Is negative gearing for housing good or bad?
Debates about tax concessions for housing have been raging of late, but what do older people think about arguments for change?
Negative gearing – the practice of offsetting property investment losses against other income to reduce tax – has been a feature of Australia’s housing market for decades.
Supporters argue it encourages investment in housing and helps increase rental supply, while critics say it drives up property prices, locks younger people out of the market, and places pressure on the federal budget.
The debate has intensified recently after research suggested tax concessions for short-stay rentals, such as Airbnb properties, could be costing the Federal Government up to $556 million a year and contributing to housing affordability pressures.
Economist Saul Eslake questioned whether budget savings would eventuate if a ban on short-stay was implemented but was more positive about the supply of long-stay rentals.
He suggested that if negative gearing for short-stay properties were restricted, many investors would probably shift those properties into the long-term rental market, improving supply for renters.
However, he cautions that this change might not necessarily make housing more affordable for buyers – a reminder that there are no simple solutions in this complex debate.
This discussion has gained further momentum following the recent Productivity Roundtable, which explored a wide range of tax reform ideas aimed at tackling housing affordability and broader intergenerational equity issues.
Older Australians have often been portrayed as the main beneficiaries of tax concessions such as negative gearing, but that’s not the full story.
Younger Australians also make significant use of these incentives, highlighting the need for a balanced conversation rather than a generational divide.
ATO statistics from 2022/23 show, for example, that the number of people reporting rental income at age 60-69 (409,217) is slightly less than those aged 30-39 (433,315) and much less than those aged 40-49 (569,393) and 50-59 (566,982).
At National Seniors Australia (NSA), we’ve been exploring older Australians’ experiences with property investment through our National Seniors Social Survey.
While our full report is still in development, these preliminary findings provide valuable insights:
45% of survey respondents reported ever owning one or more investment property (11.9% said they still owned an investment property).
Among those who did, 80% had traditional long-stay rentals, while only 4% were using short-stay platforms, such as Airbnb.
Tax concessions, such as negative gearing, were the main motivation for only 26% of property investors, while 45.5% said their main motivation was potential capital gains.
These findings suggest that while many older Australians are involved in property investment, short-stay rentals make up only a small share of their portfolios.
Given the growing public debate, NSA wants to better understand what you, our readers, think about proposals to change negative gearing.
Your feedback will help inform our ongoing research and advocacy efforts on behalf of older Australians as part of our Better Housing and Retirement Income campaigns.
