Real Estate Policy: Suspiciously Strategic
It's not as if a boon for builders and developers was beyond the realm of possibility in Budget 2026. It was widely expected. The real estate lobby has been loud, well-organized, and persistent. Many however were caught off guard by what was ultimately announced, describing the budget as both contradictory and inadequate to truly revive the 'ailing' sector.
To recap: buyers will now pay lower withholding taxes across different slabs, while sellers face increased capital gains taxes based on property value. The Federal Excise Duty (FED) has been abolished on all property transactions. Additionally, there's a tax credit for the construction of houses up to 10 marlas and apartments up to 2,000 sq ft. Meanwhile, non-filers will be barred from purchasing property and vehicles altogether.
There appears to be a clear rationale behind this policy design and it piques the interest of those that read between the lines. To an untrained eye, it may seem contradictory to reduce one tax and increase another but this is sophisticated policymaking which is suspicious in and of itself.
The lowering withholding tax on buyers and increasing capital gains tax on sellers shifts the tax burden from transactions to wealth accumulation. Capital gains tax is progressive — it taxes the actual profit made by sellers, proportionate to their earnings. In contrast, withholding tax is regressive, hitting all buyers equally regardless of whether they benefit financially. Reducing WHT lowers transaction costs for genuine, long-term buyers. Raising CGT, meanwhile, deters speculative activity, discouraging short-term flipping and artificial price inflation.
The introduction of a tax credit for constructing smallers homes and apartments could further spur real, demand-driven activity, potentially broadening the tax base. Abolishing the FED is also a sensible step, an indirect tax on property transactions that, paradoxically, disincentivized formal activity. All of this is tied together with the restriction on non-filers from participating in real estate, reinforcing the shift toward documentation in the sector.
The fact is, builders and developers do not fear higher taxes as much as they care about what comes with it— the restriction on non-filers. In a sector heavily dependent on undocumented capital, this move threatens to shrink the buyer pool dramatically. If enforced, it could trigger grey capital flight, and paralyze volumes. But it may also prove tobe a turning point: by excluding non-filers, speculative investments could dry up, allowing genuine real estate activity to begin gaining ground.
The combination of tax credits (though details on their scope are limited) along with lower transaction costs for genuine buyers and restrictions on non-filers, could stimulate documented activity in the formal real estate sector and gradually expand the tax base. But for this to happen, the government must stand its ground. The real estate lobby is already at the Prime Minister's door, pushing for a rollback. If the PM is truly committed to documenting the economy, now is the moment to prove it—capital flight threats be damned.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
7 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Gold falls as investor focus turns to G7 meeting, Fed rate decision
LONDON: Gold fell on Monday as investors weighed the impact of the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict, while also focusing on the Group of Seven (G7) leaders meeting and the US Federal Reserve policy decision later this week. Spot gold fell 0.4% to $3,419.89 an ounce, as of 1059 GMT, after hitting its highest level since April 22 earlier in the session. US gold futures were down 0.4% to $3,439.80. 'Geopolitical tensions are not disappearing near term, as well rates are likely to be cut further by the central bank (Fed), so that should provide a floor to gold,' said Giovanni Staunovo, an analyst at UBS. Iranian missiles struck Israel's Tel Aviv and the port city of Haifa before dawn on Monday, part of a wave of attacks by Tehran in retaliation for Israel's strikes on Friday. The dangers of further escalation loomed over a summit of G7 leaders in Canada, as wars in Ukraine and the Middle East add to global economic uncertainty. But there was no sign of panic among investors as currency markets stayed calm and Wall Street stock futures firmed after an early dip. 'Investors will be watching developments in the Middle East very closely, especially the risk of other countries being dragged into the conflict,' said Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank. Gold is considered a safe-haven asset during times of geopolitical and economic uncertainty. It also tends to thrive in a low-interest rate environment. The Fed's interest rate decision on Wednesday followed by Fed Chair Jerome Powell's comments will be eagerly watched.
Business Recorder
7 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Budget 2025–2026: A hope for progress or a storm of inflation?
In Pakistan, the annual budget is seen as an opportunity for the government to express its economic priorities and development strategies. The current government has presented the fiscal year 2025–2026 budget at a critical juncture when the country is facing an economic crisis, rising debt, inflation, and a water emergency. This budget will not only impact the daily lives of the people but also determine the future direction of Pakistan. In this column, we compare the current budget with the previous two budgets (2023–2024 and 2024–2025), while also analyzing its potential effects on various social and economic classes. Comparative Analysis of Budgets 2023–2024, 2024–2025, and 2025–2026: In the 2023–2024 budget, the total size was PKR 14.5 trillion, with a revenue target of PKR 9.2 trillion. This increased to PKR 16 trillion in 2024–2025, with a revenue target of PKR 10.2 trillion. The 2025–2026 budget now stands at PKR 18.5 trillion, with a tax collection target of PKR 12 trillion. The fiscal deficit was 7.6 percent of GDP in 2023–2024, reduced to 6.9 percent in 2024–2025, but is expected to rise again to 7.2 percent in 2025–2026, which is an alarming indicator. The current account deficit stood at $2.8 billion in 2023–2024, which improved to USD 1.9 billion in 2024–2025. However, due to an expected increase in imports and a decline in exports, it is projected to reach USD 3.1 billion again in 2025–2026. Impacts on Different Social Classes: Lower-income Class: This year, PKR 400 billion has been allocated for the Ehsaas Program, up from PKR 360 billion last year. However, subsidies have been cut by 18 percent. The increase in electricity and gas prices will hit this class the hardest. Middle Class: New income tax slabs have been introduced for salaried individuals, increasing the burden on those earning over PKR 80,000 per month. There is no significant relief in educational expenses. Upper Class: Tax has been increased on purchase of luxury items, large houses, and expensive cars. However, no significant increase has been made in capital gains tax, keeping the investor class largely unaffected. New taxes and their impact: Federal Excise Duty (FED) increased on cigarettes, sugar, and soft drinks. A 2 percent rise in income tax on annual incomes above PKR 1.5 million. The 35 percent withholding tax on non-filers. A fixed tax scheme introduced for small traders. These tax measures will indirectly burden the poor and middle class, while the lack of expansion in direct taxation limits the pressure on the elite class. Trade deficit: The government expects the trade deficit to reach $28 billion in 2025–2026, higher than $25 billion in 2024–2025. The deficit is widening due to limited export growth and rising imports. Increased taxation instead of relief on industrial raw materials may worsen the situation. IMF pressure: Under the $3 billion IMF program, several tough measures have been adopted in the current budget, including: Cuts in energy subsidies, Increase in electricity tariffs, Implementation of an automated revenue collection system. Around 80% of the budget decisions align with IMF recommendations, drawing criticism that such moves could harm local industries and public welfare projects. Poverty and unemployment: The proportion of people living below the poverty line is expected to rise to 39 percent this fiscal year, up from 36 percent in 2024. Decreased job opportunities, additional burden on SMEs, and rising inflation may increase unemployment. Fuel, electricity, and water bills: A PKR 20 per liter increase in petroleum levy is expected after the budget. A 15 percent increase in electricity base tariffs has been proposed. PKR 85 billion has been allocated to tackle the water emergency, including the construction of dams, rainwater storage, and water recycling projects. Development vs. non-development expenditures: Development Budget: PKR 1.4 trillion (PKR 1.15 trillion in 2024–2025). Non-Development expenditures: PKR 6.5 trillion. 60 percent of the development budget is allocated at the federal level, while 40% is for the provinces. However, weak monitoring mechanisms limit its impact at the grassroots level. Foreign investment: The government has attempted to attract foreign investment through special economic zones and relaxed digital taxes. However, political instability and judicial uncertainty remain major hurdles for investors. Other key aspects of the budget: PKR 60 billion allocated for combating climate change. Extension of tax exemptions for the IT sector andPKR 50 billion allocated for youth skills development programs. Conclusion and recommendations: While the budget sets a direction for the economy, it reveals several gaps when matched against ground realities: Limited expansion of direct taxes leaves the wealthy class largely unaffected. The poor and middle class are likely to face more hardships. Greater transparency and monitoring are essential for effective development spending. The government must expand the tax net, curb corruption, and promote local industry and agriculture to build a sustainable economy. Restoring public trust will require not a superficial but a transparent, fair, and balanced budget. (The writer can be contacted on [email protected]) Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
7 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Real Estate Policy: Suspiciously Strategic
It's not as if a boon for builders and developers was beyond the realm of possibility in Budget 2026. It was widely expected. The real estate lobby has been loud, well-organized, and persistent. Many however were caught off guard by what was ultimately announced, describing the budget as both contradictory and inadequate to truly revive the 'ailing' sector. To recap: buyers will now pay lower withholding taxes across different slabs, while sellers face increased capital gains taxes based on property value. The Federal Excise Duty (FED) has been abolished on all property transactions. Additionally, there's a tax credit for the construction of houses up to 10 marlas and apartments up to 2,000 sq ft. Meanwhile, non-filers will be barred from purchasing property and vehicles altogether. There appears to be a clear rationale behind this policy design and it piques the interest of those that read between the lines. To an untrained eye, it may seem contradictory to reduce one tax and increase another but this is sophisticated policymaking which is suspicious in and of itself. The lowering withholding tax on buyers and increasing capital gains tax on sellers shifts the tax burden from transactions to wealth accumulation. Capital gains tax is progressive — it taxes the actual profit made by sellers, proportionate to their earnings. In contrast, withholding tax is regressive, hitting all buyers equally regardless of whether they benefit financially. Reducing WHT lowers transaction costs for genuine, long-term buyers. Raising CGT, meanwhile, deters speculative activity, discouraging short-term flipping and artificial price inflation. The introduction of a tax credit for constructing smallers homes and apartments could further spur real, demand-driven activity, potentially broadening the tax base. Abolishing the FED is also a sensible step, an indirect tax on property transactions that, paradoxically, disincentivized formal activity. All of this is tied together with the restriction on non-filers from participating in real estate, reinforcing the shift toward documentation in the sector. The fact is, builders and developers do not fear higher taxes as much as they care about what comes with it— the restriction on non-filers. In a sector heavily dependent on undocumented capital, this move threatens to shrink the buyer pool dramatically. If enforced, it could trigger grey capital flight, and paralyze volumes. But it may also prove tobe a turning point: by excluding non-filers, speculative investments could dry up, allowing genuine real estate activity to begin gaining ground. The combination of tax credits (though details on their scope are limited) along with lower transaction costs for genuine buyers and restrictions on non-filers, could stimulate documented activity in the formal real estate sector and gradually expand the tax base. But for this to happen, the government must stand its ground. The real estate lobby is already at the Prime Minister's door, pushing for a rollback. If the PM is truly committed to documenting the economy, now is the moment to prove it—capital flight threats be damned.
