“Under the proposed framework, gains are indexed but real losses are not fully recognised. As a result, the taxable gain rises to...higher than the investor’s total real economic gain and 82% higher than under the current system.”
https://t.co/O8sBZkNHug
@GeoffWilsonWAM Double the taxation is a seismic change. Why wouldn't people just buy a home double the size and sell at retirement instead? This will heavily impact investors, make it marginal tax rate instead
The global economy now uses roughly half as much energy per dollar of output as it did in 1980, helping cushion oil shocks. Read more in F&D magazine. https://t.co/uIBOYR9eU2
Fascinating chart from CBA showing how long the median home remains for sale on market by capital city.
The rise one would expect in Sydney and Melbourne, but Brisbane and Perth rocketing like demand just fell off a cliff vs the previous hot markets.
@Dcroft I agree with you, why add just deep changes when the core is broken? It doesnt feel organic at all because the engine prefers animation over physics but time has been put into micro adjustments why?
A couple of weeks ago I wrote about a major flaw in the government's proposed capital gains tax reforms.
Using a four share portfolio, I showed how replacing the current 50% CGT discount with inflation indexation could increase the amount of tax paid by investors by ~61%. The example was deliberately simple because it helped illustrate the mechanics of the problem... but some readers reasonably questioned whether a portfolio containing one extreme winner, two mediocre performers and one complete failure was representative of how Australians actually invest in shares.
So I decided to test the CGT changes using a portfolio based on actual investor behaviour rather than relying on a hypothetical portfolio. I analysed the 20 most popular ASX shares and ETFs purchased six years ago in April 2020.
Despite analysing a completely different portfolio based on actual investor behaviour, I arrived at a similar conclusion. The proposed indexation model increased taxable gains by ~82%.
The government's stated aim is to improve fairness and encourage investment into housing. But if the practical effect is to penalise diversified investors and significantly increase tax on ordinary Australians who invest patiently over decades, the reforms risk creating distortions far greater than those they seek to address.
Policymakers should carefully consider whether a tax system that increases tax for a typical long term investor by more than 80% is really achieving its intended objective.
A related question is why any rational investor would choose to invest in direct shares at all under this regime? If successful portfolios are taxed much more heavily and unsuccessful ones receive less recognition for their losses, the after tax risk adjusted return from direct share investing becomes highly unattractive.
Full analysis is here: https://t.co/hc5vRfz4un
If I put money into my super which are mostly ETFs/Shares they tax at 15% but if I buy my own ETFs (no fees to manage) I’m taxed at selling at 30% what a racket by the financial industry.
Basically saying Super funds get priority and Individuals should not be in the market
@XavierORourke I am short. I sold half my holdings because the market is overpriced a couple months ago before the tax changes announced. A minimum 30% tax on capital gains I think will change many investing towards super and bigger home residence that have low/no tax
@XavierORourke ASX is certainly at all time highs.The news laws haven’t kicked in, they are grandfathered so no need to panic sell.
Unrelated I expect a big correction coming
@DrCameronMurray Its been on my mind this week, all the rich dump money into Super but how does the system help middle and low income who add zero voluntarily. Bizarre to me all the pathways are for those you can use them
🚨 Tax specialists have uncovered a sleeper clause in the federal budget bill designed to quietly inflate investor tax bills — and it's a rort. The bill which passed the lower house yesterday, introduces a mandatory "loss-ordering" mechanism for the first time in Australian tax history. Instead of cherry-picking how losses offset gains, investors will now be forced to burn through their oldest gains first — stripping away the 50% CGT discount and leaving newer gains fully exposed to the punishing new cost-base indexation regime from July 1, 2027.
Say you bought shares in 2018 and again in 2024. You sell both at a gain, but you also have losses to offset. Previously, you'd apply those losses to your 2018 gains first — which already qualify for the 50% CGT discount, meaning less of them are taxable anyway. Under the new rules, you're forced to do exactly that — exhausting the discounted gains first and leaving your 2024 gains fully exposed to the new, harsher indexation rules.
You end up paying more. This isn't an oversight. It's a deliberate revenue grab buried in fine print
@Official_Mole Agreed, even for me I dont see 'lane' or cutback options. Been playing 25+ years and doesnt feel like you have 'control' jukes,cuts as canned animations dont work