tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,447
- Reactions
- 6,477
Investors will build to sell not to rent.
Good luck with that.
The Greens have released Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) modelling that shows the Government could save $3 billion in four years by abolishing negative gearing.
The tax break allows investors to claim expenses for rental properties and reduce tax paid on any other income.
Investors will build to sell not to rent.
Good luck with that.
Investors will build to sell not to rent.
Good luck with that.
Excuse my ignorance, but don't the vast majority of "investors" by established properties in the first place.
NG should be on new builds only, this would at least funnel some of the investors money into adding supply.
Cheers
I really don't understand what investors are thinking buying when interest rates are this low? Surely the time to buy property is when interest rates are relatively high?
I really don't understand what investors are thinking buying when interest rates are this low? Surely the time to buy property is when interest rates are relatively high?
I really don't understand what investors are thinking buying when interest rates are this low? Surely the time to buy property is when interest rates are relatively high?
Well interest rates alone aren't a good indication - I'd use them more as the 'risk free' rate for my cash, and would expect net rental yields to be greater than these; i.e. if IR are 7%, but net rental yield is 11%, then it may be worthwhile.
It's more the idea of picking up an asset that generates less cash than a term deposit and hoping for it to go up in value that doesn't really make much sense to me.
For me my holding costs are lowest ever.
More buyers off plan locking in rates.
I believe the vast amount of passive property investors by established properties as this is where the capital growth is.
As others have said, if you can set aside $500 a week for a few years, you'll be in the market soon enough.
Why are you paying high fees? Are you purchasing units in both stocks every week? Might be better off accumulating cash and making a purchase once every month or two, to reduce brokerage costs.
The average price for detached homes within the city of Vancouver has rocketed to a record $2.23-million as the provincial government faces pressure to cool off the scorching housing market.
Prices for those coveted properties in Vancouver proper have surged amid low interest rates, limited listings and an influx of international buyers in a seller’s market. Industry observers say buyers with ties to China have been especially keen on high-end houses, though the broader impact of offshore buyers is unclear because of a lack of data.The record monthly average price of $2.23-million in Vancouver for existing single-family detached homes sold in May is a 19.2-per-cent jump from $1.87-million in the same month last year, according to new statistics obtained by The Globe and Mail from the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver.
In its monthly release of statistics, the board provides the average detached price for Greater Vancouver, which includes most suburbs, but doesn’t disclose the average for the city itself.
Last week, B.C. Premier Christy Clark dismissed a proposal by Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson, who called for the province to introduce a speculation tax on house-flippers. She also rejected his suggestion to selectively hike British Columbia’s property transfer tax to target high-end transactions.
In his May 22 letter to Ms. Clark that was publicly released last week, even Mr. Robertson vastly underestimates how expensive detached homes have become within city limits.
A recent Vancouver City Savings Credit Union study predicts that in 2030, the average price for all housing types within Vancouver could exceed $2.1-million, with detached properties forecast to soar to an average of $4.4-million.
Ms. Clark said it doesn’t make sense to clamp down on foreign investors. “Experts estimate that local investors are 3 to 4 times more active in the region’s housing market than foreign investors,” she wrote in a letter dated June 4 to Mr. Robertson. “Using any method of new taxation with the goal of driving down the price of housing could have the unintended effect of hurting current homeowners across the region.”
I have held many Established properties over the last 20 yrs.
I now only hold 2---One I have on the market and the other is
my business premises which collects rent from my company into my super.
Holding Established property here in SA is not a sound investment and hasn't been for over 5 yrs.
Your just chewing up capital with very low return on rent.
I'm in it for capital gain and the only place I can get decent capital gain on my money (Or I should say a lot of the banks) is building---developing. Here a 15% return on capital at work is a minimum and 30% is possible in 12 mths.
The return on my own money is massive even at 15%
I buy the land and borrow the development building costs.
On a 1.5-2 mill development there is around 20% so $300K
Land on a 3 apartment build on average $350K
So after holding costs of say $45k and Sub division and legal's of
$30K there is a drink.
Ms. Clark said it doesn’t make sense to clamp down on foreign investors. “Experts estimate that local investors are 3 to 4 times more active in the region’s housing market than foreign investors,” she wrote in a letter dated June 4 to Mr. Robertson. “Using any method of new taxation with the goal of driving down the price of housing could have the unintended effect of hurting current homeowners across the region.”
Foreign nationals who want to buy a house in Victoria must pay a three per cent surcharge on stamp duty from July 1, which is expected to raise about $279 million over four years.
A land tax surcharge - an extra 0.5 per cent from 2016 - will also scoop a collective $52.5 million for the government.
Mr Pallas said the new taxes would ensure foreign property investors paid their "fair share" towards infrastructure, and the added cost was a small component of the overall price and would not affect investor demand.
A $600,000 home would attract a surcharge of about $18,000 for a foreign buyer under the new taxes.
Well interest rates alone aren't a good indication - I'd use them more as the 'risk free' rate for my cash, and would expect net rental yields to be greater than these; i.e. if IR are 7%, but net rental yield is 11%, then it may be worthwhile.
It's more the idea of picking up an asset that generates less cash than a term deposit and hoping for it to go up in value that doesn't really make much sense to me.
Hi Tech/A,
As I mentioned earlier, I didn't believe most investors borrow money for new builds (construction) but rather for established dwellings.
It was a lot higher than I thought. 90% of housing financial commitments are for existing.
NG gearing on existing is a rort.
Hi Tech/A,
As I mentioned earlier, I didn't believe most investors borrow money for new builds (construction) but rather for established dwellings.
It was a lot higher than I thought. 90% of housing financial commitments are for existing.
NG gearing on existing is a rort.
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?