logo
It's hard not to hate investors when the property game we play is unfair

It's hard not to hate investors when the property game we play is unfair

It's also easier to think things are totally fine when the people we're surrounded by aren't outraged by it. The more time I spend at inspections, the more desensitised I've become to the way we see housing: as a wealth-building machine.
Loading
But we need to catch ourselves out on this type of thinking.
Low home ownership is not always a bad thing. But it's terrible when the only other option – renting – leaves many in financial stress and struggling to save for a deposit: the very thing they need to buy their way out.
In Australia, about one-third of the population rents and one in three of these renters are spending more than 30 per cent of their income on housing, meaning they are considered to be in financial stress.
The problem with keeping people renting for life by necessity is that it keeps many of them trapped in a tough position for the rest of their lives.
Retirees who rent in the private market are much more likely to live in poverty than retirees who own their own house. Two-thirds of retired renters live in poverty, compared with one-quarter of those with a mortgage and one in 10 who own their home outright.
And the rate of home ownership has continued to drop over the decades. More than half of Australians born between 1947 and 1951 owned a home between the ages of 25 and 29, compared with one in three people born between 1992 and 1996.
The big focus on lifting our supply of houses is fantastic: both the government's ambition to build 1.2 million new homes by the end of the decade and the push to reduce the red tape – from zoning laws to slow approvals processes – standing in the way of private businesses and developers.
But as ANZ chief economist Richard Yetsenga points out, the evidence suggests changing things on the supply side alone won't be enough.
Loading
As of March this year, the government had completed only about 350 homes through its $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, with 5465 under construction. Building houses has never been something we can do overnight. But the process has become slower over time.
Yetsenga also points out Australia has 11 million dwellings and a population of 26 million. With these numbers, there should be far fewer people facing homelessness or being priced out of the property market.
'The challenge seems to be more about misallocation than a genuine shortage,' he says. 'Some choices, while individually reasonable, might be turning housing into a luxury for others.'
One thing we need to examine is the capital gains tax discount, which halves the rate at which investors are taxed when they sell a property and make a profit as long as they have held the property for at least 12 months.
That's a generous discount that gives investors more reason to snap up properties. That's not necessarily a bad thing, except when considering the fact investors are often competing against first home buyers, and we're facing a supply shortage.
We may not need to abolish the tax discount completely. In fact, it's probably a good idea to keep it for investors who are building new homes rather than buying up existing ones. And the additional discount for people using their investment properties to provide affordable housing is a good thing.
But reducing the capital gains tax discount for existing properties being rented out at standard (and often seemingly excessive) rates might give first home buyers a better chance at getting their feet in the market.
Because here's the thing: as long as most of the population are home owners, and the majority of their wealth is tied up in the value of their house, the overwhelming interest will always be to see property prices continue to rise, even if incomes fail to keep up.
In the 1990s, the average home in Australia was worth about 9.5 times the average household income per person. By 2023, they were fetching 16.4 times the average household income per person.
With supply only softly creeping up, it's simply unrealistic to assume house price growth will slow significantly.
I've been fortunate to have lived rent-free, until the age of 21, and to have received a little bit of help from my grandparents to boost my deposit.
But it shouldn't take luck – having the right parents (and grandparents) – to buy a house.
If we're going to treat homes as investments, it needs to be just as possible for a kid growing up in a broken household with no family help to escape the rental market and start building their wealth as it is for anyone else.
Loading
There's also a strong case for abolishing stamp duty – a levy collected by state and territory governments on the purchase of homes – and moving to a land tax paid annually on the value of the land a property sits on. Why? Because stamp duty discourages people from moving, including empty-nesters who could downsize, to homes that better fit their needs.
While we should welcome investment into new homes, we don't need to give more reason for investors (who are not providing affordable housing) to compete with first home buyers.
I'm still on the hunt for a home after one property I inspected with a price guide of $460,000 sold to an investor for $530,000.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

We are running the race to retirement riches backward
We are running the race to retirement riches backward

Sydney Morning Herald

time2 hours ago

  • Sydney Morning Herald

We are running the race to retirement riches backward

We've been sold a dream that kicks in at 60, 65 or 67. First by governments promising age pensions back in the early 1900s, and now by the superannuation industry selling glossy visions of leisure and freedom. And the planning for it? That usually happens just before people stop working – often too late to reshape anything meaningful. But for a growing number of Australians, it's not retirement itself that shapes their future. It's the decade or so before it. That's the window where you still have time to make strategic decisions – about money, work, lifestyle, and how you want the next 30 years to feel. The problem is that the word retirement still sounds like the end. It feels old. And for many people in their 50s, thinking too far ahead feels uncomfortable. They put off planning, or assume their super will take care of itself, or just hope things will work out. But by the time they're ready to engage, they're often left asking, 'why didn't I know this sooner?' The truth is, the best retirements don't start at 65 or 67. They start in your 50s, with practical decisions that give you more flexibility and less pressure – now and later. That might mean getting serious about salary sacrificing or topping up your super while you're still earning well and getting it into the position where, if it compounds at a long-term return rate of 7 to 10 per cent over 15 years ahead, before you retire, that it will be 'enough'. And you can even forecast that in your late 40s or 50s. It could mean getting the mortgage under control as early as you can once the kids are (finally) off your hands. Or thinking differently about your home versus investment mix, and perhaps choosing to downsize and shift money into superannuation once the downsizing window, which so many people are unaware of, opens at the age of 55. That's when the government allows you to put in up to $300,000 per person from the sale of your principal residence if you've owned it for 10 years or more.

We are running the race to retirement riches backward
We are running the race to retirement riches backward

The Age

time2 hours ago

  • The Age

We are running the race to retirement riches backward

We've been sold a dream that kicks in at 60, 65 or 67. First by governments promising age pensions back in the early 1900s, and now by the superannuation industry selling glossy visions of leisure and freedom. And the planning for it? That usually happens just before people stop working – often too late to reshape anything meaningful. But for a growing number of Australians, it's not retirement itself that shapes their future. It's the decade or so before it. That's the window where you still have time to make strategic decisions – about money, work, lifestyle, and how you want the next 30 years to feel. The problem is that the word retirement still sounds like the end. It feels old. And for many people in their 50s, thinking too far ahead feels uncomfortable. They put off planning, or assume their super will take care of itself, or just hope things will work out. But by the time they're ready to engage, they're often left asking, 'why didn't I know this sooner?' The truth is, the best retirements don't start at 65 or 67. They start in your 50s, with practical decisions that give you more flexibility and less pressure – now and later. That might mean getting serious about salary sacrificing or topping up your super while you're still earning well and getting it into the position where, if it compounds at a long-term return rate of 7 to 10 per cent over 15 years ahead, before you retire, that it will be 'enough'. And you can even forecast that in your late 40s or 50s. It could mean getting the mortgage under control as early as you can once the kids are (finally) off your hands. Or thinking differently about your home versus investment mix, and perhaps choosing to downsize and shift money into superannuation once the downsizing window, which so many people are unaware of, opens at the age of 55. That's when the government allows you to put in up to $300,000 per person from the sale of your principal residence if you've owned it for 10 years or more.

‘Remarkable': Espionage report emphasises the ‘naïve' way Australians think
‘Remarkable': Espionage report emphasises the ‘naïve' way Australians think

Sky News AU

time3 hours ago

  • Sky News AU

‘Remarkable': Espionage report emphasises the ‘naïve' way Australians think

Strategic Analysis Australia Director Peter Jennings says it's remarkable how 'naïve' Australians are to imagine that their information or businesses wouldn't be the target of espionage. 'If you search for this type of information, you'll see that it's happening all the way around the world,' Mr Jennings told Sky News host Steve Price. 'China is a very, very large part of that, but not alone. 'I think it's just remarkable … how naïve Australians are to imagine that it couldn't possibly happen here.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store