Empty housing now a target in aussie.

[Wayne]

Bit of a dumb mismatch in data sourcing, actually. Individuals who own rental properties need to fill in an IR3R, which states the address of the property and how many months it's been rented out for. Companies (including LTCs) and trusts don't fill in this form.

Didn't think I had ever specifically told IRD which properties I rented out.

[eri]

Didn't think I had ever specifically told IRD which properties I rented out.

meaning?

1 - you forgot how you filled out your IR3R

2 - someone else fills out your IR3R

3 - you don't fill out an IR3R

[Bob Kane]

I didn't think IRD cared if a property was rented or not.
It's only if you wanted to claim an expense that you have to identify the property.
And if you received income then the same would apply.
So maybe Wayne earns no income and claims no expenses on his properties?

[azinda]

Hi all,

The punishing of people - and manipulation - through taxation/ fines - for having an 'empty' house reeks of more government control, social engineering, erosion of individual liberty, more encroachment of personal freedom etc. Reeks of Kulakization.

People may have a vacant house for many other reasons. Owners of a vacant house are not all wealthy off shore investors. There may be a range of personal, financial, maintenance, legal, estate and family related reasons for why a house is empty. ATO and possibly eventual NZ govt targeting of the owners of empty houses, doesn't surprise me though... a broad policy brush will sweep up as much tax from where ever it can.

[Perry]

Too True

. . . a broad policy brush will sweep up as much tax from where ever it can.

And that's far more preferable than any gummint admitting that it (or its predecessors) actually created the circumstances that caused and/or encouraged empty houses and/or high house prices.

[flyernzl]

Don't forget the census is just a snapshot of one night.
There are many reasons why a house might be vacant on that particular night - the occupant(s) may be on holiday, in hospital, away on business, shifted out to allow renovations, or a host of other quite legitimate reasons.

They have a vacancy tax in Vancouver - and the running costs don't come cheap.
I wrote about this in my August 'Life as a landlord':

"The second move by the Vancouver authorities has been to propose a vacancy tax. In order to reduce the number of residential properties that sit empty for long periods of time (estimated to be 25,400) they have voted to impose a 1% tax on the assessed capital value of any such property that remains continually unoccupied for more than six months. The stated aim of such a tax is to coerce those owners to either rent out their property or to sell it to someone who will.
Of course, setting up a system to identify and levy those properties does not come cheap. When the proposal was adopted, the setup cost was said to be C$4.7million. Now, just seven months later, this cost has blown out to C$7.4million. That’s an increase of $2.7 million in just a few months, and you can bet your bottom dollar that won’t be the end of it. Ongoing running costs have been estimated (yeah, right) at C$2million a year. Some of the opponents of the scheme have already pointed out that the city is building a whole new bureaucratic money-pit.

Obviously there has been some negative feedback to such a scheme. Some Vancouver property owners split their time between that city and other places. Renting out their Vancouver accommodation is not viable because they want to use it themselves for several months each year. Some homeowners with expensive property will be paying out tens of thousands in the vacancy tax all while their strata bylaws actually prevents them from letting out the property to others.

While the stated aim of the tax is to increase the renting pool, the leftish academics and politicians cannot resist the envy statements. When second-home owners cry poor, these ‘experts’ can never resist pointing to the large capital gains such properties have enjoyed recently, and suggest that the city offer the option of deferring their vacancy tax payments by means of a lien over the property which is then paid when they die or sell. Quite how this is meant to achieve an increase in the renting pool is unclear, it sounds more like an envy tax to me."

https://www.propertytalk.com/forum/showthread.php?30140-Life-as-a-Landlord/page81

[Nick G]

Now now, don't be rational.

[The_Dog]

ATO are only interested in Tax grab. They are complete bastards.

Bob is on to it. It's not about homeless. Investors will take the hit as it's less painful than renting.

No rent. No income. No tax return.