As expected tonight's budget went part way towards removing an obvious disadvantage to younger Australians trying to enter the home ownership market. The abolition of negative gearing for new property investors and replacing the 50% capital gains tax discount with an inflation-linked approach will level the playing field to a certain degree. Without such tax breaks there will be a disincentive to use property as an income stream by the highest income earners over younger poorer folk looking to buy. This can only be a good thing.

Hi Fester,

Just as a side in the 2022/23 tax year;

91 Australians who earned more than $1 million in total income paid no tax, according to data from the Australian Taxation Office. The data shows overall, these 91 millionaires claimed $390 million worth of different deductions to reduce their tax bills to zero. The majority of these zero tax payers live in the affluent suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne. It gives the lie to your claim of "eating the rich". Don't worry the rich do very well for themselves in Australia, they don't need all that extra help they afford themselves through their very generous governments for most of the past 125 years.

Hi Fester,

"When you target the wealth of part of a nation to help another part of a nation, that is by definition "eating the rich"

In 1999 the Howard/Costello government did exactly the opposite, they changed negative gearing, capital gains and trust arrangements to favour wealthy investors. I assume it was done in an attempt to stimulate the housing rental market, which was a problem even then. That arrangement existed for 27 years until yesterday. The changes didn't work, rents increased exponentially as house prices did likewise.

I assume as a conservative you support largesse for the rich. Unless you have hundreds of investment properties or own a large corporation, you believe in the discredited "trickle down economic effect", that tax breaks, deregulation, and financial benefits for corporations and the wealthy will stimulate investment, create jobs, and eventually boost the economy for everyone. At best it partially works, with a few crumbs falling off the table going to you, at worse its a "let them eat cake" scenario.

Hi Paul,

Robert Mugabe would be proud of you. "See all those wealthy white farmers? They are the reason you are poor.". Now that all the farmers have fled or been murdered, Zimbabwe is destitute. Congratulations for another triumph of the politics of envy.

My reason for opposing IE is the absence of supporting models and real world examples. Note that there was modelling of negative gearing proposal that indicated no benefit.

If you want to care for people then follow the example of successful nations. Blaming the plight of the disadvantaged on wealthy citizens does not help anyone.

Hi Fester,

You do yourself no service in trying to link me and intergeneratinal equity to Robert Mugabe, white farmers and Zimbabwe, irrelevant nonsense. What is it with you and Africa, are you a displaced white from there?

For 27 years Australia tried the Howard/Costello model, it didn't work. You will go on about Australian values, and equality of opportunity, then given this you want to favour the rich. Hypocrisy at it worse.

Give you a simple example, a doctor with an income of $500,000/year from his practice. Having a large income he has been able to invest, through bank loans, in 6 rental properties. The rent from the properties does not cover the full mortgage cost, so the "loss" he writes off against his practice income, thus reducing his tax burden. Over time his properties one by one are paid off by rental income, sells a property with a substantial capital gain, to invest in another property, but tax is only levelled against 50% of that capital gain. YOU expect young people seeking their own home to compete with that. BTW, add in a Family Trust and the doctor will pay zero tax.

"Note that there was modelling of negative gearing proposal that indicated no benefit." Treasury modelling indicates these changes will allow 75,000 first home buyers into the market. Where is your "no benefit modelling from?

Fester,

The comparison with Mugabe and Albanese is a good one insofar as their ultra Left politics goes.

Now that Mugabe has gone, as Albanese surely must also do at the next election, I gather from a piece I read a couple of days ago that the Zimbabwe government is now recompensing foreigners and white Zimbabweans for the farms that were stolen from them and handed over to people who didn't have a clue what to do with them.

Zimbabwe seems to be a bit better after Mugabe's demise.

Here's hoping Australia will get better after Albanese's demise. It certainly could not get any worse.

Hi Paul,

Your choice to hop on the bus and the people you share the ride with are not my doing. Hey, but let's look at what Magoo is up to. Basically it's another tax grab. So fifty b on the disabled, fifty b on indigenous people, twenty b plus goodness knows what on koala clubbing grifters, and now a big tax slug. And that is not all the wastage by a long way.How does this make Australia and Australians prosperous?

Do you see why Australians might benefit from getting ideas from prosperous nations?