A % of what? Purchase price? Valuation? Who does the valuations? etc
Valuation done by an agency set up to do the job. Varibles such as market prices and rents could be used as inputs in determining values. Sure it wouldn't be a completely perfect system but what system is. The obstacles to a land tax are not practical but political.
Creative definitions Tyson but not applicable to common usage or correct by explicit definitions. Thorough analysis can never promise safety of principle or "adequate" return (I can provide examples). Yes, speculation is about taking considerable "calculated" risk for significant gain as opposed to gambling.
!
I disagree with asset taxes generally as assets are (or should be) purchased from after tax income.My solution:
Remove stamp duty
Land tax on PPOR: 1% per year
Land tax on IP : 2% per year
Would remove many distortions in the property market but unfortunately a land tax is not even close to being politically feasable.
You dont think this agency would have a vested interest to quote higher valuations to ensure that gov revenue was higher?
I dont trust current valuers let alone one set up by a government
You dont think this agency would have a vested interest to quote higher valuations to ensure that gov revenue was higher?
I dont trust current valuers let alone one set up by a government
Yep, thanks for the vid. I am familiar with Ben Graham's book and his influence on the likes of Warren Buffett and Roger Montgomery. However everything Graham said is not investment gospel. I say again...The definition comes from the Book "the intelligent Investor" by Benjiman Graham, Who is considered the father of value investing and was one of the most successful investors of his time.
Conflicting valuation models and methodologies are abundant across many asset classes. How in the world can you call valuation a "straightforward process"?...Although the technical analysis "head and shoulders" mumbo jumbo people here might think otherwise, valuation of assets (shares, property, etc) is a fairly straightforward process.
Thorough analysis can never promise safety of principle or adequate" return (I can provide examples).
.
. Graham's definitions are outdated and represent over reliance on his interpretation of "thorough analysis" as some kind of guarantee of safety and return, nonsense.
House price expectations turn negative
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ns-turn-negative/story-e6frg9gx-1225994177425
For an individual security I aggree, But graham never said that thorough analysis of a single security and purchase there of was an example of sound investment policy, infact he says in the book that purchasing one or two stocks in isolation is speculating.
His definintion refered to the term "Investment Operation" eg. An Investment operation is one which upon thorough analysis promises safety of principle along with an adequte return.
By having a sound investment policy where your invested priciple is spread across shares, bonds, property and cash. with each individual security and property bought at a sound price with a margin of safty it is possible to build an investment operation that in it's entirety promises safety of principle and an adequte return.
A % of what? Purchase price? Valuation? Who does the valuations? etc
Conflicting valuation models and methodologies are abundant across many asset classes. How in the world can you call valuation a "straightforward process"?
Can some body explain why they believe a tax based on asset value would be better than a tax based on earnings.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax
"Because the supply of land is inelastic, market land rents depend on what tenants are prepared to pay, rather than on the expenses of landlords, and so LVT cannot be directly passed on to tenants. The direct beneficiaries of incremental improvements to the surrounding neighborhood by others would be the land's occupants ..."
and
"LVT is also said to act as value capture tax. A new public works project may make adjacent land go up considerably in value, and thus, with a tax on land values, the tax on adjacent land goes up. Thus, the new public improvements would be paid for by those most benefited by the new public improvements ”” those whose land value went up most."
Bring a new law in and remove FHOG.
When you buy your first house you pay no stamp duty, or when you only own 1 house, you pay no stamp duty on that house.
When you buy your second house (investment, holiday house whatever) you pay 15% stamp duty.
When you buy your third house etc you pay 25% stamp duty.
What does this do? It gives the FHO a chance to get into the market, they would effectively have 25% or cheaper cost to purchase a house if they were bidding against an investor. It makes it harder for an investor to get into the market place, forcing price to slow or go lower. Everyone wins.
Discuss.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?