Turnbull should help the states switch stamp duty for land tax

It makes sense for the federal government to grease the wheels of federal-state tax reform, writes….

Rachel Ong, Curtin University and Gavin Wood, RMIT University

Before the government considers company or personal income tax cuts, it should help the states replace property stamp duties with a broad based land tax argues the Australian Council of Social Service27238870_l

It is well recognised by tax experts that land taxes are a more efficient tax than stamp duty.

Indeed Treasury modelling released earlier this month confirmed what theory has long proposed – that stamp duties are a drag on the economy, raising the price of housing and adding to the upfront costs that home buyers pay to break into the home ownership market.

Stamp duty also deters moving between homes.

This can be damaging to housing and labour market efficiency, especially when people are less likely to take up jobs in new areas and “empty nesters” are discouraged from downsizing into smaller properties.

Overall, housing stocks are underutilised when residential mobility is hampered, and unemployment higher than would otherwise be the case.

Australian land taxes currently exempt home owners.

The failure to apply this tax on a uniform basis penalises those land uses captured in the tax base, such as rental housing, industrial, retail and office property.

Applying land taxes on a broad base eliminates these distortions by putting all land uses on a level playing field.

Productivity gains can be expected as land uses previously penalised, but more competitively placed, displace lower value uses.property investment Land tax

We can also expect “land hoarding” to be discouraged as those developers with limited scope to borrow and few liquid assets, accelerate development plans in order to avoid further land tax liabilities.

Land tax is also one of the more efficient tax instruments due to its effective incidence on land owners.

Land can only be reclaimed at generally prohibitively high cost, and cannot be transported for relocation in a lower tax jurisdiction.

This means its supply is fixed and the broad based tax cannot be avoided by changing land use or tax jurisdiction.

The tax burden is shifted back into lower land values that ease inflationary pressures in property markets.

In 2012 we modelled the impact of a broad-based land tax schedule to replace the revenue lost on removing stamp duties in Victoria.

We showed that land values could fall by as much as 6% on average.

These falls would be larger in the more expensive land value segments where market pressures are strongest – the CBD and inner suburban ring.

The additional revenue generated by a uniform land tax could be used to replace that lost on removing stamp duties.

For example, our simulations indicated that back in 2006 Melbourne’s residential property market generated A$1.29 billion in stamp duty revenue (at 2006 prices).

These revenues could be replaced by a land tax schedule that exempted land plots with per m2 values less than A$286.54.

Above that land tax would apply across six bands at rates ranging from from 0.92% to 1.37% in the highest band.

While the average stamp duty on a residential transaction was A$18,860, the average land tax burden would be much lower at A$1,458.

There is also a macroeconomic rationale for these reforms.

Most owner-occupied housing is bought with the assistance of a mortgage. piggy bank save mortgage house property gold loan deposit

Stamp duties increase the amounts that must be borrowed.

This is especially important for hard pressed first home buyers.

Stamp duties have therefore played their part in pushing up mortgage debt to home value ratios.

Since the early 1990s these ratios have steadily increased across all age groups, exposing owner occupiers to raised levels of investment risk.

Land taxes would help to restore stability into housing markets by easing inflationary pressures and thereby curbing indebtedness.

The suggested reforms would promote both efficiency and fairness in the housing market.

The politics of reform

In all areas of reform there are “losers” alongside the “winners”.

Existing home owners who have already paid stamp duties would be hit with a “double whammy” if they were subsequently required to pay land tax as well.

However, a set of transitional arrangements could be implemented to smooth the path towards reform.

Under our suggested transition model, current home owners who have already paid stamp duty would continue to be exempt from land tax.questionmark house

When they next purchased property, their transaction would no longer attract a stamp duty, but the property would become liable for land tax.

Stamp duties are a major source of revenue for state and territory governments.

A gradual transition such as the one proposed in this article would result in an interim shortfall in their tax revenue.

It would seem reasonable to expect that the federal government, in a federation where taxation powers and service provision are shared across different tiers, would assist in bridging such revenue shortfalls.

Federal government assistance would support a tax reform package that, unusually, offers both efficiency gains in the operation of housing and land markets, and equity gains by improving housing affordability for future generations.

In return it might also expect a more conciliatory attitude from state and territory governments when they are asked to cooperate with other reforms to federal-state financial arrangements.The Conversation

Rachel Ong, Deputy Director, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre, Curtin University and Gavin Wood, Professor of Housing, RMIT University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Want more of this type of information?


Michael is a director of Metropole Property Strategists who create wealth for their clients through independent, unbiased property advice and advocacy. He's been voted Australia's leading property investment adviser and his opinions are regularly featured in the media. Visit Metropole.com.au

'Turnbull should help the states switch stamp duty for land tax' have 2 comments

  1. April 26, 2016 @ 7:24 am Tony

    Replace Residential Land Tax with a Broad based Tax at $300 per home and all States will be collecting more than before. Do not remove Land tax from commercial property as it is Baked in the Cake due to leases and tenants paying the majority of it. It has become efficient due to this. Residential is inefficient as there is only a small % of Residential investors that this has affected and they cannot raise their rents to cover it as they would price themselves out of the market.
    Residential Land Tax in Tasmania represents 80% of the total take of $85 Mill.
    80% of residential land tax is paid by 30 Families.
    There are 250k homes in Tasmania.
    $250k x $300 = $75 Mill

    And this only represents 20% of the current $85mill take.



    • April 26, 2016 @ 7:30 am Michael Yardney

      Thanks for that Tony
      In fact not all commercial tenants pay land tax and if they do it’s on a “single holding” basis – in other words a lower percentage


Would you like to share your thoughts?

Your email address will not be published.



Michael's Daily Insights

Join Michael Yardney's inner circle of daily subscribers.

NOTE: this daily service is a different subscription to our weekly newsletter so...