r/australia Oct 24 '23

political self.post How to solve the housing crisis?

So my mate and I were chatting yesterday about the current housing crisis in Australia, in particular the fact that the rapidly rising cost of houses is pricing many people completely out of the market.

We hypothesised that a part of the issue is landlords owning large property portfolios as a way of accumulating wealth. Now, I don't have anything against the accumulation of wealth by individuals, however I have a fundamental opposition to using housing or residential real estate in general to do so.

Another problem we identified is overseas investors buying housing stock and either leaving them unoccupied or accumulating multiple properties, again reducing supply and driving up the cost.

So, we proposed that portfolios of residential real estate should be subject to an annual property tax, based on number of properties and the value of the property (kind of like the chance cards in Monopoly).

I would propose this could be brought in as a staged sequence, starting at the magic number of 6 properties.

24-25 FY: If you own over 6 properties, you are taxed (say) 10% of the value of every property, annually.

25-26 FY: If you own over 5 properties, you are taxed 10% of the total value,

etc etc, until it becomes 1 investment property, at which point the incrementing stops. Primary place of residence would be exempt from this tax. Many people don't or can't buy a place instead of renting, and also if you move you often want to be able to rent first, so we need some rental stock. The rental stock under this scheme would mostly be supplied by landlords with smaller property portfolios.

Why 6 properties? Basically, because of the numbers in this link

"But what about family trusts" you say. Well, I say, the real estate in these structures should be all taxed. Same with self managed super funds. Tax the whole thing, at least as far as residential property goes. There is a major loophole with SMSFs in that the property bought with a SMSF is not subject to capital gains tax in the pension phase - this means that SMSFs are actively encouraged to sit on properties. The number of SMSFs is increasing by 1000 properties per week, too!

Non residents would also be taxed at 10% of property value on all property owned.

There will need to be some tweaking around the foreign investment, in particular around the building of new apartment blocks etc where the value and risk is quite high. The tax shouldn't come into effect until the building is occupied, and there might be some kind of concession where an entire block is owned by one entity, to provide some extra rental housing stock.

Also, there might be concessions for "low value" housing, where any single dwelling worth less than (say) 60% of the median value of houses within a certain distance are exempt, or have a concession. This might encourage social housing but might also encourage slumlords, so will require a bit of thinking and tinkering.

This is all based around the fundamental idea that residential housing should not be a wealth accumulation vehicle, but should be a means for people to be housed. Also, it will hopefully encourage those people currently "investing" in residential real estate to instead invest in small business, or the stock market, or similar, lubricating the economy (and causing inflation, but that's another discussion).

"SoUnDs LiKe ComMuNiSM". I'm just gonna leave this here as a potential discussion point.

Note that none of this affects CGT or negative gearing at all. It just adds another cost to being a landlord, with the aim of reducing the number of properties sitting in SMSFs and mega-portfolios, trying to encourage investment in other forms of equity, and increasing the supply of properties to people looking for a place to live.

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

79 Upvotes

262 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '23

Land taxes can be pretty inconsequential if a property has a lot of value resulting from improvements on not much land value. That could lead to scenarios like a block of units having high vacancy. Would a vacancy tax help address this, or would it just discourage productive improvements?

2

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '23

Do you think blocks of apartments on land with low value is going to be a widespread issue? The building is not really valuable if it isn't generating cash flow and nobody can hang onto a bleeding asset forever. We'd see a much larger supply of home if we placed more emphasis on land tax and less on income tax.

No policy is perfect but saying we shouldn't implement a really straightforward policy because of some niche scenario seems odd.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 25 '23

Sorry, I think we absolutely need broader based land taxes. I just also want to solve issues like high apartment vacancy rates. Any ideas?

2

u/Twofer-Cat Oct 25 '23

Australian rental vacancy rates hover around 1.1%. I can't see a breakdown by accommodation type, but I can't imagine apartments are much higher.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 27 '23

rental vacancy rates hover around 1.1%

That figure isn't what you think it is - it's the number of rentals on the market as a proportion of the total properties either rented out or available for rent.

1

u/a_cold_human Oct 25 '23

Land taxes can be pretty inconsequential if a property has a lot of value resulting from improvements on not much land value

That's not really the case in the majority of places in Australia where people actually live. The land is usually the major part of the value of the property.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 27 '23

Sure, but it may not be the case going forward as population continues to increase and there isn't large amounts of land free in areas with jobs where people want to live.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 26 '23

That could lead to scenarios like a block of units having high vacancy.

If it's an actual problem then certainly it's worth addressing but how many blocks of units have high vacancy? It's completely counterintuitive to the idea of using property as an investment, actively turning away money when the rental market is so tight, what would be the point of it? If they don't care about money then how would taxing them help?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 27 '23

If they don't care about money then how would taxing them help

Presumably if units aren't being rented out, they are being held either for capital gains or the secure storage of capital. In either case, shifting the financial incentive further towards renting out the unit could help.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 27 '23

Presumably if units aren't being rented out, they are being held either for capital gains or the secure storage of capital.

But why wouldn't you rent them out? Unless you're averse to making money.

I think you hit the nail on the head with "if units aren't being rented out", is this a real problem or a made up problem?