Here’s why negative gearing changes won’t drive all investors from the housing market

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has warned that Labor’s negative gearing policy would deliver “massive shocks” to the residential housing market and drive all  Changes to negative gearing and the capital gains tax discountinvestors away.

Does that claim stack up?

Danielle Wood, Grattan Institute and John Daley, Grattan Institute take a look….

After Labor announced proposed changes to negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull told parliament that the policy would

administer two contradictory shocks, massive shocks, to the residential housing market. They are proposing to remove from the market for established dwellings one-third of demand. All investors would be gone.

When I say all investors, I mean all investors.

That assertion was questioned by some listeners at the time, including The Guardian’s Katharine Murphy.

Does the prime minister’s claim stack up?

Not all property investors negatively gear

Data is not directly available on what proportion of home purchases are made by investors.

Data on new home lending from The Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Lending Finance figures indicates that between one-third and half of new lending is to investors.

And ABS census data shows that just under a third of existing properties are owned by investors.

But not all of them negatively gear.

Some do not borrow, and others do not borrow enough to be negatively geared: that is, their rental income is greater than the expenses and loan interest.

The tax stats show us that about two-thirds of all housing investors are negatively geared.

This suggests that around 20% of housing buyers are negatively geared investors.

Investor demand for housing will reduce – but not disappear

Labor’s proposed changes will reduce the after-tax returns on property investment.

Although negative gearing has attracted more attention, Labor’s proposed changes to capital gains tax will have a bigger impact on returns.

Reducing the discount from 50% to 25% will increase the effective tax rates on capital gains, bringing the tax rates closer to those that apply to other sources of investment income such as rental income and bank interest.

Labor’s proposed changes to negative gearing will also have an impact.

Under the policy, investors who make rental losses – because their rental income is less than their costs, including loan interest costs – will no longer be able to write-off those losses against wage and salary income.

But for people investing in new housing there will be no change: they will still able to write-off losses against all forms of individual income.

For most investors in existing properties, the changes to negative gearing mainly affect the timing, not the amount, of tax deductions.

Losses can still be deducted against investment income, including subsequent capital gains.

But negative gearing may lose some of its psychological appeal.

While there is no hard research for Australia, some investment advisors have warned against placing too much emphasis on tax breaks (particularly tax breaks on wages) and not enough on the financial returns to the investment.

Together these policies will reduce investor demand for housing. Indeed, one of Labor’s stated aims of the policy is to make it easier for first home buyers to get into the market.

Some investors will switch to other investment opportunities that offer higher post-tax returns.

Others might choose to spend more and invest less.

But some will also continue to invest in the housing market, and either borrow less, or simply accept a lower return on investment.

The extent to which investors will vacate the property market will ultimately depend on how much post-tax returns fall, and how sensitive is investor demand for property to changes in returns (what economists would call the “elasticity of demand”).

Our estimates suggest that the changes in effective tax rates from Labor’s policy are relatively modest. Others might choose to spend more and invest less

Consider an investor in the top tax bracket, paying 45 cents in the dollar on their marginal income and earning a 6% nominal return on their property (half from rental income, half from capital gain).

Let’s say the investor buys a property and then sells it after seven years.

Effective tax rates calculate how much tax is paid on the profit made by the taxpayer.

If the investor buys the property outright, the effective tax rate will increase from 33% to 35% under Labor’s policy.

If the same investor borrows 40% of the house value then effective tax rates increase from 19% to 22%.

And for a negatively geared investor borrowing 80% of the property value, the effective tax rate changes from 5% to 9%.

Effective tax rates

Author provided

And any changes in post-tax returns under Labor’s policies may be swamped by annual fluctuations in property prices.

As the Commonwealth Bank of Australia Chief Executive Ian Narev recently noted:

I can tell you having a $400 billion home loan book – your assumptions on unemployment and what’s happening in global interest rates will dwarf whatever assumptions you’ve got on the modelling about the impact of negative gearing by a factor of… I can’t tell you the number but it’s a big number.

A massive shock?

Under Labor’s policy, other passive investments that generate capital gains, such as shares, will also be subject to a more stringent tax treatment.

Other investments that will be relatively more attractive after the change – for example, superannuation and bank deposits – have a very different profile of risk, return and liquidity.

No-one can ever perfectly predict investor behaviour. A massive shock

Ultimately, there are a whole host of factors that people take into account when investing in property, including rental returns (particularly for the one third of positively geared investors), risk perception, familiarity with the asset class and ability to obtain bank finance.

In our opinion, modest changes in tax treatment are unlikely to change the decision-making calculus for the majority of investors.

Indeed, looking at other countries with less generous tax treatment for investment properties – US, Canada, Germany and France, for example – there is still plenty of investor activity in housing.

Given the evidence we have seen, it is overreach for the prime minister to say that Labor’s policy will drive away all investors away.

Danielle Wood, Fellow, Australian Perspectives, Grattan Institute and John Daley, Chief Executive Officer , Grattan Institute This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.


Subscribe & don’t miss a single episode of Michael Yardney’s podcast

Hear Michael & a select panel of guest experts discuss property investment, success & money related topics. Subscribe now, whether you're on an Apple or Android handset.

Need help listening to Michael Yardney’s podcast from your phone or tablet?

We have created easy to follow instructions for you whether you're on iPhone / iPad or an Android device.


Prefer to subscribe via email?

Join Michael Yardney's inner circle of daily subscribers and get into the head of Australia's best property investment advisor and a wide team of leading property researchers and commentators.

Michael Yardney


Michael is a director of Metropole Property Strategists who help their clients grow, protect and pass on their wealth through independent, unbiased property advice and advocacy. He's once again been voted Australia's leading property investment adviser and one of Australia's 50 most influential Thought Leaders. His opinions are regularly featured in the media. Visit

'Here’s why negative gearing changes won’t drive all investors from the housing market' have 6 comments


    April 6, 2016 Eric

    I’m wondering if the recent poll was influenced by Labor’s decision to change the negative gearing. What’s your thoughts about changes in capital gains tax? Is that part of Labor ‘s proposal as well? I also recently heard about the idea of removing the stamp duty in exchange for land tax.


      Michael Yardney

      April 6, 2016 Michael Yardney

      Eric – lots of speculation – not worth concerning yourself too much about it – if Labour doesn’t get in



    March 10, 2016 Jeff

    I just love the way that facts can be distorted by mathematics
    Two thirds of investors are negatively geared
    Isn’t that 66.66% of investors ?
    True investors are in for the long haul and really make their money through accumulation and compounding
    They will be seriously affected by negative gearing changes in the long term
    Traders are in for the quick dollar and will be seriously affected by changes to capital gains tax
    Either way I think the changes are designed to affect everyone choosing to create wealth using property as the vehicle
    I think that is 100% the way I see things – not 20%


      Michael Yardney

      March 10, 2016 Michael Yardney

      You’re right all investors will be affected, but those who stay in the game, as I did in 1987 when it was last removed) will still beenfit



      March 10, 2016 James

      Hi Jeff
      I see it the same way, I have stopped all of my investment growth at present until after the election & the senses.
      We will see who get elected & we will see their strategy – a new term of government on either side, they can hit the small investor in the first couple of years of their term & change it back in the second half of their term for the next election.
      We need to remember the days when they removed negative gearing back in the Keating days to see what happens in reality.
      There are some things that I am concerned about with some of the banking system as well.
      Any thoughts on investment banks.?
      Have a Great Day


Would you like to share your thoughts?

Your email address will not be published.


Copyright © Michael Yardney’s Property Investment Update Important Information
Content Marketing by GridConcepts