We don’t inflation-proof any other parts of the tax system, so why should we give special treatment to capital gains?
Articles on Capital gains tax concession
Displaying all articles
The new proposal to phase out tax breaks on more than one investment property would affect around 1% of Australians.
Limiting or scrapping negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount would help take the heat out of the market and give the government much more money to invest in social housing.
Housing policy is a stark point of difference at this election. While the government took promising steps to set up social housing finance, it has yet to give any sign it will finish what it started.
Who is entitled to the increase in value created by planning approvals, new infrastructure, population growth or urban development? For John Stuart Mill, the answer would have been the community.
Housing experts writing for The Conversation largely agree on the government policies that are causing negative distortions in the market and the wider economy. And supply is not the key concern.
Scott Morrison will renew his warnings against tampering with negative gearing, in a speech on Monday.
The Economics Society of Australia (ESA) Monash Forum polled economists on whether capital gains tax deductions for housing investment should be removed.
The government has yet to address a major incentive to put assets into super and hold them until the retirement phase.
Federal treasurer Scott Morrison’s diagnosis of the risks and challenges confronting the Australian economy is hard to fault. But tackling those problems will require flexibility from the government.
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten said that Australia spends more at a Commonwealth level on negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts than it does on child care or higher education. Is he right?
A decent national housing policy is not just about the million or so Australians who are in housing need, marginal housing or homeless. In reality, all the housing sectors are connected.
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has warned that Labor’s negative gearing policy would deliver “massive shocks” to the residential housing market and drive all investors away. Does that claim stack up?
The release of the defence white paper this week revealed plans to substantially increase Australia’s military spending over the next two decades.
The Turnbull government desperately needs a circuit breaker. It is in an appalling mess over tax policy and it can’t afford to wait until the budget to have it sorted out.
Even 12 months ago, challenging negative gearing seemed off limits. Now, there are real plans for reform.
Top contributors
-
Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra
-
Vice-Chancellor’s Fellow, University of Tasmania
-
Emeritus Professor, Social and Community Policy, University of South Wales
-
Professiorial Fellow, The University of Melbourne
-
Emeritus Professor of Finance, The University of Melbourne
-
Adjunct Fellow, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland
-
Adjunct Professor, Curtin Law School and Curtin Business School, Curtin University
-
Associate Deputy Vice Chancellor in Research & Innovation, RMIT University
-
Lecturer of Economics and Finance Tasmanian School of Business & Economics, University of Tasmania
-
Senior Lecturer in Finance, University of Sydney
-
Professor, City Futures Research Centre, Faculty of the Built Environment, UNSW
-
Emeritus Professor of Housing, UNSW
-
Alan Morris is a Friend of The Conversation.
Professor, Institute for Public Policy and Governance, University of Technology Sydney
-
Post-Doctoral Research Associate, University of Sydney
-
Professor of Urban Planning, The University of Melbourne