It used to be Bernard Hickey that kept banging on about this but he got his message across poorly. Of course, there are no tax advantages for investors over any other business.
However, we do have a tax advantage over a home owner. We can claim expenses that the home owner can't. We are direct competition for first home buyers. Our ability to make mortgage payments is enhanced by the deductibility of interest and other expenses such as insurance, rates, repairs and maintenance that a home owner also has but cannot claim. So, clearly, an investor has a tax advantage over a home owner. I think it's disingenuous to suggest we don't.
We will probably always need investors to provide some rental accommodation but I do think that we need to decide how much free rein investors are given. The rebuttal of "but the free market.." is bollocks because firstly, there is no such thing as a free market. Secondly, the market is not and end in itself but a means to an end. That end is the kind of society that we wish to live in.
However, we do have a tax advantage over a home owner. We can claim expenses that the home owner can't. We are direct competition for first home buyers. Our ability to make mortgage payments is enhanced by the deductibility of interest and other expenses such as insurance, rates, repairs and maintenance that a home owner also has but cannot claim. So, clearly, an investor has a tax advantage over a home owner. I think it's disingenuous to suggest we don't.
We will probably always need investors to provide some rental accommodation but I do think that we need to decide how much free rein investors are given. The rebuttal of "but the free market.." is bollocks because firstly, there is no such thing as a free market. Secondly, the market is not and end in itself but a means to an end. That end is the kind of society that we wish to live in.
Comment