Select to expand quote

myusernam said..

evlPanda said..
Sydney auction clearance rates around 70%.

You see plenty of articles like this one (I was looking for one on Bondi): www.domain.com.au/news/south-coogee-home-sells-for-more-than-36-million-at-auction-in-patchy-market-20180302-h0wwin/

There. Is. No. End. In. Sight.

The reason there is no end in sight is because nothing has changed. Capital Gains Tax rules, Negative Gearing are the same. Interest rates have dropped. There are some changes for investors regarding interest only loans, but that's it. Foreign Investors and immigrants are encouraged more and more, from all 2.5 sides of politics.

Prices will continue to be unaffordable, or worse, while the status quo continues.

the problem is only in sydney and melbourne. Its because our new australians all go there.
Its got less to do with CGT and NG IMHO. If you fxck with that you risk destroying the economy.
Finally we are having a dialogue about our pump priming of the economy with record immigration levels.
I think we also need to look at where we settle these people. Why not incentivise or conditionalise resettlement in a regional area. Especially refugees.

How do refugees afford homes in Sydney and Melbourne? How do they bring the money with them? Bitcoin? What? How?

Immigrants. But I made the side point that both refugees and migrants can only seem to want to.go to Syd or Melbourne and that we should consider encouraging refugees (because we can have more pull with them) to live in regional towns and take up jobs in agriculture etc

All Coombabah dwellings sold for march (approx). It's been a pretty good barometer for north GC sub prestige market

2016 50+
2017 30
2018 11 - and with a record number listed for sale

Days on market to sell a property in Sydney has gone from 40 to 80.

Counting myself lucky I didn't get stranded with bridging finance on my recent move!

Property is down. Stock market is down. Crypto is doooown. It's a sea of red everywhere.

I suspect the recent tightening of lending for investors by banks (forcibly) has actually worked.

Select to expand quote

Haircut said..
All Coombabah dwellings sold for march (approx). It's been a pretty good barometer for north GC sub prestige market

2016 50+
2017 30
2018 11 - and with a record number listed for sale

Merrimac in the 500k bracket lasting about 2 weeks on the market ...unreal .

It's going up again - 475 for sale

I saw on news business is dead with commonwealth games on .
I imagine after they finish there could be a slump.

Select to expand quote

actiomax said..
I saw on news business is dead with commonwealth games on .
I imagine after they finish there could be a slump.

Definitlty has created a lot of wirk here on the GC , there will be a slump for some .

488

Select to expand quote

evlPanda said..

myusernam said..

evlPanda said..
Sydney auction clearance rates around 70%.

You see plenty of articles like this one (I was looking for one on Bondi): www.domain.com.au/news/south-coogee-home-sells-for-more-than-36-million-at-auction-in-patchy-market-20180302-h0wwin/

There. Is. No. End. In. Sight.

The reason there is no end in sight is because nothing has changed. Capital Gains Tax rules, Negative Gearing are the same. Interest rates have dropped. There are some changes for investors regarding interest only loans, but that's it. Foreign Investors and immigrants are encouraged more and more, from all 2.5 sides of politics.

Prices will continue to be unaffordable, or worse, while the status quo continues.

the problem is only in sydney and melbourne. Its because our new australians all go there.
Its got less to do with CGT and NG IMHO. If you fxck with that you risk destroying the economy.
Finally we are having a dialogue about our pump priming of the economy with record immigration levels.
I think we also need to look at where we settle these people. Why not incentivise or conditionalise resettlement in a regional area. Especially refugees.

How do refugees afford homes in Sydney and Melbourne? How do they bring the money with them? Bitcoin? What? How?

When you have 10+ people living in the same house it's easy

495

17 Arlene Park terrace
Sold for $657,500. In Feb 2018

Back on the market for $645 and above. I wonder if his will be the first sold under last purchase price since 2014? Many near me being sold now already losing money when including taxes and agent fees, even without holding costs

Yes, it doesn't look good for GC property....
I see lots of investas trying to get out, looking for cashed up greater fools from Syd or Mel to come along and in some cases hooking one.
Have also been following the Syd market and it looks like oversupply and price reductions started.....

Lots of head winds to come and we all know that sailing into the wind isn't easy.

Well i dont know wats happening but here in merrimac they are moving fast .. one across rd listed today .. 78 inward circut , will see how long it takes to sell.

Yeah, should be an interesting one to watch. Sold 2010 for $400 then had some renovations, sold feb 2017 for $543, now being sold for $549 +

Only 400m2 block too

Offers above $450k for a 3brm Runaway Bay townhouse:

http://raywhiterunawaybaygroup.com.au/properties/residential-for-sale/qld/runaway-bay-4216/townhouse/1856435

Sold for $350k ...in January???
www.onthehouse.com.au/3688955/68_100_morala_ave_runaway_bay_qld_4216

25% qld auction clearance out of 300+ properties today. It was 25% in 2011 with barely 100

We went to 6 villa and duplex opens today. We were the only people at four of them, all vacant/empty but one. It has dropped off so much, if it keeps going 2020-ish may see some great buys

FWIW, over here in WA there are more and more coming on the market and selling, all be it at lower prices than previously, but keeping the estate companies earning.

Select to expand quote

Buster fin said..
FWIW, over here in WA there are more and more coming on the market and selling, all be it at lower prices than previously, but keeping the estate companies earning.

Apparently in some working class suburbs we are back to 2002 prices here in WA.

Imagine if that happened across the board nationally?

Select to expand quote

Haircut said..
Yeah, should be an interesting one to watch. Sold 2010 for $400 then had some renovations, sold feb 2017 for $543, now being sold for $549 +

Only 400m2 block too

Looks like it sold for 570. Might have just scraped their money back

Select to expand quote

Bara said..

Buster fin said..
FWIW, over here in WA there are more and more coming on the market and selling, all be it at lower prices than previously, but keeping the estate companies earning.

Apparently in some working class suburbs we are back to 2002 prices here in WA.

Imagine if that happened across the board nationally?

That would be awesome, unless you have borrowed at the 2010 prices. Inflated realestate values are ruining this country. It is making the cost of living too high and a few people are profiting from speculating on property.

The rest of us are doing it hard to pay a mortgage when the country is filled with vacant land.

2002 prices are probably the 'real' prices. When the rental returns are so low, it has to affect the price of houses.

Joking aside, if prices fell across the country to the same level we would have a recession. There would be so many people that couldn't afford to service their mortgages but at the same time couldn't sell it to cover the loan.

A decent government would do whatever it takes to avoid a huge slide. Then again a decent government wouldn't let the economy get too focused on house prices in the first place.

With the failure of Bunnings in the UK, it makes me think that we are too focused on home improvement here too. Everyone is improving their houses to make them worth more, and Bunnings are reaping the profits. If house prices slow down, Bunnings will become a ghost town.

All the economists seem to be trying to figure out ScoMo's new taxation "mega bracket" from $40k to $200k. Does it benefit the rich, does it benefit the poor, does it benefit "Middle Australia"? I dunno who it benefits the most, but one thing we can say is that it can remove the incentive for an individual earning less than $200k (a large proportion of tax payers) to use negative gearing to drop their taxable income into the "next bracket down" because under the new scheme, "the next bracket down" is now at $40k.

In a year or two's time when investors (earning less than $200k who have a negatively geared property) figure out that they aren't getting the same amount on their tax return, they may reconsider their investment and there may be additional investment properties for sale which will have an impact on the property market. Telling "Middle Australia" that a new tax rate/bracket is aimed at making negative gearing (or any other pre-tax claim like additional super contributions) less attractive is political suicide, telling them that it is to make them better off is far more palatable

Select to expand quote

Paddles B'mere said..
All the economists seem to be trying to figure out ScoMo's new taxation "mega bracket" from $40k to $200k. Does it benefit the rich, does it benefit the poor, does it benefit "Middle Australia"? I dunno who it benefits the most, but one thing we can say is that it can remove the incentive for an individual earning less than $200k (a large proportion of tax payers) to use negative gearing to drop their taxable income into the "next bracket down" because under the new scheme, "the next bracket down" is now at $40k.

In a year or two's time when investors (earning less than $200k who have a negatively geared property) figure out that they aren't getting the same amount on their tax return, they may reconsider their investment and there may be additional investment properties for sale which will have an impact on the property market. Telling "Middle Australia" that a new tax rate/bracket is aimed at making negative gearing (or any other pre-tax claim like additional super contributions) less attractive is political suicide, telling them that it is to make them better off is far more palatable

This is exactly why we need to move to lower income taxes. Lower taxes will reduce the incentive to make investments just reduce taxable income. Often these investments are not good in that they don't make any money.

The best way to lower income taxes is to raise the income tax free threshold. With the threshold rising the lowest income earners will benefit the most. No politician could argue this is inequitable, by arguing someone earning 30K a year should pay income tax.

Why governments don't want affordable housing:

www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-28/affordable-housing-why-governments-dont-want-it/9806118

Select to expand quote

Paddles B'mere said..
...remove the incentive for an individual earning less than $200k (a large proportion of tax payers) to use negative gearing to drop their taxable income into the "next bracket down" because under the new scheme, "the next bracket down" is now at $40k.

If you are negative gearing a higher tax rate is more beneficial.

Say you are losing (negatively geared) $100/week. If you're earning into the 45% tax bracket you can claim 45% back, $45. If you are only earning into the 30% bracket you can only claim $30 back,

It does remove the incentive, but not because people want to get into a lower tax bracket. Lower taxes do reduce the effectiveness of negative gearing.

Hey evlpanda, the trick is to get rid of that part of your income that is in the higher tax bracket by writing it down against an investment expense such as interest on a mortgaged investment property. Say you earn $200k and the next bracket down is $180k, you invest so the expenses of your investment are greater than $20k to get a saving equal to the difference in the tax rates (between the bracket $180k). If that difference is not there any more, and the next drop in tax rate is now at $40k, there is less incentive to negative gear as the tax saving is not quite as good as it used to be.

Negative gearing means owning a property that is making a loss. Personally, I would always rather earn more money regardless of the tax bracket. Would you reduce your tenant's rent just so you can negatively gear? The tax advantage is better on higher tax rates, but you are still forgoing money in your bank account because your investment is a loser. It also is the more highly paid that can best afford to do this.

This investment strategy only makes sense if you are making big capital gains. If the capital gains do not appear, then all you are doing with negative gearing is reducing your loss. If a crash ever does come, some of these smart investors are fecked.

Absolutely correct nnnbrewery, the entire scheme requires a capital gain in the end to cover the losses plus the capital gains tax, that's how it rolls and plenty of people do it.

Reminds me of my old accountant Hank , he was also my landlord, which is why he helped me with my tax.

Anyways he said there was no sense in paying $1.00 to save $0.33, and to this day I hear people saying "Oh yeah but it's a tax deduction" they must think it is tax rebate.

Select to expand quote

Paddles B'mere said..
Absolutely correct nnnbrewery, the entire scheme requires a capital gain in the end to cover the losses plus the capital gains tax, that's how it rolls and plenty of people do it.

That's why I always cringe when people describe it as property investment. With the rental returns on offer, the only thing people want is the capital growth. The capital growth seems to occur because of speculators pushing it up, and you don't even need to improve the property for this to push the price up. What a mess. An economy that is pumping its own housing up.