My modest (130sqm) rental house has improvements valued at 485k, whereas my much larger personal house (renovated under building consents) has improvements value at 270k.
The suggested 0.5% levy would drive a rental increase of $117 per week to cover the additional costs, already can't write off genuine interest charges so can't subsidise more new charges.
a person paying off a mortgage on their own home cannot write off interest charges. therefore a business or person paying off a mortgage on a dwelling they rent out must not be able to write off interest charges (although for new builds they still can). allowing interest to be tax deductible on rental and speculative residential properties gives their owners a colossal financial advantage over people who are purchasing a residential property they live in and this policy caused the raging inferno of increasing residential property prices which resulted in the current unaffordability of residential properties in NZ. the problem is GREED!!! I hate GREED.
Hang on Robert. A person living in their home gets the benefit of a place to live, a landlord has no usage right once they let it out, and still have to provide their own place to live. Different situations altogether.
The government taxes the rental income on the property, without allowing an offsetting expense for all costs, that drives up rent to deliver a fair return on the asset. Not greed, economics, but the government significantly lifts its share of tax on the whole transaction - now who was being greedy?
Our rental properties were a service to an elderly person and a young family, neither of whom were in a position to buy a warm comfortable home. We charged rent that never increased while the tenant stayed, in one case 9 years. The rules changed, so we decided to sell one, and that young family didn't have a place to stay any more.
Nobody was better off, but it must make you feel relieved
a person paying off a mortgage on their own home cannot write off interest charges. therefore a business or person paying off a mortgage on a dwelling they rent out must not be able to write off interest charges. they still can for new builds which gives them a COLOSSAL financial advantage over people buying a new home for themselves (that is nasty).
your second paragraph is bs.
greed is a serious problem in NZ. also, you were better off compared with all people who were purchasing a dwelling for themself.
what is desperately needed in NZ is the rapid construction of at least 100,000 public/state houses of the sizes and in the locations needed, to be rented at affordable (to the tenants) rents.
Not ignoring the fact, that was clear in my comment.
I pointed out that a person living in their own house gets a direct benefit - they live in it, and save rental costs, naturally that has a cost. A person providing a home for others, does not get the benefit of living in it, so the situation is different.
Of course I'm better off, I've been saving for 30 years. I bought a ratty home in an outer suburb when we earned a pittance, many hours to make it better, we did the same thing again after moving for work, any gains a direct result of my physical labour and time commitment.
I agree, building more affordable houses is a sensible and practical solution that requires a competent government to do it. 5 years on we haven't got that....... but law changes, building failures and fiscal/monetary policy means that things are even worse for renters.
It also adds up if you include improvement’s rather than just land as a $1M property would mean additional $5k pa which is a lot for most people
Also the RV is an unreliable source of info,
My modest (130sqm) rental house has improvements valued at 485k, whereas my much larger personal house (renovated under building consents) has improvements value at 270k.
The suggested 0.5% levy would drive a rental increase of $117 per week to cover the additional costs, already can't write off genuine interest charges so can't subsidise more new charges.
Only land.
a person paying off a mortgage on their own home cannot write off interest charges. therefore a business or person paying off a mortgage on a dwelling they rent out must not be able to write off interest charges (although for new builds they still can). allowing interest to be tax deductible on rental and speculative residential properties gives their owners a colossal financial advantage over people who are purchasing a residential property they live in and this policy caused the raging inferno of increasing residential property prices which resulted in the current unaffordability of residential properties in NZ. the problem is GREED!!! I hate GREED.
Hang on Robert. A person living in their home gets the benefit of a place to live, a landlord has no usage right once they let it out, and still have to provide their own place to live. Different situations altogether.
The government taxes the rental income on the property, without allowing an offsetting expense for all costs, that drives up rent to deliver a fair return on the asset. Not greed, economics, but the government significantly lifts its share of tax on the whole transaction - now who was being greedy?
Our rental properties were a service to an elderly person and a young family, neither of whom were in a position to buy a warm comfortable home. We charged rent that never increased while the tenant stayed, in one case 9 years. The rules changed, so we decided to sell one, and that young family didn't have a place to stay any more.
Nobody was better off, but it must make you feel relieved
you are ignoring the fact:
a person paying off a mortgage on their own home cannot write off interest charges. therefore a business or person paying off a mortgage on a dwelling they rent out must not be able to write off interest charges. they still can for new builds which gives them a COLOSSAL financial advantage over people buying a new home for themselves (that is nasty).
your second paragraph is bs.
greed is a serious problem in NZ. also, you were better off compared with all people who were purchasing a dwelling for themself.
what is desperately needed in NZ is the rapid construction of at least 100,000 public/state houses of the sizes and in the locations needed, to be rented at affordable (to the tenants) rents.
Not ignoring the fact, that was clear in my comment.
I pointed out that a person living in their own house gets a direct benefit - they live in it, and save rental costs, naturally that has a cost. A person providing a home for others, does not get the benefit of living in it, so the situation is different.
Of course I'm better off, I've been saving for 30 years. I bought a ratty home in an outer suburb when we earned a pittance, many hours to make it better, we did the same thing again after moving for work, any gains a direct result of my physical labour and time commitment.
I agree, building more affordable houses is a sensible and practical solution that requires a competent government to do it. 5 years on we haven't got that....... but law changes, building failures and fiscal/monetary policy means that things are even worse for renters.
Only land