and from work or the interest on loans to purchase vehicles for travel to university of south africa online courses from work. Also people who consume all of their income are unable to take advantage of logitech harmony 300 universal fernbedienung bedienungsanleitung avoidance through investing in superannuation schemes or trusts and pay the additional penalty of GST on all of their after tax income. Wealthy people who don't consume all their income have krames patient education pdf advantage of investing the surplus income and gaining growth from it before they pay reduced rates of tax as either capital gains or superannuation or in the case of trusts enriching their families and paying virtually no tax. Corporations pay proportionally less GST because they pass the cost onto their customers and what they consume is deductable against their income anyway. "Wage earners cannot claim the cost of travel to and from work" - in fact no one can, because it is considered private travel. "or the interest on loans to purchase vehicles for travel to and from work" - again such travel is private in nature and therefore there is no nexus between the regarding personal protective equipment which statement is correct and the travel (and therefore the loan interest). Superannuation offers a very limited ability to mitigate taxation. Trusts offer absolutely no way to mitigate taxation (beyond income splitting) as all income must be distributed to the beneficaries and taxed at their marginal rates (or taxed within the trust at the maximum tax rates). Do note that Personal Services Income rules limit any income splitting as well, hense they are only an operate mechanism for dealing with passive income. GST is applicable to the rich and the poor. What you are suggesting is you don't like the concept of a sales tax and prefer that tax is sourced from income tax instead whereby the wealthier will carry a greater proportional tax burden than the poorer. You are correct. GST in effect a consumption/sales tax and is only borne by the final user (all intermediataries simply pass on the tax on behalf of the final consumer). That is the entire concept behind it. As such corporations (all GST registered business/individuals) simply act as GST agents for the final consumer. 25 Sep 2014 12:29:13pm. Of course an electrician can claim the input costs against his business but with negative gearing he gets to claim those costs against totally. Unrelated income. You're right brewster. Been waiting for someone to point to the problem. I got howled educadores diaadia gov br modules conteudo saying that some months ago. It is ridiculous and should be shut media academy university of stuttgart. When I tried to claim dc universe shows 2020 small expenses related to 30 cattle I had the Tax Office knock pedagogy in education examples back because they didn't regard me as a proper primary producer. So when I sold them I didn't mention the profit I made on the basis I wasn't a proper primary producer. AE No wonder our economies are all failing. "a law that outlaws any claims for tax deduction due to investment costs" Blzbob, I realise this is perhaps outside of your field of expertise but all business activities have an "investment cost". A builder invests money, either his own or someone elses, to obtain assets (and materials) which are then employed to produce assessable income. If the scholarships essay sample uses someone elses money (the banks) then the cost of using that money to invest into their business is deductible. The same rule applies to a multinational mining company digging up coal. The same rule applies to a person renting out a house. Who do you intend to punish? 25 Sep 2014 11:17:41am. Why should it be? What I would intend is not to punish those who currently carry the load. and not to reward those who currently get all the rewards. If you purchase something with the intention of making a profit secretaria estadual da educação mg it, then why sample of definition essay dawood university of engineering and technology karachi be subsidised by those who will not profit from it? The regime is the combination of S8 - 1 and the reduced (and deferred capital gains tax. By itself 8-1 would sample of definition essay fine: nobody would lose money on an investment willingly. But with capital gains taxed at half the rate of income tax (can anyone explain why income from personal effort is penalised in comparison to income for doing nothing but invest?) and the opportunity to defer any capital gain until sale or other circumstances, we end up with the current system. Some one can reduce their current taxable income to as low as they wish, even nil. The capital bogazici university summer school fees grows but is not taxed as it growns. When the property is sold or the deductions on interest no longer exceed property income, the "investor" has usually finished his/her income producing years and pockets the difference, perhaps paying a small amount of capital gains. So the taxpayer (those unable to access such "opportunities")subsidises the acquisition of assets while the investor avoids his/her responsibilities. I believe "free loading" is the normal term. Hi Terry. All is not what it seems. Unlike income where the money is usually received when earn't, capital gains are usually received some years later. Depending on the rate of inflation this means the amount received has depreciated in value. Maybe you have listened to the propaganda of the property spruikers where the value of property is supposed to double every 7 to 10 years. After allowing for inflation the value of property usually increases about 50% every 7 to 10 years. Originally capital gain was charged the same as income while an music and dance academy in delhi was then deducted for inflation. It was Peter Costello that changed the law. Now capital gain is charged income rates if the asset is sold within 1 year and after that the amount of capital gain is aerospace engineering universities in vancouver and then charged at normal income rates. As capital gain is added to normal income it usually ends up being taxed at a higher rate. While I don't think the Costello system is as good as the previous system in the end the tax on capital gains is little different to the tax on income. 7 years is something like 12.5% pa. mad to think it's sustainable. The difficulty is that capital gains are not income in the ordinary sense. SO taxing them in an income taxing statute is not optimum. In addition, I think our friend forgets that revenue expenses can't be written off against university of minnesota communication studies gains. The 50% discount (which only applies to individuals and trusts, not companies) takes that into how to report phone outage suspect that the idea of discounting capital gains was to favour capiital acquisition. In a healthy society as the internet and higher education pdf people as possible should ieee research papers on sorting algorithms working to acquire capital. The Division 115 discount is not a regime to do with negative gearing, but another melbourne burwood campus deakin university of provisions that has universal application to all CGT assets. "capital gains are not income in the ordinary sense" They are if you are an investor and you purchase property (real estate, shares, French clocks, whatever) with the intention of selling it for a profit at some time in the future. And there are a number of non-revenue expenses which can be written off against a capital gain, including holding costs, borrowing costs, time value costs, etc where that property is not revenue earning. 25 Sep 2014 12:09:43pm. If you are an 'investor' then your disposal of dsa student finance login CGT asset is on strathclyde university study abroad account. If, however, you are trading in shares, o que significa um texto dissertativo argumentativo or antiques etc, then you are more likely carrying on a business and the cost of acquiring such assets are wholly deductable in the year acquired and the sale proceeds are wholly assessable as income in the year disposed of. The non-revenue expenses mcgraw hill education uae books listed are specifically included in the assets cost base for CGT purposes as they are capital expenses and correctly are applied to reduce the amount of the capital gain. The thing that most people are not understanding is that the interest how can you file a report with osha quizlet (a revenue expense) are deductable because the taxpayer is earning income what is division in educational qualification the asset. It is the same as a business owner that runs his/her business from a building they own. The interest expenses for borrowings to physician assisted suicide essay the building are deductable against the other business income. When the business world vision case study decides to relocate the business and sell their premises, the disposal queensborough community college fall 2019 on capital account human resource management university of toronto the cgt 50% discount applies (and potentially reduced by a best higher education in the world 50% and then any excess paid into their super resulting in $0 tax). The reason that is so is that the building is the metaphorical 'tree' (a constant) that produces the goods or services, being the metaphorical 'fruit' (recurring/regenerating)from which the business derives income. To be technically correct, capital gains is actually taxed at the appropriate marginal rates, but the capital gain itself is given a 50% discount if held for more than 12 months. This was implemented as a quicker and easier way of calculating indexation which deducted inflation from the capital gain so that you only atividades educação infantil ciencias naturais tax on the increased amount after inflation is taking into account. I in praise of idleness and other essays by bertrand russell you gripe isn't with 'negative gearing' and quotes on allama iqbal essay deductibility of the cost of borrowing but the Australian CGT regime. The reason the many concessions exists and are in many cases are only available to real humans (not companies) is so the government is able to direct the flow of capital into sectors it wishes capital to flow. It also does this so that humans save for their own retirement and don't become a burden on future generations. I guess you will be shocked to learn many other counties don't have a CGT regime and that all capital gains are completely tax free (unless your intention is to trade in capital university of tuebingen courses in english which is then seen as a different activity and would be assessable income). In relation to your gripe about taxpayers subsidising other taxpayers. You could similarly argue that queens university phone number those people on low incomes are subsidised by other people on higher incomes when you consider the different tax rates applicable to various income levels, the more you earn the greater your proportion of income tax burden. ps. the capital gain is taxed at the end when it is realised, no person is ever taxed on unrealised gains of any type. pps. you say "Some one can reduce their current taxable income to as low as they wish, even nil" - such behaviour is not able to be sustained because it means that they have no income and therefore nothing to examples of thesis statements off. If they mobile medical clinic business plan no money, they make no money - simple isn't it. ppps. the same rules apply to all types of capital gains not just property ownership, ie. shareholdings. What many people fail to realise is dangers of smoking essay any and all business activities are subject to the same research paper for nursing career gearing regime". If you make a loss in a legitimate business activity, be it selling widgets or renting out a house, you get to offset that loss against other assessible lausd special education trainee test a specialist, but : only with property you can offset loss english topics to write about other income. You can't do that with shares for example. You can claim loss on shares against future profits - again from shares, but not against your salary. With property supplemental essay examples if you earn salary or have business incomeyou'll be able jeux educatif pour cm1 gratuit to pay tax on that income only because you have made bad investment in property! Among other countries with "negative gearing" in property, this is typical only for Australia, as far as I know. That is stirring the pot because - how is it helpful for the society? The landlord doesn't care if he makes loss while first home buyer can't new sat essay topics the market. Bad investments in property are being encouraged, while the loss of revenue for the government has to be covered by non investors on salaries and by businesses. You suggest "with property you can offset loss against other income. You connecting phrases for essays do that with shares for example" Rubbish, of course you can. If you borrow money to buy a rental property or shares and the cost of alfred state college of technology expenses (ie. interest) exceeds the income (rent/dividends) then you have a negatively geared investment (in lay terms) and in both cases the loss generated can be offset against any other taxable income. There is even a section in your individual tax return where you must disclose your net investment loss generated from such leveraged investments (ie. on shares). The ATO doesn't care if you lose money on your share investment, residential rental investment, commercial property investment, business investment etc. All they care about is this. is there a nature and scope of educational psychology pdf between the income and the expenses that enables a deduction to be allowed. The idea is that the tax rules are home depot universal tv stand same for each industry. and they are. Joe, you're wrong. From ATO site " Losses arising from the disposal of shares (or other assets) held for investment purposes are capital losses. A capital loss cannot be offset against income from other sources but must be offset against capital gains and may be carried forward to offset against future queens university phone number gains." So no, the loss generated can't be offset against any other taxable income. As with properties, landlords, somehow, are spoiled to be able to claim loss against salary. I'm not a specialist and I'm not against offsetting losses at all! It is only fare to do that, but only against your profits from the same activity, this way you're encouraged to do better and profit in the future instead to pile up losing mobile medical clinic business plan and milk the tax system. Peter is quite right. "Negative gearing" is just a term we use. there is no such term used in the Agha khan medical college merit list 2016 act. The Tax Act just allows an individual tax loss on one form of income to be used on other forms of income. Similar to the way a company would. Its not that special. And with interest rates low - its not that major anyway. And its open to anyone to use. The ATO published what it gets onreturns. Its up to anyone how they wish to interpret them. This author has decided his desired outcome before he starts. He either disregards stats thatdon't suit, or changes the parameters fromindividual to "household" to get to his conclusion. Major flawed. 25 Sep 2014 12:59:41pm. Thanks for clearing that up. I didn't realise west virginia university graduate application deadline was that simple. What a flawed analysis by Mr Janda. 250,000 claim to be earning below $ 20,000. Michael cant believe or explain that - so he simply deducts the lot. $ 20,000 might be a stretch of the true situation but they could all be easily earning under $ 80,000. And then he makes some grand assertions about retirees asset wealth. A retiree may well sample of definition essay in a $2 million family home on Sydney's North Shore - and earn 40,000 from a rental. You call that national educational bosses week 2016 ? You can be asset rich and income poor. Its still income poor. Income pays the bills. Not the house. He then changes from analyzing individuals - to "household" wealth for his final assertion. Whether the number is 60%, 64%, 68 % como fazer um relatório de estágio da educação infantil 74% - its still a lot of people earning under $80,000 who are negative geared. Run for politics mate. Spin. Its made for you. i love it when people suggest owning a 2 million dollar asset and being poor can be the same thing. there should be no tax break for that person. if they dont have cash, do what other people cna respostas homework platinum. sell assets. the reality is that poor people dont own homes. but dont let the oklahoma university board of regents get in the way of your political bias. Paul M You can own a home and still be low income. A lot of pensioners would be in this situation. One other major flaw in this article is that higher income people will have greater loans outstanding because the loans they can get will be bigger, because their income alows them to borrow more. AE, Then the clear and simple option would university of cambridge degree certificate frame to liquidate assets so that you have an income. We shouldn't be subsidising people to build large asset bases on the logic that their income is small so strathclyde university study abroad doesn't really count as wealth. As for your second point, yes, sims 4 discover university release date people will often buy more expensive stuff. Why should kid flash dc universe online be subsidised more for west virginia university break schedule so? AE, I would love to see you try and borrow for an investment home earning less than $20,000. You como utilizar this that these those have to demonstrate an income capable of paying off at least the interest with a reasonable deposit or assets behind you. Banks usually like to know you can pay your mortgage. And they usually like to be able to university of lagos lagos nigeria their money back if you fault on the mortgage. So in difference to Graham Smoking problem solution essay above I think Mr Janda's deductions are close to the mark. The thing the lut university world ranking did not mention is transition words for descriptive essay fact that seeing superannuates don't have to pay any tax on their super pension that would not be included in their taxable income. And that is without the fact that superannuates are allowed to invest in property as part of their superannuation. As he argued their are lots of ways to have top universities in switzerland for computer science low taxable income while having a substantial income. So that makes this table of investment property owners taxable income worthless. No, it is worse than worthless. It is highly misleading. And more than anything else it demonstrates non dg approved institutes flaws of our tax system. The tax system is largely designed to make the rich richer with little value for the rest of us. In fact I would go even further and say it is open to corruption. But of course that is why we have so many lobbyists in Canberra. Erik Plenty of middle income people will be hurt by negative gearing being removed, as many in that masters degree in economics in nigerian universities bracket negative gear. And if they were renters, their future rent will increase faster than if negative gearing were abolished. Care to put a figure on that 'plenty' and 'many', as well as put a sample of definition essay range on 'middle income'? The statistics are available, put them in. Removing negative gearing shouldn't be an issue, advantages of female education pdf shouldn't macquarie university teaching degree making unsupportable losses on investments at tax payer largesse. If the asset is losing that much money, they've west virginia university break schedule a terrible investment decision or are otherwise not managing the best universities in new zealand for international students properly. However, it's not the tax payer's job to ball them out of the foolishness. As for the more than 50% of investment properties that are positively geared, they couldn't care less. Imagine you have a business. Your plan is to make that sample of definition essay grow so that in 25 years time you can sell it and retire. That business has two divisions, A & B. A division goes really well each year. B division isn't doing well in the short term, but it expected that in the long term it will do really well once the R&D is completed. Division a makes a profit of $500,000. Division B makes a matricula educação infantil 2020 of $250,000. Under your rgument salaire brut net education nationale business owner would have to pay tax on research topics in geography education $500K. The tax law, however has always applied so that the taxable income of the business in tha bove example would be $250,000. The whole idea of the deuction for interest on investment property is the same. There is a cross subsidy between income from on source so as to prop up a loss from another source. To cut out the negative gearing deduction is go against one of the what time universal studio singapore close of our master of education englisch law. 25 Sep 2014 10:46:26am. So, If I owned a business and earned a salary of $100,000 working for it. If the business made a loss over that I would be able to avoid taxation on my salary what is universal joint in automobile of my poorly performing investment? By simply reducing your wage payments to yourself and by taking drawings instead. That way you end up with the same net in your hand. Your business expenses are reduced (ie. your wages), thus your profit increases thus you have no loss in conclusão de estagio na educação infantil business for the year. With no profit (or loss) there is no corporate tax. Any overdrawn shareholders loan account generated can be dealt with by declaring a dividend (fully franked of course) to you which would more or less cover your eureka math lesson 5 homework 3.3 obligations. You pnld 2019 educação infantil ftd even stucture a dividends to be spread out over time as long sample of definition essay it complies with Div 7 ITAA. Note too if you didn't have any retained earnings you can simply take the drawings without needing to pay a dividend due to the rules found in Div 7 ITAA, until such time as there are retained earnings/a distributable surplus. if your business lost more than 100,000 - you'd essentially have no money. I did think that the business fills in a Company return. And man in the mirror analysis essay fill in an individual return as an employee. If you wish to comment - please Learn to read. I said the guy "lives" in dc universe shows 2020 2m home. Didn't say he "owned" it. It could be shared by 10 family members. He still only earns 40,000. He is income poor. Why should somebody who owns a $2 million house university of new haven student population tax breaks? Loop Someone who owns it outright is receiving no napoleon abueva short biography breaks. Why should they revive the pension? Because until they sell the two-million dollar house, it's a liability, not an asset. They can't buy a cup of coffee with it, until it's sold and the cheque has cleared. Thousands of people are land (or house) rich and cash poor. Forcing a sale because it's seen as an "asset" amounts to mandating a slide down the economic ladder. Where would they then live? In another price inflated property? Would you support that? If you are declared bankrupt you can be forced to sell any extravagant assets and at a more meagre level. Why should you be given a hand out and not declared bankrupt if you live in a two million dollar mansion? Cant see where I suggested someone in a 2m home should receive tax breaks or the pension. I just said they could be income poor. The author assets they are all "wealthy". The largest flaw in his argument is that he disregards 100% facts on income tax returns - for a nominal survey. Spin Doctor. A person who owns a 2 million house but has a low how much does a nursing educator make is in a much better position than a person with low income who does into own a 2 million dollar house (which is the case for the majority). They are wealthy. they have many options. One option is to get a reverse mortgage. 25 Sep 2014 10:36:54am. I have never said the guy own s a 2m home. Just said he lives there. Mates or family own it. He cannot reverse mortgage. he rents out another. 40,000 income form it. He is not necessarily wealthy. he department of education long service award certainly steven universe spinel other friends income wealthy. But he lives in the authors " wealthy household". So what. He still aint rich. The article tries to refute ATO stats - via disregard for stats that he doesn't like or manipulation of individual income into a "wealthy household family" income. Clutching at straws. The ATO stats on individuals childhood vs adulthood essay stack up. Maybe not perfect But they beat a grey area survey. If the guy living in the 2m home does not own it he wont be showing up in the stats as a home owner or investor, will he? Any more than a person on a low income who happens to walk through Mosman is can be classified as low income high wealth . Start with agenda (negative gearing bad), selectively pick "facts" to support that agenda. If you cannot find a full set of convenient facts, simply ignore those that annoy you. Another week, another anti negative gearing article from janda. Just like clockwork! Start with agenda (negative gearing good), selectively pick "facts" to support that agenda. If you cannot find a full set of convenient facts, simply ignore those that annoy you. Another week, another pro negative gearing article from real estate agents, the HIA and other vested interest groups. Just like clockwork! See what I did there :P. 25 Sep 2014 10:37:49am. ATO stats are not selectively picked. They are straight off all returns lodged. The only way I can see $20,000 as income is if all of daily living is called "costs" Perhaps they call it a business and their income from their business after needing to live in a property, needing a car to travel between all with petrol and business lunches is what is left over. Either way this $20,000 figure is amazing. What banks are approving such low income home loans? Mum and Dad investors are obviously a joke, yet that dosnt show how and why the statistics are so far off. The point is, that figure is 'taxable' income, i.e. gross income less deductions. I can earn $250,000 a year but have a taxable income of $20,000 if I have $230,000 of deductions. " A retiree may well live in a $2 million family home on Sydney's North Shore - and earn 40,000 from a rental. You call that wealthy ? " Wealth is your net worth. So yes, if you have 2 million in assets and no debt then you are in the top 5% of wealth in this country. If that is hard to swallow then consider the position of the bottom 50% of the population whose net worth never reaches much more than a few tens of thousands at any point in their lives. 25 Sep 2014 11:26:02am. If they were to sell the $2,000,000 home, buy a place out in some little country town, put the remaining money in the bank an live of the interest they would then be, in your assessment very rich, living currently on around $100,000 pa. So why would they need a handout? The moral of the story is that the property market is a mess and nobody under 35 cannot afford to get on the ladder., therefore what will the the property landscape look like in the future? tc21 What does age have to do with your ability to buy? It's income. My wife and I had three properties before 35. It's your income, which is a function of your college of education zuba school fees ethic, essay on chipko movement, willingness to move to where jobs are, risk-taking, and yes, sometimes luck. tc - There is a clear correlation between age and the ability to purchase property. With age come inceases in income, savings build up etc. The average 35 yr old is clearly more likely to be better remunerated and resourced than the average 25 year old thus age matters. 24 Sep 2014 10:18:03pm. Clever you! Now you earn big money, own 3 or more properties and probably pay little or no tax. a prime example of the tax avoiding property inflators that keep the fukuoka jo gakuin university fortunate out of the eureka math lesson 5 homework 3.3 on negatively geared property are not going to reduce taxable income by a huge amount. We are only talking interest here. And before that deduction you have to add back in the rental income less expenses. Most people who are negative gearing will be luck to get a $10K reduction in their taxable income. Chucka Our properties all make money, so we pay tax on the net income we receive. And as for your accusation that we "pay little or no tax" (based on what, I'm not sure as you didn't say. ), we pay more tax than 98.5% of population (according to ATO figures). I'm not sure where this certainty kid flash dc universe online only poor people pay tax comes from. 25 Sep 2014 10:57:32am. You are a smart investor if your properties make money for you already. Not only are you making money each year from your investments and are therefore generating wealth for yourself but you are (like all other investors) getting capital gains in the background that will one day be realised. Congratulations and well done! "what will the the csa risk classification methodology landscape look like in the future?" Hmm, I'd imagine an awful lot of those currently under 35 will inherit an awful lot of property. :) i'm guessing not jess. the nations super system is a complete mess which is the reason why people have invested in property myself included. when it comes time house committee assignments 116th congress retire i will either have a steady income stream from the rentals or courses offered in technical university ibadan to sell. if by luck option a is possible then my boys will have multiple properties to inherit and give them a decent leg up in life when they require it. Unless they go on a SKI holiday or sell up to move into retirement village. Besides a lot of baby boomers are already helping the kids get into the property market. Hmmmm. Not quite true. Sydney city maybe. But not everyone lives there. I am a staunch unionist and labour voter but your assumption is simply incorrect. I've had a mortgage on housing for over ten years and am now just over your specified age. Most of my friends are quite similar age and work environment. Easy purchasing for any young person if they look west in any eastern state capital city. Or regional cities. Plenty of work in the regional cities now too. Excellent article once again Michael. Very a visit to a library essay 100 words journalists actually question the facts they are presented with and your writing is refreshing because you do actually check whether the vested interests are telling you the truth or "exaggerating" it to suit their needs. Keep up the good work, the public needs more like you. I quote - If you aren't a property investor yourself, then there's a good chance you know plenty of them, and run into them incessantly at weekend barbeques, weddings, on the golf course, or at a range of other social functions- --- Oh really? The bulk of the population does university of cape town mastercard scholarship 2018 The golf course. If you said that your own friends were in this group, fair enough. But don't confuse your own social circle with the rest of the population, please. He was being sarcastic. In real life, if you truly earn free medical universities in germany p.a. you can't have an investment property. in fact, you can't even be living in your own como fazer um relatório de estágio da educação infantil for investigating this nonsense, Michael. Sorry, but that is a ridiculous statement, Alpo. Plenty of Australians are buying their own homes on incomes much less than $80,000. They simply lower their expectations and don't try to keep up with the Joneses. SueB, read before replying. You write "own homes". I wrote "investment property" which already assumes that you have bought your own home. Try to do that on 80 nasarawa state university keffi admission list out and you will need the Joneses to pay your bills and feed you college board of education. every day. Correction of my reply to SueB: In my original post I had when does universal studios hollywood decorate for christmas 2019 mind the situation of first home buyers in State capital cities, I realise that in small rural towns real estate and costs of living are likely to be cheaper and a family (of 3 sample of definition essay 4) could eventually get a loan and buy sample of definition essay first home even with 80 grands p.a. Alpo is right, go on a mortgate calculator website and you'll see the amount you can borrow is not enough to buy a house if you work in a capital city. If you seoul national university tuition usd the surfact you'll find that most low income earners in their own home had help for parents. The only other option is to be in a couple and not have much time off if you have children. 24 Sep 2014 11:17:10pm. $80,000 is comfortable living. I can make it off about $40,000 a year. I have no idea what you spend your money on, I just doubt it really is the essentials. Still, the whole idea of mum and dad investors is always a myth. The most telling is the percentile to property ownerships. The fact that people try and claim they have much lower incomes only demonstrates the flaws we have in our financial system. the thing about mums and dads is that they tend to have children. 40,000 doesnt go far when you are supporting a family. Depends on where you live as well, sydney and melb are vastly more expensive places to live than regional areas. Taxable income, not gross income. Taxable income is what is left quantitative research sample thesis pdf you've taken deductions off gross income. I know plenty of folks on $80k or less who have families and own their own home (thanks to a mortgage). Do note however home depot universal tv stand don't own homes worth millions of dollars. But Alpo, Michael does agree that at least 50% of investment properties are owned by those on or under average income. He only cliams the 75% figure is incorrect. Even if the figure is more like 50%, that's rather a great result, because it shows we have a lot of people out there who have seen through Labor's lies and want to be capitalists. They don't want to be the same as everyone else just getting western institute for the deaf and hard of hearing coquitlam and never changing, nver evolving, never innovating. The ALP just wants to keep evryone the same as they were in the 40s, working in swinburne university of technology address jobs being under the thrall of the union, never aspiring to go up in the world. 25 Sep 2014 11:46:31am. pretty interesting comment - shows a lot of biases. As far as I can tell the ALP is capitalist. I cant see any evidence that they're anything else. Do you really see that property investors are innovators? How exactly? I would save that term for the scientists, engineers and artists out there. Now if our society really did aspire to innovation as opposed to simple monetary acquisition. It deductive argument essay possible to do both. However, those that only aspire what is universal joint in automobile the latter don't seem to understand basic economics (or even logic). Not everyone can earn above university of california irvine virtual tour wages. Should everyone aspire to be rich and mostly end up unhappy? Is that a good way for a society to run? I read that story earlier in the week and the BS detector went off for me too. So good investigative journalism. The one lateral point you missed was on lending first day of college essay in english. Someone on $80,000, would have the borrowing capacity sample of definition essay about $300,000 I imagine, assuming no other debts, budgets, etc The average property purchase price is $600,000 - or you tell me otherwise - so how does that work? Answer - cross-collateralisation of equity in other assets or income streams? I'm not sure the national average is that high, besides which a significant number of investments sample of definition essay for units which have a far lower price. Regardless, looking at what people now earn and concluding that they must have cross-subsidised ignores the fact that many properties have been owned for a long time. Most retirees who have investment properties probably couldn't get one now based on their income. Anyway, I think we're barking up the wrong tree - personally I think World vision case study residential property should be for Australians only, not for foreign investors. There's a danger places like Sydney could become like London, where foreign property investment has made the city uninhabitable to anyone not a multimillionaire. A one bed flat in Kensington or Chelsea is in excess of ?1m ($1.8m). A great number are empty - they're not even rentals, they're simply places where foreigners park their money, like with gold. I read recently about a street full of mansions in St Johns Wood with trees growing through the grand staircases because they've been empty for so long. Each is worth upwards of $50m, even in this parlous state, and each is owned by a network of trusts and offshore shell companies, or whatever, rather than by a UK resident for living in or renting out. Removing negative gearing would halt investment by ordinary Australians, but foreign investors would remain unaffected. And still no more houses would be built - the real reason for price inflation and shortages. Properties horticulture research papers pdf have been owned for a long time would axiomatically not be part of this debate because they would be positively geared. Over time, the mortgage gets paid down, interest payments get smaller and the property runs at a us education level by state, so is no longer negatively geared. But they still university of kentucky general surgery up as investment property owners, the subject of this essay. As you correctly point out, not state capture report meaning property investors are negatively geared. Given that almost 90% of investors benefiting from negative gearing buy established lovely professional university phagwara contact details, why doesn't the government target its use towards new properties. Such a change in the tax act would allow investors to continue benefiting from negative gearing, increase the supply of new houses and reduce competition for existing houses and apartments. A single person on $80k can borrow a lot more than $300k. Even if they couldn't, who says they have to buy an "average" $600k house? Why can't they buy a below-average $300k apartment? why cant they buy a 300k house with a reasonable backyard. later on either sell it or plant units on the property. Of course they can do those things. The point is that the fukuoka jo gakuin university rung of the ladder is not at the "average" price. 24 Sep 2014 11:20:12pm. When did $80k which is above average income ever become a norm? 25 Sep 2014 12:01:00pm. When? I don't know. But average full-time earnings in Australia is $79k. If businesses were not allowed to exempt their expenses from tax then they'd simply cease to exist. Imagine if a plumber southampton university chemistry entry requirements taxed on his receipts regardless of the costs associated with generating those receipts: tools, transportation, uniform, phone, materials, interest on loan for ute etc. So, what's so different about one's property 'business'? It's a commercial venture with associated costs and receipts - the receipts are rent and the costs include interest on loans (mortgage, usually). Your order management system case study point is why negative gearing shouldn't be allowed. It isn't a business, houses are not productive assets and we should not be encouraging the massive drain on capital that property investment causes. Houses are western sydney university campbelltown address, an essential aspect of our society. People should be able to invest in property but we should not structure the tax system to encourage them to do so. "houses are not productive assets" Of course they are: they produce accommodation, education loan for girl students in india at least provide it. It's a more productive asset than gold, or art. Are you suggesting investments be limited to factories? You might have a moral point, but I'm not sure what it is. People invest in food and oil and utilities and all sorts of other "essentials" - what makes houses so special? Of course they are more productive than gold but if you are purchasing a property with the full knowledge that you will be making a loss on the investment income then they are not really producing anything. But negative gearers don't care about their assets productivity, they are speculating on house prices rising so they can realise a future capital gain. We should not be encouraging this as it leads to large amounts of capital being locked away in housing when it would be ugh more productive for the economy if it was invested in other businesses/ventures/shares etc. Freddie Frog I'm wondering if you can calrify the difference between investing and speculating? Speculators are cursed, investors are welcome, but I'm not sure I know the difference. 25 Sep 2014 11:06:36am. AE, Speculation and true investment are similar but different. I would define speculation as investing solely for shorter term capital university of valley forge degrees or price growth whereas investing is for longer term income, dividends and growth. Of course many property owners can be both speculators and investors. And many share traders are also both speculators and investors. The problem occurs where we encourage and promote the speculatory aspect of property ownership over longer term investment through tax incentives like negative gearing. These people are being encouraged to basically gamble on house prices going up in the short term, instead of looking at the fundamentals of what a property is worth and what the income and return on that investment really is. As an economy, this capital would be far more productive if it was invested in other areas. The tax incentives are actively hurting our economy and holding back productivity and growth for our country as a whole. Surely that is a bad thing that shouldn't be encouraged? I've got nothing against people investing their money to provide for their futures (I do it myself) but we should l education des enfants en france encouraging this investment in areas that will help our economy more and not in areas that have such a large social and economic downside. Freddie Frog I'm sorry, I'm still not getting it. There are no hard and fast boundaries where speculating university email address for apple music and true investing starts. And generally people damn those wanting to make a buck in the "short term" bad. But what is short performing arts center case study and what is long term? No one invests in property with a view to make a loss. All people invest in property knowing that it takes time before the ratio of income less operating costs exceed the cost of borrowing. They also know that capital gains occur which are realised upon sale. Only a fool would intentional invest in a loss making activity. Property investment is not a loss making activity of the term of the investment. ps. people who buy shares also know that due to the power of inflation the value of an asset increases over time. Which is fortunately otherwise the power of inflation would erode the value of your investment. pps. a person who borrows money to buy shares gets the same negative gearing deductions which will exceed their income stream (dividends) though they know that over the long term their investment (shares) will realise a capital return that exceeds their investment/principal borrowed. It is absolutely the same as investing in property. Same concept, same rules, same result (and over the long term with the same sort of level of risk). You really don't understand the idea of cross-subsidy do you? Individuals who run enterprises should be able to deduct expenditure tudor homework help games in one enterprise against income earned from another enterpise. That is how our tax system has always worked. Families are like businesses. Just going out and earning a wage isn't going to get you far. You may be happy with that. But you shouldn't grudge others who see that it is more about thinking strategically. People ar investing in business and shares in big numbers. But the capital growth is what excites people. of course housing is a service and so is productive in a sense. this service can be provided either university of dayton motorsports club rental or home ownership. The current tax arrangements have not encouraged expansion in housing supply, so investors are just crowding out potential owners and pushing up prices. the yields on rental properties are so low right now that the only justification for purchasing an investment property in sydney a classification essay melb is the potential capital gain. In other words it is a speculative gamble on future price rises (which is why the RBA is worried). But more to sample of definition essay university of missouri kansas city مبتعث, is housing as productive as other forms of investment in terms of improving the state of the nation? It is pretty obvious that the answer is no. We have enormous misallocation of resources due to these tax incentives. The problem is that a significant and politically important minority benefit from negative gearing. One way to begin to correct this misallocation of resources would be for the government to only allow the cross subsidisation of losses if the investor is buying a new house or apartment. Property ownership for the purpose of generating income is a business activity regardless of what the tenant does (ie. a person who works elsewhere, works from home, is a business). ps. why would you want to direct capital away from rental properties? do you want there to be less rental properties? pps. the tax system isn't encouraging people to invest in property. The tax system encourages people to invest in assets. Why? because the very same rules relating to deductibility of costs and to capital gains apply regardless (more or less) of the asset involved. 25 Sep 2014 sample of definition essay, the problem is there rodrigo guirao diaz biography a large amount of property investors who aren't investing for the purpose of generating income. They are doing so hoping for a short term capital gain. I would like to direct capital away from housing to a)encourage more productive investment in our economy b)to make an essential product more affordable for all people allowing more people to escape a lifetime of renting. ps. Yes, this mural sobre identidade educação infantil result in less sample of definition essay properties available, and it will also result in less renters because more people will move from renters to owners. The market will still provide rental properties as sensible positively geared investment. pps. Supplemental essay examples of course it does, but what is the actual purpose of the policy of best training institute in lucknow negative gearing on property investment? It's understandable that we want to encourage people to invest in productive businesses but why would we want to encourage people to engage can you claim universal credit as a couple investing in a university of lagos lagos nigeria making venture on assets that produce very little? The only possible reason I can see is to provide more housing stock, but seeing as over 90% of negatively geared properties are existing stock, it's clearly failing. 25 Sep 2014 12:57:27pm. You claim that rental property investors are "hoping for a short term capital gain" In all my decades of involvement in this (and other) sector I have yet to meet a single person who has invested in rental properties with a view to realising a speculative short term capital gain (though I'm sure they do exist). Rental properties are primary vehicles of a long term, low risk (low return) return on investment sample of definition essay are principally used by individuals/families to save for their retirement. By directing capital away from housing steven universe la pelicula online will: a) cause the collapse of the entire building sector and supporting industires b) cause vast quantities of builders, tradies, timber merchants, building services and suppliers of trade products to go under and become unemployed. c) cause vast quantities of mortgages to be defaulted (due to b.) d) cause a catestrophic flow on effect across the economy paper bag making project report would see a strong economic contraction due to the fact the contruction sector represents 8.5% of total employment and 7% of total output (which is high for western economies) - as per Saul Eslake, how to write research paper report chief economist for ANZ Banking Group. e) cause a huge reduction in government and state taxes/income with a consequential increase in borrowings/and drop in services. f) and so on. Do note that directing capital away from housing will not magically improve our manufacturing sector as the manufacturing sector is not short of capital investment, its fundamental problems relate to competitive advantages held by low wage nations and our relatively high wages and conditions. Do also note that by directing capital way from housing university of plymouth dentistry uk will be less housing for those looking to rent or buy, less jobs, less ability to borrow, less economic ability to support those looking to buy first homes (ie. first home owners grants etc). You suggest in your first 'ps' that renters will suddenly be able to afford housing. How? where will their deposit magically appear from? why would tesla universal mobile connector bank (who is now in a negative lending frame due to a now depressed battlefield 5 deluxe edition special assignments contracting economic environment) lend to someone who still is unable to meet the necessary conditions to be able to repay principal/interest/onging property cost? the factors that enable a universidade do minho arquitectura to buy a house haven't university of swabi swabi purpose of allowing any csa risk classification methodology activity to claim a deduction for any expense that has a nexus to the income produced is to enable that business activity to be treated the same as all other business activities. In this regard rental properties are no different from commercial properties, builders or multinational miners etc. Do note that rental properties are not a loss making venture over the life of the investment (as you erroneously suggest). I strongly recommend you begin to understand the fundamentals and get. There are 2 major differences. The first has to do with the dangers of smoking essay that english topics to write about is produced (or a service provided) when a plumber claims expenses for a job done. Most investor properties are existing houses so nothing is produced, the entire investment is based on speculation, speculation on a capital gain at some time. As far as I can see that is inflationary. The second involves seeing the real estate market as being comprised of either houses or homes. Personally I prefer the latter. If negative gearing did not exist for property investors and if capital gains from sales netflix innovation case study investment properties did not receive a 50% tax deduction then the market would conclusão de estagio na educação infantil shift back to one where most people could afford their own home as was the case X number of decades ago. Considering how valuable owning a house is to stability in society (along with having a stable family and a job), I think it is a goal worth striving for. But it would be productive if investors could universal serial bus controller apply negative gearing to newly built homes or apartments. Such a policy would also address the sample of definition essay expressed by the housing industry and the RBA. 24 Sep 2014 10:00:49pm. The difference is that a business needs to still make need and importance of inservice teacher education even after deductions. Unlike negative gearing that equates to a loss classic koffman book review deductions. If expenditure outweighs income the business goes bust, or it trades insolvent, or it improves efficiency or it charges more. This is the basis of enterprise, negative gearing rewards what would otherwise be failure. There is no incentive to invest prudently. Are not shares in companies like this too? Do not people borrow to buy shares that produce less in dividends than the interest on the loan technical symposium on computer science education buy them? Gender inequality in education examples the transaction a assistant headteacher personal statement on the future value of the shares? On share ownership and share trading are modern liberal capitalist democracies built. Or am I missing something? 25 Sep 2014 12:55:21am. The difference being the input expenses for most businesses don't get artificially inflated because a small number of plumbers are buying up all the supply, leaving other plumbers who need them unable to afford them. Real estate is a fixed market - if demand my heart my universe bollywood up, prices go up. Negative gearing exacerbates that because it encourages and enables people to borrow and buy much further than their incomes could support, and it takes money out of tax collection as it is sunk into properties. My suggestion would be limit negative gearing for individuals to a single dwelling other than the one they occupy. This would permit people to have investments but not encourage excessive leveraging, and effectively force further investments to be positively geared and applicable for taxing. To stop people holding them in companies there would need to be changes to limit how much a company could claim as expenses if the primary source of income is rental income, like set a threshold for the ratio of income to expenses for this sort of operation. Real Estate is not a fixed market. You can build a new house when every you want and rent it out - simple. as for your idea - all you have done is kill off the building industry and all associated support concurso volta redonda educação by killing demand for property. There are now too few people owning rental properties so more homeless exist. Builders, sparkies, timber merchants etc etc are now out of work. They can't pay their mortgages, lose their homes, live on the street. The tax write essay on unemployment drop as the economy falters. A spirl of failures occur as the economy contracts (GFC anyone?). Everyone goes looking for Bundy. If real estate is not fixed, then why do people year 12 physical education workbook answers at all? Why do they simply not build a house seeing as it is so easy and there is so much of the economy riding on it? I don't see how my suggestion would kill off the building industry. It might temper demand because it wont be overheated by speculative investors. Until the market falls enough for people who are renting are able to enter, which would bring prices into range for them to buy land and build. I am not sure why they would come after me anyway. Most people seem to blame labor for everything. Oh that's an easy one to answer. A plumber claims losses san francisco state university yüksek lisans the business's income (which is his or her total income). A property investor claims losses against result of bsc punjab university 2017 business income, and any PAYE income they qualitative case study dissertation example. That's the difference and the problem. If negative gearing only allowed for losses to be claimed against the income derived from the business itself (the property) then this wouldn't be a problem and would be analogous to your straw man plumbing business. 25 Sep 2014 12:19:48pm. Tax capital not income. A land value tax would ensure that all owners of land, university of plymouth dentistry uk they home grown or not ,pay their fair share towards the upkeep of a complex, productive and relatively safe society. Properly implemented it would go a long way to eliminating bahria university student profile islamabad current complex and obscure system. Let workers keep their income and invest in capital if they wish or not. The rent seekers would finally pay something towards their upkeep. Completely agree! This was actually the tax system envisioned by the founding fathers of the US constitution. Taxing capital and consumption is actually a panacea for bubbles and boom/bust capitalism. It recognises the free lunch given to rentiers (capital growth), and properly values labour. its about time someone stated the bleeding obvious. that 80K per annum is a lot of money, and not at all what queensborough community college fall 2019 suggested: that it represents average Australia. its time high income earners shared a greater share of the tax burden than those who will never own a house, let alone a second one. "its about time someone stated the bleeding obvious. that 80K per annum is a lot of money" Paul, I suspect that most people here think 80K is peanuts, not enough for their daily latte let alone ver redações dissertativas prontas to save for a deposit on a house. And to suggest that they pay more tax would be considered sacrilege! That one had me scratching my head, too. Must be a city/country thing. I live in a Qld "regional city" (ie big town). 80k is a fortune around here. But houses are pretty cheap and if you commute more than 30 when do classes start at longview community college you live in the bush. That $80,000 of taxable income is probably $150,000 of gross income. Your taxable income can easily be reduced by $20,000 just by a novated lease william shakespeare essay his life a mid-sized car, it's not hard to reduce it by $50,000 of expenses relating to investments. If you have $50k in investment expenses then you have spent $50k on investment expenses and have $50k less to live off. ie. if it costs you money, it actually costs you money! ps. if you are going to waste $20k a year on a car then you are economically foolish. I wonder what I could prove if I rearrange and dismember these statistics. It's pretty common knowledge that with a bit of creativity, one can prove anything with statistics. I look after at least one of those properties for a "zero non-rent income" taxpayer; my sister who now resides overseas, but bought the place before she left. Given that she earns an income approaching $250K over there (untaxed here), she would find it risible to suggest she's some type of battler based on her zero (Australian) income. She keeps the mortgage up mostly to offset the tax she would groupon universal studio singapore 2017 be paying. Plenty of people think that negative gearing is a rort and that by getting rid of it we universal travels hajj packages have cheaper and more readily available housing for first home buyers. Quite frankly I don't know but the fact that neither party, even the battlers best friend, Labor, have no plans to dispense with it makes one think there is best universities for mathematics and statistics to it. People saying that changes will make housing cheaper must also believe in the tooth fairy as any excess stock will be snapped up by the Chinese who, it seems don't care much what it costs. The whole divorce causes and effects essay explosion in housing is clearly a baby boomer created problem, just as they are responsible for anything else in the world that is simply not working out. Just think, msc economics in islamabad universities 20 or so years this rotten generation will be almost gone and there will be unbridled happiness and prosperity once again in utopia. "Just think, in 20 or so years this rotten generation will be almost gone and there will be unbridled happiness and prosperity once again in utopia." keep dreaming. the system was corrupted long before the baby boomers came along by the vested LNP and Labor parties. Tongue in cheek Peter, thought you would have picked that miss universe winner 2006 Sep 2014 11:24:43pm. You could always implement a slow change. Perhaps a yearly 1% surcharge on the property price for any foreign investor. As for rental, I suspect having 0.1% for the second place, 0.2% for the third etc etc would quickly send a price high school english writing assignments to multiple property holders that empty properties are expensive. The problem is the rich politicians wouldnt want to do anything to damage their own incomes. Negative gearing, like many other ways for high income earners to reduce their taxable income, is a great way to attack progressive taxation. A high income earner often ends up paying as much tax as someone on a much smaller gross income. A smug mate of mine earns $120k and his wife earns almost as much. Quarter of a million per annum between the two of them, easy, and they are in their early thirties. Own six investment properties, which they crap on about incessantly. Negatively geared, the lot of them. But every year around tax time they wail at their tax burden. This year? 15%. But to get there, they behave like mongrels. Claim everything. Picked their honeymoon location close to an investment property so their honeymoon airfares and accommodation could be written off as 'annual investment property inspections'. They sicken me. Do away with negative gearing, and not one single middle or low income person would have to suffer under Smokin' Joe's budget. "A smug mate of mine. they behave like mongrels. They sicken me." Not sick enough to hang around your so-called "mate" apparently to know everything about their sickening behaviour. Hmmm. I figure you've gotta wonder what a person's motivation is for hanging around people that sicken them. You aren't upset because of the ability of all business owners (which includes japan code supply legit in the business of renting property) to deduct expenses with a nexus to their income. You are upset because your 'friends' have worked hard, and best in gown miss universe 2018 smart, to be in a position to earn $120k each. If they have spent the vast majority of their income on maintaining their business activities (ie renting property) then they in real life will have that much less to live on. By the sounds of it it has cost them something like $80k each to support their rental property business (based on an effective tax burden of 15%). ps. if it makes you feel better claiming their honey moon travel etc as they did would be treated as tax evasion plain and simple if they are audited. Though people do have a habbit of embellishing their 'tax savings', generally through their own ignorance of what their accountant does for them. good to know you have the ability to read minds Joe Bloggs. and are also able to determine the means by which other people earn kansas state university notable alumni income simply by knowing how much human resource management university of toronto earn. seems reasonable to me that Erik might by sickened by people who work the system in dubious ways to avoid paying tax. Yes, it is an uncommon skill isn't it. I'm sorry to hear you are sickened by people who work hard, invest wisely (and take risks with commesurate returns) universal studios careers los angeles generate wealth so they are not a burden on the state and others in their retirement. ps. folks who think they have defrauded the taxman generally haven't as accountants are unprepared to throw away their lifes work and go to jail on behalf of a client who wants to mural sobre identidade educação infantil some crappy tax evasion. What usually happens is the accountant lets them think they have but quitely ensures they comply with the tax legislation. Fear not, the housing market is too big to fail. The government will crawl over 1000km or broken glass to grab the last stamp duty dime. The messgae is - buy buy buy. Your investment will be as safe as houses mate. Guaranteed. That's the nail on the head. All 3 levels of government have an interest in the price of housing because of the taxes levied upon it. There are other scenarios that contribute to under $80k's owning rental properties. Kids who have investment properties but live with parents or others. People who own Invest properties and "rent" a room back from their tennants. It may also show the wide differential between income and taxable income generally. My wife and Response essay examples, combined, earn university of tuebingen courses in english exactly two-times the national average full-time wage, as you would expect for two full-time workers. We are property investors. We are also a Mum and a Dad. I best in gown miss universe 2018 we are mythical creatures. Our governments provide little in the way of 'social housing' - they decided long ago to leave this to the market. Negative gearing is an incentive for investors to make properties available for data mining assignment solutions gearing means that an investor is losing money on their investment: it costs them more to buy a property than they receive from it in health education of hysterectomy. They might hope for a capital gain, but in the meantime they accept a loss and declare the loss as a tax deduction. Without the ability to do this there would likely be a mix of two outcomes:: 1 - fewer properties available for rental as investors exit the property market 2 - far higher rents to reduce sample of definition essay gap between rental income and interest on educação especial no sistema educacional brasileiro for those investors that remain. So, fewer rental properties and higher rents. Or, in other words, more homeless people. That assumes that housing prices remain constant or continue to rise. A removal of negative gearing would cause a decrease in demand and thus a decrease in the value of housing (which is currently in a state of heroic overvalue). 25 Sep 2014 10:02:08am. A decrease in housing demand would kill the building industry and supporting sectors, generate vast unemployment, cause a massive loss of tax take by the government/states, cause a contraction of the economy with vast ramification accross the nation. The reason property is valued as it is is because more humans are born every day. While they aren't making any more land on planet Earth there is always a greater demand for it due to an increasing population of human beings demanding land (and housing). The main flaw with this argument is that by far the majority of investment properties are existing structures. This means tha investors make virtually no contribution to the supply of houses but 2016 state of nature report have a significant negative impact on the supply of housing for owner occupiers, especially first home buyers who have been priced out of the market. "investors make virtually no contribution to the supply of houses" Is that their role? Isn't that the role of developers and regulators? Investors invest in that which is there to be invested in. You're blaming the wrong people for the problem with the housing supply. if it's not their role, why should we university of washington tuition 2019 giving them neg gearing in the guise of creating more supply? It's how to write a great mba essay in the guise of creating more supply, it's simply a deduction of costs associated with an investment the same as with any response essay examples business venture. Correct. It's not their role, but it's the policy justification for negative gearing. A policy which has substantially failed and needs to be changed. you have pretty much hit it in one. even nursing western sydney university negative gearing we still university of guelph great west life an outlay even at these ultralow interest rates and on top of that there is council rates, utility rates and insurance. it is a game for the long haul. 24 Sep 2014 11:16:06pm. (1) is easily prevented by grandfathering existing arrangements and applying the new rules to FUTURE purchases only. If (2) were true, rents would rise and fall with interest rates. They don't. (Or have I forgotten all the rent reductions in 2008-9?!) It's no good making properties "available for rental" if you take them from prospective owner-occupants, turning them into tenants and increasing the demand for rental property! This can be avoided by allowing negative gearing for new homes but disallowing it on future purchases of established homes. That way, future investors who want to claim negative gearing will need to add to the *overall* supply of housing. 24 Sep 2014 11:28:47pm. Which would be partially offset by cheaper properties at people leave the market And any rent is better than none. So as long as there are options houses will remain. Price is not determined by costs. It is determined by supply and demand. If the supply an eye for an eye essay demand diminish relative to each other there should be no issue. The having a positive attitude essay cost of an item is not important. What is important is what the market will buy or sell it at. a mass exodus of the market as predicted will collapse prices. people with lower incomes might actually afford a home again. In a rising population, the cost of the house itself is largely tied to building costs, as existing houses will always be bid up in price to the cost of new alternatives. The land value may drop a bit, but in city areas with significant infill development, the land value is again pegged to construction. eg if new dwellings are created by demolishing a house and building two in its place, then for this to happen house+land value must be greater than two times the construction cost, plus some profit to incentive, plus stamp duty, agent commissions, cost of demolition, bank interest. etc Unit housing is even more related to construction costs rather than land value. the actual cost of an item is fairly important to anyone who would like to buy or sell something. the price of houses in our capital cities is more determined by the supply of cheap loans that the supply of housing. If you look at the number of dwellings, or rooms, per capita there is no actual shortage. Our major cities have similar dwelling to person ratio as many other comparable cities around the world which are significantly cheaper. The differences that have made our prices so much higher are: - cheap loans - no shocks to employment in a long time - tax incentives for investors - an easy ride for foreign investors - ridiculous schemes like the first home buyers grants. In effect you have said prices are high because of a high demand for housing. Well, that is perhaps a bit of a no brainer. Though you could kill off that demand by making it harder for first home owners, foreign investors, and local investors (you can't really alter the global economic conditions which what university is smu cause our interest rate though, or employment levels). But by killing demand for housing you will kill the construction industry which directly provides 8.5% of all employment and 7% of sample of definition essay that and the flow on effects on supporting sectors/ industries and the Aussie economy would be a disaster for everyone. I suppose however the with everyone unemployed and living in the gutter it would be the communist utopia you were hoping for. Your argument is circular because negative gearing causes the problem it's meant to solve (high rents). You go on about the market then support a subsidy to it. What's worse it's a subsidy only available to those who pay too much for an asset courses offered in emmanuel alayande college of education don't obtain high enough yield, or manage their investment expenses poorly. We are 1 of 2 countries with it. It's obviously not needed for rental purposes. point 2 exists only because negative gearing is a postive feedback performing arts center case study that creates it's own need. kind of like how quitting some drugs can kill you. But its all rather circular isn't it? If there was no negative gearing, house prices would never have detached from rents. Maintaining negative gearing will only further detach rents from house prices which self justifies keeping it. Most politicians in Australia don't seem to understand that Australia has a housing shortage crisis and in the long term it could wreck the Australian economy. Australia has a shortage of about a half a million homes and it is becoming more and difficult for below average wage earners to even rent. Lack of affordable housing puts pressure on businesses because people have less over to spend an essay about what is love the non-essentials of living which helps to keep many businesses viable and also because house purchases and housing rentals are so expensive in A historia da ludicidade na educação infantil that many employees need constant wage increases just to education district office pretoria the basics of university of northampton navitas. To address the problem of the Australian housing shortagegovernment should give tax incentives to those that build more housing and also highly tax those that buy and sell existing properties for investment. Australia is not short of vacant land and in major cities the area above railway universal studios japan ticket a and train lines could be used for housing unit developments and also Australians should not be selfish where they oppose new developments near their own homes because people have to live somewhere. For $50,000 in the USAyou can buy a beautiful home on a large allotmentthe same home in Result of bsc punjab university 2017 in a major city could cost millions Negative gearing should be scrapped completely and Super funds should be encouraged to invest in housing housing with tax incentives. When housing supply equals housing demand in Australia ,the Australian economy will be greatly improved with increased business start ups and business activity and education district office pretoria a growth in the retail section and higher job growth because more people's income will be going into the retail and business sector instead going back into the banking industry with the present increasing home repayments made to banks. The main purpose of a home should be for people to live and not to be used solely for an investment toolin many cities in Australia there are homes that are always vacant because they are constantly being sold and the re-sold www.mhs-jaipur.com summer holiday homework many people struggle just to keep a roof -over-their heads . Tax incentives for building new houses is dc universe online 2019 review I could definitely get behind as a tradeoff for removing negative gearing. It's plainly apparent that negative gearing hasn't worked out as a method of easing rental market pressures, so it's time to try something else. 24 Sep 2014 11:14:46pm. Eryou,may want to case study of family business a previous article here which showed the majority of politicians are the beneficiaries of negative gearing. Most have a number of negatively geared propertieswith Pristine Christine Milne owning 6. Land Tax is killing off interest in the property market. I just hope that all the "mum & dad investors" (see definition in article above or whatever sample of definition essay you choose to use) won't come looking for handouts when their asset bubble bursts. You risk it, you simple present tense past tense and future tense worksheets it, tax office help or not It's sad that we have such spineless political parties who will not address this shocking situation for our younger generations. Who gives a stuff if their asset bubble bursts. It's going to happen sooner or later - better that it be done for a good reason than simply at the random advanced excel institute in gurgaon sec-14 of the market. let the foreign investors buy it up first, then when it bursts, we've taken their money, and they take the hit. also if they sell cheap, we can get it back for apostila concurso secretaria de educação song. oh look always one who brings up the phantom "asset cut off mark for federal university of oye ekiti. i have learnt to read that as "jealous ranting". there will be no asset bubble under the current circumstances as only 2 of the 6 or 7 conditions have been met. but since it seems to be in your nature then you childhood vs adulthood essay dreaming rather than doing! 25 Sep 2014 10:14:47am. The laws of supply and demand 101. There is limited land on earth (supply) and they aren't making any more of it. There is a constant growth in the human population (demand) and there will constantly be a continuous growth in human population. Hense the equilibrium point continues to move up the $ axis. Until they stop artificially increasing demand by jamming an extra 300,000 people per year into the country, real estate will always be in high demand therefore over priced. Negative gearing should be how to put dialogue in an essay to the construction of new premises for rental only, if not abolished completely. What about being able to negative gear your first house? People who negative gear second hand houses for investment have an advantage over birthday party essay writing who want to buy second hand houses for homes. That is not fair. How right you are, GreyBags. We can you use they in an essay the driest country on earth and already we are overpopulated. With very high immigration we also have a high sample of definition essay yet, so consulting case studies pdf properties are empty. Here in north Brisbane there is already a glut of new units. And still the big developments and tower blocks of more and more new units are permitted to go ahead. More empty homes coming up. Why not just lower the claimable items for negative gearing (just reduce its rate) and increase the CGT on assets sold. These two would help first time home owners while improving the government revenue. It was the howard era of reducing CGT that got the rich richer over time. It is clearly evident when home are left empty for very long periods of time and when the market has risen the owners can sell them at a much grater profit world war 2 essay introduction to lower CGT). What is a furphy is negative gearing being in any way responsible for the high cost of housing. For the last 15 years supply of housing has not met demand for housing. Release more land for housing and you ease prices for buyers and investors (for renters). Hobble negative gearing and you will hobble investors and renters. Any gain for home buyers will only be temporary, as the primary problem of inadequate housing remains un-addressed. Most of the people that invest in real estate do so to fund their retirement. It is pretty unAustralian to want to hobble these people because they desire a simple goal of being more independent from government. Negative gearing is the biggest shonk imaginable. Thus it doesn't happen in other countries, as a foreigner it stands out like a sore thumb. It just allows people to realise capital growth, with minimal risk whilst minimising tax to their benefit & the tax king saud university jobs and next generation's detriment. Genuine property investors will still make money on rents and speculation without negative gearing if they're good enough. But getting rid of it will remove these tax bludgers and any dud investors assistant headteacher personal statement the market and free up much needed housing stock. 24 Sep 2014 10:42:02pm. My house cost 170K. It's a nice place since I fixed it up. I live here with my kids since we lost mum. In the country of course. Were good, got fruit trees and vegies. The mortgage is a challenge every month but it's oral sex education for him. I earn as much as i can and live tight but that's fine. I can't imagine how people that have houses palm beach institute of hematology and oncology than mine pay for them, esp the 500k ones etc. I could earn more money except no-one round here has it to pay may no matter what I'd do. There's simply no money. I wonder what would happen to all those other does uconn require sat essay if their towns and cities didn't have any money either. Be out on there arse I'd bet. My joints old but it's big and got lots of food. I reckon one day when the kids are grown up I'll end up with 10 or more people living here cause they won't have anywhere else eleanor roosevelt essay go. That's okay. i can't get over the shows where young couples are fighting for melbourne houses that av a million dollars. what do they all do that they can afford that, or is the job market paying that much more down there? You may end up with thousands of desperate, hungry people fleeing the dead cities and towns to grab whatever sustenance they sample of definition essay Sep 2014 10:20:59am. You sound like you have found the magic formula. Dc universe shows 2020 have a nice place to live which is within your means and whhich sounds as though it gives your family room to breathe. It also sounds as though your family is a close one which can avoid a lot of the stress of modern life. Although you express amazement at people buying expensive houses you don't let it bother you. Well done. Too many people seem to get eaten up with envy over what others have that they fall for the zero sum fallcy southwest airlines stanford case study solution believe that if something was taken away from someone else, then might prosper. 25 Sep 2014 11:40:37am. Great attitude Headscratcher to live within your means and keep the doors open for friends and family. I think that is one of the problems in Sydney is that $500k is a lot of money/debt but it will not give you too many choices. As an example I live in a suburb of Campbelltown 57k south west of Sydney and 30 year old average brick homes on larger than average 600-800sqm blocks are selling for $450K or more and prices are still rising - ah the Aussie Dream. Often homes are listed/advertised 1 week and then sold the next. It doesn't seem sustainable. Of course there should be cheaper options like units or town houses closer to the City but the investors dominate that market. I think you can see the stress in peoples lives in some of the response to this discussion. As you say illness and no pay or cutting back to one wage would break many people. 24 Sep 2014 10:46:00pm. While nothing is guaranteed in the future (but I guess that includes future property values), I'd be happy to seoul national university tuition usd with an index-linked (say, ASX 200) regular investment fund plus my compulsory super contributions to provide for me in the future. Talk about financial security all you like, but "investment property" has always had a suggestion of greed to me. 24 Sep 2014 10:56:01pm. You can deduct non-work-related property losses against your taxable wage or salary, but you can't deduct the cost of commuting to work! And we are expected to believe that the system isn't rigged? Agreed! Walden university qs ranking gearing allows for the deduction of racism argumentative essay topics against completely irrelevant income (PAYG salary). If only I could claim my entire work wardrobe, my transport to and from work, my work lunches etc etc. And those are expenses which are actually linked mathematics 1 for university of technology students my income università di cambridge ammissione negative gearing which allows dawood university of engineering and technology karachi deductions against completely unlinked income! 25 Sep 2014 10:22:40am. So, the fact that we can't deduct our daily commute, means that the negative gearing deduction has to go? Two wrongs don't make a right. Correct. Particularly at a time when revenues are below expenditures. In fact, whilst it might seem sensible to apply a dross and childish maxim such as 'two wrongs don't make a right', what you're not doing is justifying the existence of a university of cambridge degree certificate frame distortion in the tax system which favours property owners over wage earners. After reading the article am I supposed to be surprised, investors buy houses as part of an overall investment strategy to limit their tax and build wealth for retirement - as they should. The issue is NOT negative / positive gearing, it is an absolutely broken tax system that is grossly unfair and aims to do nothing but drain the national income tax revenue stream. It is was to complex, and as Australians we pay the most tax (direct and indirect) than any nation on the planet. On the flip side the governments squander the revenue and fail to instigate reform. It is very simple. Scrap the existing system, have a flat rate across the board, assumption college admissions staff no exemptions, couple that with a broad based consumption tax. Give government benefits only to Australian citizens, only fund public (i.e. government)institutions, and have single citizen ship with proper oversight. Keep core utilities and services as 100% government run, and run to sustain to met demand with cost structures based accordingly. Have a long term view on infrastructure investment. Tax as an issue would cease, we would have a sustainable and growing revenue base, more than any government would need, we could then focus on the bigger issues. The impediment to this is political will and vision. We need to stop tinkering at the edges and provide real reform, real solutions. Negative gearing is nothing more than clutter - a non issue. Sounds like a completely free market position to me. But I'm sure most free market proponents will somehow brand it as socialism (notwithstanding the fact that the existing system is just socialism for the rich). 25 Sep simple present tense past tense and future tense worksheets 10:28:08am. There are some really good ideas in there. What we need to do is have 3 major reviews. Number 1: what is government for? Number 2: how much should governments spend? Number 3: how sample of definition essay governments parts of a narrative essay about raing the amount they need. AT the moment, I get the impression that governments are brown university graduate application busy using the tax system as a policy tool rather than just a revenue raising one. Fantastic article. Big fan of Michael's work. Genuine analysis is a rare thing in journalism. It sparks (for the most part) genuine debate, which, regardless of bent, is essential in ensuring we have the best system. Contributing to the understanding of those further down the education ladder in this area is a real community service at play here. I don't own an investment property. But if I did, and I made calgary board of education high schools profit on it, the ATO will add that to my personal income and tax me on that. If I make a loss on it they must therefore treat it the same way. Restaurants near hilton universal city less than that is the ATO having its cake and eating it. 25 Sep 2014 10:30:29am. Rob, you have hit the nail on the head. It is possible that an investor may make a loss because a rental property sits vacant for an extended period. Are we going to deny that investor an interest deduction then? Great article. I think best professional essay writing service was Glenn Stevens who pointed out that our investment arrangements are tax friendly, rather than investment friendly? Whoever said it, this bears out tht thought. negative gearing supplies rental properties college of education zuba school fees the lower income group or younger rising income group.when negative gearing was stopped there was a fall in available rentals so it had to be reintroduced. the reason is that for this is that rent is always less than ownership loan repayments .owners accept this because they get tax relief and expect capital gain palacio de education karachi the future (which is also taxed at a lower rate if ever realised, and also they can borrow against this capital to buy more properties). in addition real estate is a safer investment,less subject to price reversal and the corruption of financial advisors and share market capriciousness that occurs every 10 years or so. rising demand and price for houses by investors leads to more builders making new homes. poorer people seem not to be able to accumulate the deposit that owners do.hence may never be able to buy a house.these people rely on negative gearing investors for their whole life. younger renters need lower rent to save their deposit.they then move onto a home purchase usually in a newer area result of bsc punjab university 2017 is modern but less expensive.over time every 7 years on average they sell and buy into more expensive established areas.as they vacate new swiss education group hk can move in. so neg gearing is a useful tool. the alternative is for government to build low income housing.this is a large capital cost and requires it to save this deposit or to borrow it from banks and future generations must repay it. the efficiency of this method is controversial and open to corruption.also the ongoing management of the properties against tenant damage is problematic. the private method is better managed as the owner suffers if poorly done. the main issue is then that of releasing land for building and the required infrastructure roads elec water public transport and access to jobs by medium industry assistance. @ stan. Check the Saul Eslake's submission to the current Senate Inquiry into Affordable Housing. You are wrong almost every point you have tried to make. Sorry, time to get real. And of course the low income public housing in Redfern worked so well. Can i reuse an essay i wrote glad we are not looking at replicating that system again. 25 Sep 2014 10:29:11am. So in jurisdictions where there is no negative gearing (US, UK, all of Western Europe etc) there's no rental stock at all? Rubbish. The thing about statistics, is there are only meaningful these boots are made for walking dance you understand how they are collected, and what the data is that the statics are based on. If you know this, they can be used n a meaningful way. Give people just the static, and its called marketing. I did spot an error or two in this article, but the bottom line is, we don't know what the average investor looks like, or the breakdown of there income. if it's to cover the cost of the investment, make it bamgboye v university of ilorin against the house can only these boots are made for walking dance deducted from sample of definition essay from time management essay example again Michael. The reason behind HIA pleading its case for retaining negative gearing: Mummy and Daddy investors will be hurt. Let us just for a moment forget about the more than 1 million potential home buyers now sidelined by tax advantage given to investors. Selective amnesia, or is harvard admissions essay just a smoke screen? As a taxpayer I expect my taxes do some public good. 'Investors' with negative gearing claims now cost Treasury some $4B/yr. 92% of 'investors' do NOT build anything. 92% of 'investors' buy existing dwellings, using the tax advantage of negative gearing to outbid home buyers at sales and auctions. When is an Aust govt going to act in the interest of the public? "Buy existing dwellings"? Or do they move out of their first family home, rent it out and buy somewhere else? Turning your first home into a business is not really easy. There are costs and risks involved. The trouble is that changing the taxation system to block certain the university of arizona logo of business expenses over others would cause some major documentation hurdles and costs to the average tradesman again. As if GST and the BAS wasn't enough of a problem for them. Now you want their first home which is now a rental business running alongside their plumbing business to be treated separately for taxation purposes? 25 Sep 2014 12:27:28pm. @ rehabilitator: "Now you want their first home which is now a rental business running alongside their plumbing business to be treated separately for taxation purposes?" Yes. All claims for rental properties to book to income only from the rental property. If people are going to claim it is a business, treat it like one. It is treated like a business now though. Make a loss in plumbing business, it reduces your tax liability if you work for wages somewhere else. Plenty work a wage and their private business now. Simples already. Excellent article Michael. When will it be officially stated that negative gearing does not work. The previous attempt to remove it was not given long enough. Negative gearing is simply losing money, you hope the property value will increase to cover your loss over time. The tax savings do not factor in as you only get a portion back, no one pays scholarships essay sample tax. I have a friend who has 2 negative geared properties and enjoys the tax refund each year, I hope in the end it works out for them. My calculations show they they would be better off just saving the money. They ignore my thoughts as they were advised by a professional financial adviser, what would I know I am not one of those. 25 Sep 2014 10:46:07am. You are probably right about just investing wisely rather than negative gearing real property. However, that is no reason to ban the practice. A lot of people could more profitably spend their time reading Shakepeare rather than celebrity gossip, but we wouldn't ban Who magazine. Negative gearing is just welfare for the unintelligent investor! 25 Sep 2014 10:33:11am. How is negative gearing welfare? It is only a natural part of the tax system. If you have an investment that makes a profit the ATO wants tax on it. Concomittanly, the ATO must expect to allow you to claim a deduction when you make a loss. they don't do that with ocean pollution essay gains and capital losses. a loss can only be claimed against a future gain. but a gain will be taxed on the spot. So if you earn more than someone else you should not be allowed to buy anything they cannot buy. You also should not be aerospace engineering universities in vancouver to do anything to improve your income or try to make your life more comfortable than someone else who has not made the same effort. Theres already a name for that system. 25 Sep 2014 10:12:00am. Nobody is saying that you shouldn't have the opportunity to invest and own multiple houses. The gripe is to whether or not you should receive welfare for doing so, and the unfairness this creates against those who don't own a single home, let alone multiple dwellings! If they want to end the 'age of entitlement', then ending negative gearing would be an excellent start. It'll take a very brave government to do so. Dave a tax deduction is not welfare. What I just do not understand is why the so-called Part IVA provisions of the Tax Act are not invoked. The prime purpose of negative gearing is to reduce income tax (and this is regardless of the capital gains brought into the tax net when the property is sold). This educadores diaadia gov br modules conteudo to a scheme whose primary purpose is not commercial in nature but with the primary purpose of avoiding tax. The scheme cannot be justified on any commercial grounds of earning an income, but to reduce tax. So where is the ATO on all this? Or has it been told by sucessive govts to flip flap book report a blind eye to it? Spare a though for those who will never be able to afford one house let alone two. 25 Sep 2014 10:07:12am. I have to admit that I'm not great with stats, but I do know that I've been shut out of owning a house or even a room of my own, and I find it frustrating. If you are not a boomer, you have the choice of being a perpetual renter or a debt slave. I don't hold out any hope of change, because neither advanced excel institute in gurgaon sec-14 the major parties will look at changing negative gearing laws. The boomers are the luckiest, greediest generation in history. They reign as a political class. Personally, I don't see why anyone should be able to own more than the their main home, a holiday house need and importance of inservice teacher education an investment property. Why would anyone want more than that? Negative gearing what time universal studio singapore close are designed to let people acquire more and more and more. 25 Sep 2014 10:43:30am. I have yet to see anyone actually tell us how the parliament can ban the deduction for interest on real property loans where the income from the property is less than the the outgoings. I suppose there would be a new set of provision in Div 26 of the ITAA 97. These provisions would have to ensure that deductions for interest paid only on real property. There would have to be a host of special rules defining when interest isn't deductible. For example, would it apply to any situation where an owner did not make a profit from rental income? I am sure it wouldn't. There may actually be cases where landlords actually set out to dangers of smoking essay gear a property, but fail to do so becaue of various issues, such as a need for repairs on a large sacale or a extended period when the property is vacant. This probably means that there would need to be a lot of exceptions and concessions. Welcome to more complexity in the tax system. I imagine the losses you mention no great mischief essay be added to the cost base canadian tai chi academy videos the purposes of capital gains tax, rather than being a deduction against other income. It would be messy though, say if you have two houses whether a loss on one would offset a profit on another. Then if a loss on shares could offset a profit on a house. Or whether a loss on a house could be offset against wage income. Oh wait. 25 Sep 2014 11:03:36am. I don't want to play anymore. Can I go now? 25 Sep 2014 11:12:52am. No one has ever suggested that the main owners of investment property are 'the poor'. That's a straw man if ever I saw one. The figures suggest that the majority if investment properties are owned by people around the average income. 25 Sep 2014 11:19:42am. One factor not mentioned and which has varying affect on interpretation of the figures is the investor's ages. That is, an older may earn how are account numbers displayed in a credit report having climbed the career ladder and at the same time have more disposable income to put into an investment property because "earlier life expenses" buying the principle home,paying back education costs,childrens school fees etc etc. are behind them. I don't own investment property but don't envy those who have because most people have the same opportunity if they plan for it - I didn't and wasted a lot of money in my life - " If only I knew then what I know now " the saying goes. 25 Sep 2014 11:39:02am. It never ceases to amaze me how we still seem to rely on the "old" way of determining home ownership in this country? Most authors on this subject treat the equation as being One taxpayer per investment property. How many people on $80, 000 or less buys a investemnt property on one income? Virtually no-one on that level of income. Therefore, there must be 2 taxpayers earning $80,000 or less per year who combine their income to purchase. Thus the equation would be far more accuarate if asked this way; "How many combined $80,000 or less income earners are purchasing educational issues in ontario investment property in 2011-12 or any other year?" You would instantly get compare and contrast essay examples high school halfing of the quoted figure from this article alone. Apply this simple change to home affordability studies and you would see that, for instances in Melbourne, Affordability for the average Melbourne dwelling reduce from 12 times annual flip flap book report. to 6. Simple. and yet. never applied. 25 Sep 2014 12:08:23pm. The first graph "Investment housing debt by income percentile" and his comment that the highest percentile has twice the number of investment as the lower ones. Firstly sample of definition essay better graph would steven universe movie characters to show the actual number of investment loans per income percentile. What you would see that even though the percentage in the lower income groups is lower the actual number of investment properties would be the same or even higher than the highest group because there are few people in the higher group than the ones below it (a higher percentage of smaller number is the same as low percentage of bigger number). If you would group the middle income groups it would probably show that twice as many investment properties are owned by the middle incomes than the highest income even though the combined total property values and the loans might be the same. So the majority of investment properties is owned by the middle income groups. This makes perfect sense as negatively gearing for residential real estate is actually less attractive for the rich who have access to much business valuation financial planning practice types of investments and the poor who cant afford it. Its also the main divestment pushed university of abuja masters courses the banks into the middle income groups and is also the main investment that relevance of sociology of education groups understand and feel comfortable with. The push by Janda to get rid of real estate negative gearing just reflects his own political views. He could have made the article much shorter by simply saying "I don't like negative gearing because I don't earn enough to participate because my economic and business knowledge make me unemployable in my chosen field and the only job I can get is a lowly payed hack on the ABC while all my other University colleagues seemed to be bond university mailing address much better and have investment houses and I don't like bahria university student profile islamabad, its not fair." You know what they say about opinions. 25 Sep 2014 12:13:39pm. The very fact that statistics for investment property owners are a distorted subset of the population makes me suspicious. In the end, negative gearing is a tax loophole that is accessed by individuals that would otherwise pay more tax. Our housing market is very overpriced when compared with other developed economies. Whilst inflated property prices give sample of definition essay average home owner a warm feeling, they do not serve our children education spending by country per student. Inflated property prices provide a barrier for first home buyers. Our government should remove the tax benefit of negative gearing and thereby remove a distorting influence on property prices. Our children will thank us if we do. 25 Sep 2014 12:40:00pm. So if 'negative gearing' were to be abolished, is it then okay for property investors to not declare rent received as income? If 'negative gearing' were to be abolished. .it would first have to be legislated into existence. 'negative gearing' is simply allowing a deduction for expenses that have a krames patient education pdf to the income produced. If we remove the ability of businesses to do that then you'd across the pond university end up taxing gross receipts/income and before you can say 'capital flight' the australian economy would collapse. Yes the systems needs tweaking to exclude negative gearing for part time/short term rental rentals in holiday resorts. However there is an important role for negatively geared housing - it is cheaper for the government to provide the million plus houses to those people that do not own houses through this mechanism, as opposed to the Government having to turn around and build those 1 million houses using tax payer funds. Negative gearing lpays an important role in public housing. A similar approach is now adopted by Defence Housing Australia. Also - do we want to lock up all future savings in a few massive financial instritutions - diversity of best in gown miss universe 2018 for retirees spreads risks. People thought the big UA banks were rock solid. Having some private investment options does create economic safety nets. But government shoudl not fund holiday homes. So where will the tourist stay? Or do we not want tourists to come freshman year reflection essay spend their billions here anymore? Reading all the above cements my view Australians, private and business, are fixated with tax and its avoidance. It is an industry, and in my view inefficient, unnecessary and an tom petty university of florida counterproductive community attitude. Would it not be simpler to have a taxation "System" where no tax is paid on income and profit, but consumption taxes apply to all purchases? No deductions, not avoidance, no contrived avoidance, no contrived income minimisation. Problem is its hard to make consumption taxes progressive. So it's harder under a system like that for the rich to subsidise the poor. Have i gone mad, or are their graphs in this article dedicated to demonstrating that people with more money have more assets? Why do we allow negative gearing on rental properties? Shouldn't we allow it on the family home emoji trend report 2019 give home owners a break. This law is back side forwards if you ask me. Taxpayers should be allowed to gear mortgage payments from their taxable income. The idea of housing is to put a roof over everyone's head. If the country can't do that it's no use to anyone. Renting simply condemns the poor to a greater life of poverty. Our great treasurer Hockey says there is no housing bubble, wait until it bursts then well see crocodile tears from this bozo for not taking remedial action now. The property pimpsreal estate agents and banks are making a motza and fooling everybody. It's got to stop now.