218 points

Why limit these fees to foreigners? Why not penalize anyone who is leaving properties empty?

permalink
report
reply
-16 points

I would guess xenophobia

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points
*

Because there’s a big difference between an empty apartment in a city and an empty half the year holiday home out in the bush used by the whole family.

And why not give Australians an advantage in our own country? I’m fine with American companies having to pay more taxes towards us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

If you can afford a holiday home, you have enough of an advantage already

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Mate, I earn below median wage and I could buy a “holiday home”. This isn’t something fancy, it’s a shitty old house in the bush.

What I can’t afford is a house where jobs and people are, the city.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points
*

Price of my condo: 85k

Price of my cottage: 50k

Bought in 2013 and 2020 respectively, both for sale for months and I’ve spent about 10k in each in renovations. If you can’t afford 135k in mortgage and 20k in renovations over 10 years then maybe it’s ok to just keep renting… Even at the price the condo sold at this year (170k) that’s 220k + 10k over 3 years for a home and a holiday home, perfectly reasonable for a couple.

Edit: Funny how people downvote when people tell them that, yeah, it’s still possible to find affordable housing…

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

The best way to give domestic workers an advantage would be to really raise property taxes, but make them subtractable as a tax credit. Credit… not deductible, so overall tax burden on workers would be lower.

This would be an easy and logical step away from taxing labour and moving to taxation of land.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’d suspect Chinese companies would be a bigger problem than the American ones but what do I know.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

I can’t read that whole article but yeah doesn’t make sense… a foreigner could just set up a trust which then purchases the property and leaves it vacant and you’re back to square one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

You could become rich with that idea if it wasn’t exactly what they started doing!

permalink
report
parent
reply
110 points
*

Vancouver, BC in Canada did the same, though they actually fully banned foreign property purchasing. I’m guessing it’s low hanging fruit that won’t get much pushback within the country. Hopefully these are just first steps, in both cases.

Really wish fucking anything were being done in the US.

Vancouver: https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/experts-say-foreign-buyer-ban-wont-bite-b-c-real-estate-prices

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Yeah they really need to fix that in the US… there also needs to be a very significant reduction of property tax for individuals that are enterprising enough to rehab zombie properties. Go to like any city in the US, and you’ll find so many homes that are sitting abandoned because the city has assessed them for such astronomical prices that no investor will touch them due to their condition… The only option becomes to demolish them at taxpayer expense as they fall deeper and deeper into disrepair.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

That was a temporary 2 year ban on foriegn buyers, but it was too little too late. They already injected too much money and equity in to the market. I’m sure there’s a way around it too. Corporations can still buy property. And once the ban is lifted it’s back to normal and the prices are still fucked even with the temporary ban.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Temp residents, including students, also aren’t included in the temporary ban which makes it basically useless

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

So they will just create local shell companies. Didn’t solve any problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Because people in your nation are more human than those outside of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Or, it could be that there’s like 300x more non-Aussies than Aussies so constraining the ability of foreigners to speculate on Australian real estate could be seen as a priority by an institution who’s literal job it is to serve the Australian people, first and foremost.

permalink
report
parent
reply

“It’s better to be exploited by an Australian.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

So yes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
50 points

Last I saw half the elected lawmakers have investment properties.

They’ll never make any laws that will impose additional requirements or possibly impact property prices negatively.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

How many properties are currently affected by this? 6 times the taxes is mentioned, but how much is that per property and in total? It’s odd. This is the second time I’ve seen this story and that relevant information is missing in each one. It reads more like a government press release to make it look like they are doing something but it’s window dressing only. We need structural reform in housing. Not just in Australia, but worldwide. It’s a necessity, not an asset.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

It’s an ongoing fee. The initial fee is raised by 3 times, and if the property is empty for more than 6 months of the year, they are charged twice the fee (so 6 times what the fee currently is, which starts at $13200aud and is up to $105600aud depending on the value of the property)

This means it will cost tens of thousands of dollars up to hundreds of thousands of dollars, each year, to leave it empty over half the year

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yeah. The article doesn’t go into details whether vacancy is self reported and what enforcement looks like.

The cynic in me says this is a great political policy, but something foreign investors will sidestep with minimal effort.

Is it based on water consumption? Leave a tap dripping.

Is it based on electricity consumption? Leave a light on.

Is it based on garbage being collected? A friend takes your bins out once every couple of months.

I want these policies to work to better support Australians with more housing options, but I’m not convinced this is enough.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Haven’t read the article- does it explain why are there so many empty properties? I didn’t know this was a thing. I’m glad they’re finally coming along with regulations though

permalink
report
reply
28 points

Chinese and boomer investors.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’m aware of who but not why. Are they just letting them sit there until the prices rise ( I know that doesn’t take too long)? Or is there another reason?

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

yes ,becuase the house prices in Australia rise so fast it’s actully profitable to buy one outright (if you can afford it) and literally let it sit empty for 5 years ,sell it again and make hundreds of thousands and sometimes millions of dollars.

The when system (of capitalism) is ethically bankrupt and downright disgusting. Houses should be for homes, not profits.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

That’s usually the reason and the possibility of getting a citizenship (depending on what country the property is in it can help).

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Money. The reason is always money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I think Chinese people can’t really invest in China because corruption and government can take everything you own without a reason.

Looking at property crisis in China https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-62402961

Not to mention bank crisis around China https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/11/china-violent-clashes-at-protest-over-frozen-rural-bank-accounts

So it makes sense to have a foreign investment + they can flee and live there if something should happen

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

The bogeyman reason is investors (and especially Chinese investors).

Suspect the real reason is they’re a mix of holiday homes, near ruins, crap properties in crap locations, tangled up in a bunch of legal shit, inheritance proceedings, or the old person that owns it is in care.

There’s a bunch of greed as well, but it’s not worth leaving a property empty over renting it out for an exorbitant sum.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

They’re vehicles for foreign investment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

There are many, but one of the reasons is to buy a house in the catchment area of a good school. They child can attend and pretend they are living in the house but still live in the city

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points
*

Considering that the government is simultaneously boosting migration so that we’re granting 200,000 permanent visas every year I don’t see this as having any real positive effect. Permanent residents are exempt from this fee.

Edit: adding because I keep getting replies that assume I think I loathe permanent residents. The reason I stated they were exempt is to add context for those unaware. To be clear, and to stop annoying people with shit reading comprehension calling me racist, I think everyone regardless of migration status should be penalised for leaving empty houses.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Permanent residents are basically Australians.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The government should focus on improving existing Australians rather than making new Australians. Boosting migration during a housing crisis is irresponsible. It isn’t only permanent visas as well. The government is doing everything it can to increase the amount of people competing for housing in Australia.

Everyone who is leaving a house empty at this time should be penalised. This is just another nonsense move by the government that will have nil effect on the crisis they created.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I can’t comment on the wisdom of Australia’s latest immigration policies because I don’t know enough about Australian politics. I just know that every permanent resident I’ve met has made the country they live in their home, and denying them the right to own property is scummy.

Perhaps my beef is really with the concept of permanent residency, because it creates a group of people who are literally second-class citizens.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

So… you don’t want permanent residents who intend to live their entire life in Australia to be able to buy property? Don’t you think this is a bit xenophobic?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

FFS, does anyone read? I think there should be fewer permanent visas granted, not that permanent residents shouldn’t be able to buy a home. You people just want to call someone racist. Not sure if there’s a word for that.

Who said anything about denying them the right to a home? I said Australia should grant less permanent visas not strip rights from existing permanent visa holders.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Unoccupied housing in growth areas needs to be taxed mercilessly.

And taxes on non-multifamily rental properties should also be physically painful for the owners.

permalink
report
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 284K

    Comments