With debate from both sides on Labor's negative gearing policy, my simple question is where is the new land going to come from.

I say this because a large portion of development land is provided by way of small acreage lots (2-5ac) being developed into housing lots.

Traditionally, these parcels of land are purchased and often rented during the DA and planning process with negative gearing easing the pain on the holding costs during this process. Abolishing NG on used homes will mean that developers will have to wear the shortfall costs durng that process, adding tens of thousands to the overall cost and more importantly, limiting their cash flow form year to year.

The end result will most likely be less lots overall, at higher prices.

You then have the likes of older homes on larger res lots, being removed, or several adjoining lots combined resulting in multiple dwellings many of which provided much needed affordable housing.

Of cause the removal of NG will also make this highly popular much needed development far less attractive and may even see it stopped all together. Then what!

I know I have touched on this in several threads but for some reason no one seems willing to debate this.

Perhaps even Mr Eastlake, being such an open opponent of negative gearing would like to contribute. Here's hoping!

I just knew this would happen, not one person is willing to debate this issue. I suspect its because they have no grounds to do so and simply come from a position of hate for anyone getting tax relief.

Surely some on this forum are renters, being provided their housing by someone who is negative gearing the very dwelling they reside in.

So take away that negative gearing, and all you have to choose from folks will be brand spankers, along with every other renter out there competing for the same thing.

Feel welcome to prove me wrong folks.

I have formally invited Mr Eastlake to contribute, so lets see if he accepts.

The land will come via corporations (so can carry losses forward) that have multiple projects and good cash-flow.

Whether this will sustain the new land requirement remains to be seen if Labor forms gov't. The May budget is where the election will be won, and I just can't see the LNP screwing it up. What it does in the budgets after that will be more interesting.

yes Luc, but corporations often cant be bothered with ten/twenty lot developments, a large contributor to urban sprawl.

If the climate change folks are right there might be some new land coming up in Antarctica in the next few months.
Hopefully the 50m increase in sea levels doesn't submerge it or we might all drown.