Some people should face the fact that they will never own a property and there is nothing wrong with that.
Government incentives like the first home owners grant and reduced taxes to have more people in homes is a bad policy.
Government’s talk about making housing more affordable but all they do is make the ‘entry point’ more affordable.
First time buyers are encouraged to enter the market because of these generous government incentives only to find out the commitment that comes with home ownership is long term and situations change.
More should be done to assist with the overall cost of land development, housing construction and increasing supply. These initiatives will do more for entry and ongoing affordability.
I was horrified to hear that the Queensland Treasurer Andrew Fraser has on his agenda, the abolition of stamp duty on property or as it is now known – transfer duty.
On the surface a good idea but it will do nothing to lower house prices because transfer duty is seen as a cost of entering the market and does not impact the ‘value’ of property according to Michael Matusik
Have you ever seen a government actually take away a tax? It is very much a case of giving with one hand and taking with another.
The Treasurer is saying that transfer duty is “an ineffective relic”.. If it is outdated – get rid of it but what will replace it?
I don’t believe in the tooth fairy either!
Kevin Turner | RealEstateTalk Host
Property Academy CEO Selling your home without an agent
[email protected] | Twitter: @RealestatetalkI find it interesting that you don't like the idea of removing a tax. I think you're probably right that they'll just increase tax somewhere else but perhaps they'll defer some spending till the tax take catches up in a couple of years.
In any case whether it lowers house prices or not I think is a secondary issue. For me the less the tentacles of government intrude into the different areas of life the better things are for the life and liberty of it's citizens. If government wants to reduce it's presence in the housing sector then that's a good thing. Getting government to cut its ties with other areas of private life would be better still.
itsandrew
Go as far as you can see and you will see further.
itsandrew wrote:I find it interesting that you don't like the idea of removing a tax. I think you're probably right that they'll just increase tax somewhere else but perhaps they'll defer some spending till the tax take catches up in a couple of years.In any case whether it lowers house prices or not I think is a secondary issue. For me the less the tentacles of government intrude into the different areas of life the better things are for the life and liberty of it's citizens. If government wants to reduce it's presence in the housing sector then that's a good thing. Getting government to cut its ties with other areas of private life would be better still.
Totally agree.
Gobermint’s constant tinkering with the market has done nothing to aid affordability, quite the contrary.
I ran a removal business in Sydney several years ago and moved many a young client who actually had zero savings. The FHOG and a few bucks from the folks 110% leverage and you were in. Only to find within a few years that they’d bought at the top of the market on historically low interest rates. Adding to the pain was the increased commute costs and time lost moving out west to get that McMansion.
Many have ended in tears that’s for sure.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
