Scrapping negative gearing would have consequences far beyond an investor’s tax return

Does negative gearing force property prices up and make it harder for first home buyers to get in to the market?

Property markets are affected by dozens of factors. The factors which affect property values the most are related to the general economy, employment, and credit policies, not tax policies). When property markets perform strongly, like they have in Sydney in 2013-14, it is not uncommon for segments of the community to blame investors for driving values up and making bit harder for others to get in.

Negative gearing has been in place for generations and it is no more responsible for Sydney’s property price growth in 2013-14 than it was for its flat-line performance from 2001 to 2008.

Doesn’t negative gearing make rents more expensive?

In July 1985, in response to claims that negative gearing was the primary cause of property rents rising uncontrollably, the Hawke government quarantined negative gearing. During the two years that the quarantine was in place, ABS figures show rents rose by an average of 22%. The policy was reversed in 1987 and rents still rose by 21% over the next two years. A similar trend occurred with property values. As mentioned previously, tax policies have a smaller impact on property markets (values and rents) than most people think.

What other potential impacts could occur if negative gearing was tinkered with?

Propertyology often describes property investment as a business – the business of providing accommodation – and the investor’s role is akin to that of a company director (to make responsible decisions which are in the best interest of your balance sheet and profit and loss statement).

Negative gearing involves claiming interest expenses from borrowings plus other costs associated with maintaining an asset in much the same way that more traditional businesses do. Similarly, a share investor will claim the interest expense from their margin loan. Time will tell whether property investors will be singled out or not.

A final word…

Rumours of negative gearing getting scrapped arise almost every year – either in the lead up to a federal budget or whenever there is a major review of Australia’s taxation policies. It is the responsibility of governments to periodically review everything; nothing lasts forever. The reality however is that negative gearing has existed in Australia for a few generations.

In the event that negative gearing was ever scrapped, there might be some short-term referred pain but the real estate body will eventually realign itself (once the dust settles, it will be business as usual again for most property investors).  The potential implications to scrapping negative gearing will be spread a lot further than property investor’s tax returns. Any government who is bold enough to make a change faces consequences far greater than the revolt of 1.9 million people at the election box. For these reasons, it is my view that negative gearing will survive further generations.

Simon Pressley is managing director of Propertyology, a full-time property market analyst, accredited property investment adviser, and Australia’s (REIA) Buyer’s Agent of the Year (2012+2013+2014)

This article originally appeared on Property Observer.