'Topping up $300 a week': How much money do property investors actually make?
Photo:
Unsplash/ Artful Homes
A big chunk of property investors do not make money from their investments - and those who do are pulling in an average of less than $16,000 a year.
RNZ revealed last year, more than 50,000 of the roughly 120,000 property investors in the country were making losses on their property portfolios.
Now, new data released under the Official Information Act has shown even those with a profit were making a limited amount.
In the 2024 tax year, the average rental income made across all entities reporting a profit was $15,680.
Based on the average house price, that is a return of 1.7 percent.
Individuals were making $13,240 and trusts $26,490.
The year before, the average income was $15,590. A year earlier, it was $16,680 and in 2021, $14,800.
Simplicity chief economist Shamubeel Eaqub said it highlighted people were not investing in property for cash yields but for other reasons.
Simplicity chief economist Shamubeel Eaqub said capital gains was a motivator for investors.
Photo:
Supplied
Those included being able to borrow from the bank to invest in property in a way that other investments were not able to, and the lack of tax on properties not captured by the bright line test.
"The real motivation is capital gains - because the cash return means tenants aren't the main business, the house is.
"Roughly, if your cash earning yield is 1.7 percent, and let's say the cost of equity is 10 percent - probably a bit higher in NZ, then investors are assuming house prices will increase by over 8 percent a year forever.
"So we have this weird setup, that encourages people to make a pretty serious financial bet, through tax and banking regulation, and cultural norms."
Including capital gains, investors would have made 6.6 percent a year on average over the past five years.
In 2022, they would have had a 19 percent return, and in 2021, 15. percent, before recording total losses in the most recent two years.
He calculated investors would have made an average $179,672 in the 2021/22 year, thanks to capital gains, and $111.464 the year before.
But they would have lost almost $85,000 in the 2023 year and another $21,362 in the 2024.
NZ Property Investors Federation spokesperson Matt Ball said he was not surprised by the data.
"We have one rental property ourselves and I'm putting in $300 a week at the moment because I'm stuck on an interest rate of 6.65 percent.
"But we've been doing that for the last year, 18 months. We'll make a loss just because that's how it is."
He said property investment was not "winning Lotto".
"It's hard work and to make money out of it you have to put in some effort. You can't just buy a place and sit down and watch the money roll in.
"That's why if you can add a bedroom or upgrade it so you get a bit of rent of rent or whatever, do some work to it, that's the goal."
He said 85 percent of property investors had another job.
"I think if you could put the money into other investments you'd probably be getting a strong income… the leverage is the difference, I can't borrow $1 million to put into shares."
Sarina Gibbon, general manager at Auckland Property Investors Association said some investors would be operating across multiple entities.
"Since FY22, when interest deductibility started being phased out, the IRD hasn't been privy to the economic reality of investing, let alone reporting it accurately. It has been reporting legislated distortion.
In FY24, landlords could only deduct 50 percent of interest costs. Cash-poor portfolios got pumped into the system and spat out as paper-rich operations.
"So, no, the numbers are not surprisingly low; they are deceptively high. We are taxing revenue, not profit.
This sort of tax distortion is nothing else but political theatre. Here's the irony, though: flawed as the policy was, it did rewire investor behaviour from accumulating to improving.
"Sure, more deductible repairs and upgrades led to better-quality housing, but also higher rents. So the adversarial policy borne out of flawed design and bad leadership cornered investors into action to benefit their tenants and no one else."
She said now investors could claim their home loan interest against their income again and interest rates had fallen, there was some breathing room.
"In the long term, I expect investment to be more dynamic, yield-focused and taxable income from the investor cohort to grow."
Property investment coach Steve Goodey said investors starting out would usually make losses but people who had been investing for a while would often have properties without mortgages.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
New Zealand signs new agricultural trade deal with Indonesia
Minister of Agriculture/Trade and Investment Todd McClay and Indonesian Minister of Agriculture Andi Amran Sulaiman sign a new bilateral arrangement on agricultural cooperation in Jakarta, 7 August, 2025. Photo: Supplied New Zealand and Indonesia have signed a new agricultural trade agreement, as part of the government's bid to double export values in 10 years. The minister overseeing both agriculture and trade, Todd McClay, said the deal would create new commercial opportunities for farmers and agribusinesses in both countries. He signed the new bilateral arrangement in Jakarta on Thursday, alongside Indonesian Minister of Agriculture Andi Amran Sulaiman. "This new agreement will make it easier for our agricultural sectors to collaborate, share expertise and open doors for trade and investment," McClay said. "It provides a framework for stronger cooperation in areas like livestock development, smart agriculture, biosecurity, agricultural research, and streamlined trade processes." The arrangement would also see a dedicated 'Consultative Forum' established to coordinate both countries' regulations and reduce red tape for exporters. The forum would hold its first meeting within a year. "This is about building long-term commercial partnerships. It will help more New Zealand businesses connect directly with Indonesian partners, support our farmers to get their high-quality products into market, and encourage ... investment in agriculture from both sides," McClay said. "Agreements like this one help to grow the value of our exports, lift returns to the farmgate, and unlock future growth for the entire economy." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Otago Daily Times
4 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Previous govt spent too much during Covid: Treasury
By Giles Dexter of RNZ The previous government spent too much during the Covid-19 pandemic, despite warnings from officials, according to a briefing released by the Treasury. The Treasury's 2025 Long Term Insights Briefing said debt had risen in recent decades, partly because responses to adverse shocks were not met by savings between those shocks. The higher debt meant less capacity to respond to future shocks, like natural hazards, weather-related risks and biosecurity risks. Treasury estimated the total cost of the pandemic was $66 billion over the 2020-26 financial years and about 20.4% of GDP. The IMF and OECD estimated it was among the largest Covid-19 responses globally. The agency releases a briefing every three years, with this one looking at the role of fiscal policy through shocks and business cycles. The briefing said the Covid-19 response showed the challenges of using fiscal policy to respond to shocks and cycles. Initially, Treasury recommended "strong fiscal stimulus" at the start of the pandemic, which was cited as "perhaps" causing the economy to be much stronger than expected by the end of 2020. The wage-subsidy scheme in particular was seen as making an important contribution to the strong initial recovery, limiting the increase in the unemployment rate and enabling economic activity to resume when restrictions relaxed. Treasury then moved away from recommending broad-based stimulus, preferring more targeted and moderate support. Its post-election advice to the then-Finance Minister in late 2020 highlighted "the importance of controlling ongoing spending and ensuring it was high value to meet the medium-term fiscal challenge." By August 2021, with the Delta lockdowns coming in, Treasury recommended any decisions to provide support to businesses "should take account of macroeconomic trade-offs". It recommended against any further stimulus from Budget 2022 onwards. Wage subsidies and similar schemes during lockdowns made up about 35% of the costs of the response. A further 18% came from health-system costs, like vaccination, contact tracing, and managed isolation and quarantine. The remaining "nearly half" was made up of a wide range of initiatives that Treasury said had "varied objectives". Some were aimed at directly responding to the impacts of Covid-19, others were aimed at providing fiscal stimulus or "achieving social or environmental objectives". They included "tax changes, training schemes, housing construction, shovel-ready infrastructure projects, increases to welfare benefits, the Small Business Cashflow Scheme, Jobs for Nature, additional public housing places and school lunches". Programmes within the fiscal response that were not tied to the shock were seen as having "a lagged impact on the economy and proved difficult to unwind in later years". The report suggested cyclical management was best left to monetary policy, run by an independent central bank. It also suggested governments set out clearly when fiscal policy will be used ahead of time, including pre-defining responses. Ideally, this would have cross-party agreement. An independent fiscal institution, which could scrutinise and report on the sustainability of fiscal policy, was also suggested. The previous government had considered setting up a watchdog to cost election policies, but it could not get cross-party support. National then changed its tune, with current Finance Minister Nicola Willis supporting such a measure, but New Zealand First and ACT were opposed to the idea. 'Dangers of excessive spending' - Willis Willis jumped on the report's release, saying Treasury's language was "spare and polite", but its conclusions were "damning". She said the briefing showed the challenges of using "big spending measures" to respond to one-off shocks. Willis singled out the briefing's focus on the money spent on initiatives not directly tied to the Covid-19 response. "That is a very diplomatic way of saying New Zealanders are still paying the price of the previous government extending a big-spending approach, initially intended for a pandemic response," she said. Labour has been approached for comment.
RNZ News
5 hours ago
- RNZ News
Treasury briefing points finger at government spending during Covid-19 pandemic
The Treasury briefing said the Covid-19 response showed the challenges of using fiscal policy to respond to shocks and cycles. Photo: FANATIC STUDIO / SCIENCE PHOTO L The previous government spent too much during the Covid-19 pandemic, despite warnings from officials, according to a briefing released by the Treasury. The Treasury's 2025 Long Term Insights Briefing said debt had risen in recent decades, partly because responses to adverse shocks were not met by savings between those shocks. The higher debt meant less capacity to respond to future shocks, like natural hazards, weather-related risks and biosecurity risks. Treasury estimated the total cost of the pandemic was $66 billion over the 2020-26 financial years and about 20.4 percent of GDP. The IMF and OECD estimated it was among the largest Covid-19 responses globally. The agency releases a briefing every three years, with this one looking at the role of fiscal policy through shocks and business cycles. The briefing said the Covid-19 response showed the challenges of using fiscal policy to respond to shocks and cycles. Initially, Treasury recommended "strong fiscal stimulus" at the start of the pandemic, which was cited as "perhaps" causing the economy to be much stronger than expected by the end of 2020. The wage-subsidy scheme in particular was seen as making an important contribution to the strong initial recovery, limiting the increase in the unemployment rate and enabling economic activity to resume when restrictions relaxed. Treasury then moved away from recommending broad-based stimulus, preferring more targeted and moderate support. Its post-election advice to the then-Finance Minister in late 2020 highlighted "the importance of controlling ongoing spending and ensuring it was high value to meet the medium-term fiscal challenge." By August 2021, with the Delta lockdowns coming in, Treasury recommended any decisions to provide support to businesses "should take account of macroeconomic trade-offs". It recommended against any further stimulus from Budget 2022 onwards. Wage subsidies and similar schemes during lockdowns made up about 35 percent of the costs of the response. A further 18 percent came from health-system costs, like vaccination, contact tracing, and managed isolation and quarantine. The remaining "nearly half" was made up of a wide range of initiatives that Treasury said had "varied objectives". Some were aimed at directly responding to the impacts of Covid-19, others were aimed at providing fiscal stimulus or "achieving social or environmental objectives". They included "tax changes, training schemes, housing construction, shovel-ready infrastructure projects, increases to welfare benefits, the Small Business Cashflow Scheme, Jobs for Nature, additional public housing places and school lunches". Programmes within the fiscal response that were not tied to the shock were seen as having "a lagged impact on the economy and proved difficult to unwind in later years". The report suggested cyclical management was best left to monetary policy, run by an independent central bank. It also suggested governments set out clearly when fiscal policy will be used ahead of time, including pre-defining responses. Ideally, this would have cross-party agreement. An independent fiscal institution, which could scrutinise and report on the sustainability of fiscal policy, was also suggested. The previous government had considered setting up a watchdog to cost election policies, but it could not get cross-party support. National then changed its tune, with current Finance Minister Nicola Willis supporting such a measure, but New Zealand First and ACT were opposed to the idea. Willis jumped on the report's release, saying Treasury's language was "spare and polite", but its conclusions were "damning". She said the briefing showed the challenges of using "big spending measures" to respond to one-off shocks. Willis singled out the briefing's focus on the money spent on initiatives not directly tied to the Covid-19 response. "That is a very diplomatic way of saying New Zealanders are still paying the price of the previous government extending a big-spending approach, initially intended for a pandemic response," she said. RNZ has approached Labour for comment. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
