Real estate, post level 4

Forums › Home Workshop DIY › Real estate, post level 4

1 | ... | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | ... | 160

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2746841 19-Jul-2021 21:42

mattwnz: Maybe the government could do what they have just done with EV cars. Charge a levy on any house purchased by any investor. Then give a rebate back to people that build new. GST removal on new builds would also help , and also helps to get rid of old houses. The government was able to bring this sort of policy in for EVs and it wasn’t considered a new tax. But unfortunately too many people making decisions have vested interests in owning one or more houses

You are talking Stamp Duty. I feel that interest is a better option, the buyer (investor ir not) pays more every repayment. They builder gets a lower repayment every repayment. I dont like one off deals. Its small, one off, and done. Interest, is actually a much higher penalty/benefit

The EV thing is the "Ute Tax" :-)

Lenovo

Lenovo computer and accessories deals (affiliate link).

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2746843 19-Jul-2021 21:46

Batman:

maybe maybe not, but taxation always is

The "tax" thing is fake. The true contact of tax and why we all hate it, is that its a tax to gain revenue from us. Most of these recent "taxes" are revenue neutral, they aren't topping up the Govt coffers. Fuel Tax was for roads up there. Feebate is a swip swap between Ute owners and EV owners, and so on. Any stamp duty/subsidy or feebating buyer/builder interest is the same. Not a tax as its not a one way trip to Govt coffers.

mattwnz

19389 posts

Uber Geek

#2746854 19-Jul-2021 22:27

Batman:
maybe maybe not, but taxation always is

NZ must be one of the least taxed countries in the world, especially when it comes to houses. But who pays for new roads and new infrastructure when new subdivisions are built? The new home owners bare much of this cost. Existing home owners then benefit with new homes raising the value of existing homes. Under investment in infrastructure and not renewing it is now causing problems in places like Wellington

mattwnz

19389 posts

Uber Geek

#2746855 19-Jul-2021 22:29

tdgeek:
mattwnz: Maybe the government could do what they have just done with EV cars. Charge a levy on any house purchased by any investor. Then give a rebate back to people that build new. GST removal on new builds would also help , and also helps to get rid of old houses. The government was able to bring this sort of policy in for EVs and it wasn’t considered a new tax. But unfortunately too many people making decisions have vested interests in owning one or more houses

You are talking Stamp Duty. I feel that interest is a better option, the buyer (investor ir not) pays more every repayment. They builder gets a lower repayment every repayment. I dont like one off deals. Its small, one off, and done. Interest, is actually a much higher penalty/benefit

The EV thing is the "Ute Tax" :-)

Higher interest is an idea but wouldn't land Lords just increase their tenants rent to compensate? Also it would mean banks would make more money, rather than that money going back to build new homes and help FHBs. IMO we don't want to just give FHBs grants, because all that does is push prices up.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2746869 19-Jul-2021 23:05

mattwnz:

Higher interest is an idea but wouldn't land Lords just increase their tenants rent to compensate? Also it would mean banks would make more money, rather than that money going back to build new homes and help FHBs. IMO we don't want to just give FHBs grants, because all that does is push prices up.

If a landlord built, they get cheaper interest, make more money/lower rent= attracts tenants. If they buy, then yes they would want to increase rents but you can only increase to what the market can afford to pay. So draw down on a mortgage and build a rental

My plan isnt about bank making money money. Feebate. Say normal interest is 4%. If you build you get 2% if I buy I pay 6%. Revenue neutral. The excess in interest charged and the interest credited to the build mortgage go to the Balance Sheet. Like EVs its not income. Build montages are subsidised by purchase mortgages. Accounting wise thats very easy.

I agree re FHB grants. If we gave FHB;s lower interest artificially, pushes up prices, but my idea is to give them lower interest on builds only. Those that buy instead will pay a higher interest causing prices to reduce. The builds are new housing stock.

mudguard

1726 posts

Uber Geek

#2746885 20-Jul-2021 06:32

I don't think building more is currently feasible. Seemingly the trade experts say that it would take about seven years to get enough builders through (not to mention the other trades), so whatever is decided, it has to be long term. A government will probably have to make an awkward decision about who takes the hit, current homeowners who may see negative equity, or perhaps a generation or two who will rent for life until incomes rise to meet prices (circa 100 hundred years)?

Surely there has to be a tipping point, petrol is sneaking up again, what would push people to leave places like Auckland en-masse, remove the accommodation supplement?

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#2746903 20-Jul-2021 07:02

tdgeek:

Fuel Tax was for roads up there.

This is actually a good example of the broken social contract between govts and taxpayers - the fuel tax is collected but nowhere near 100% of it is being spent on Auckland projects.

In fact, huge projects like the Eastern Busway, CC2M Light Rail and North Western Busway have been either delayed or forced back to the drawing board. All are going to be at least two years overdue, if they happen at all. Many other walking and cycling projects were deferred as well.

At this point, the government is still collecting the fuel tax, but is basically just leaving Auckland to stagnate, while at the same time ruling out other parts of the country having to pay a regional fuel tax to pay for their own infrastructure.

It is a clear example of the state acting as a belligerent actor towards taxpayers with impunity. You can understand my concerns at inheritance/estate duties or imputed rents when there is so little evidence of (any) central or local government being able to execute the social contract around taxation as it already stands.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2746910 20-Jul-2021 07:20

mudguard:

I don't think building more is currently feasible. Seemingly the trade experts say that it would take about seven years to get enough builders through (not to mention the other trades), so whatever is decided, it has to be long term. A government will probably have to make an awkward decision about who takes the hit, current homeowners who may see negative equity, or perhaps a generation or two who will rent for life until incomes rise to meet prices (circa 100 hundred years)?

Surely there has to be a tipping point, petrol is sneaking up again, what would push people to leave places like Auckland en-masse, remove the accommodation supplement?

If there was real action, with Govt support with builders to find, and commandeer suitable tracts of land, basically creating a boom of buildable areas, I feel that a campaign to attract kids to training would find them. 3 years to create a skilled tradie, less for experienced but unqualified tradies. They need to create a real opportunity for builders to expand, and attract job seekers in those industries. Seems a relatively easy plan

quickymart

11229 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2748791 23-Jul-2021 15:56

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/housing-eight-in-10-new-zealanders-believe-homeownership-impossible-report/ISTRJO3ORR5Z2GJARQU37SY4ME/

Depressing reading :(

wellygary

7384 posts

Uber Geek

#2748814 23-Jul-2021 16:29

tdgeek:

If there was real action, with Govt support with builders to find, and commandeer suitable tracts of land, basically creating a boom of buildable areas, I feel that a campaign to attract kids to training would find them. 3 years to create a skilled tradie, less for experienced but unqualified tradies. They need to create a real opportunity for builders to expand, and attract job seekers in those industries. Seems a relatively easy plan

Government has shown that it is unable or unwilling to actually push the boat out and actually build hard... and set a 10 year annual build target to give developers certainty, standardise the offering to minimise cost, and then build build build,...

In Auckland it should be 4-5 stories, in other places potentially terraced housing...

We have 20,000 ppl on housing waiting list, they are not going to sneer and say I want a 1/4 acre, they want a roof,

But instead we get this in 2018
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/unitec-deal-marks-major-kiwibuild-milestone

and 3 years later we have had no houses
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/government-slow-to-turn-words-into-houses-at-unitec-development-in-auckland/W5XFEH6WH7NNM4EF2YF66PIM3E/

Its a good site, close to transport, its owned by the crown, there is no reason it should take this long, other than "...reasons"

heavenlywild

4560 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2748816 23-Jul-2021 16:35

The current scenario where I am in Auckland is this - and it's been fully realised: Buy a new build off the plans in Oct 2020. Sell upon build completion for 260k profit.

Right or wrong, it's insane.

I can't see this ending anytime soon - all new house and land lots are bought and ALREADY being on-sold without a piece of timber seen anywhere on site!

heavenlywild

4560 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2748817 23-Jul-2021 16:36

And in regards to off the plans being on-sold, guess what, real estate teams are the ones snapping them up putting in a small deposit and on-selling. It's not illegal but sure isn't ethical.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2748828 23-Jul-2021 17:20

heavenlywild:

And in regards to off the plans being on-sold, guess what, real estate teams are the ones snapping them up putting in a small deposit and on-selling. It's not illegal but sure isn't ethical.

So I'm told, it's spec home builders who are buying up sections in Chch - within minutes of them being listed. There's vast swathes of land being subdivided.
I'm amazed at the ongoing demand. Just a few years ago Chch "overshot" the number of new homes built to replace those lost in the quakes, things actually started slowing down to less crazy.

Census data will be interesting - but the next one's not happening until 2023.

I get the feeling that the pandemic has resulted in a huge number of expat NZers coming home, employment stats seem to show that there's no shortage of jobs. It's boomtown everywhere.

elpenguino

2915 posts

Uber Geek

#2748835 23-Jul-2021 17:42

Shirley, part of the answer has to be densification of our cities. If we build low rise complexes in existing areas, preferably close to public transport hubs, little extra infrastructure is needed and productive farm land is not lost to tarmac.

I'm not thinking UK urban estates (gag) but more your 'Melrose Place' style 3-level blocks of units.

Shame there's so many nimbies everywhere.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2748899 23-Jul-2021 18:49

wellygary:

Government has shown that it is unable or unwilling to actually push the boat out and actually build hard... and set a 10 year annual build target to give developers certainty, standardise the offering to minimise cost, and then build build build,...

Is the Govt a builder? Or a developer? No, but I'm fine either way, but that hasn't been the case since post WW2. It may need nationalisation of building?

1 | ... | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | ... | 160