Blog: The Landlord says...

The talk about changes to the tax system has died down a little and now reality is starting to sink in.

Most commentary has been around the fact that the proposed changes are designed to whack residential property investors. The anti-property brigade has been in strong voice once again pushing the spurious line all property investors are fat cats rorting the system; thankfully investors have been putting up a pretty good defence.

While things are still murky around what the government will do and how far it is prepared to go to alienate a good chunk of its support base, there is acceptance change will happen.

As I have digested the changes and talked to other investors it has become clear this is big.

Indeed I would argue the changes are once-in-a-generation stuff. The rules around residential property investing will totally change. The business will be totally different and investors will have to change their approach.

I have heard that many investors have got the heebie geebies and are already looking to exit and have put properties on the market.

I’m not sure that is necessary. The changes don’t necessarily mean that investing in residential property will no longer be profitable. It means you will need to think about how you approach it.

One change I suggest will happen is that some of these companies who find properties for investors and sell them to them on the basis of depreciation gains and tax benefits will struggle to survive.

Also the changes are likely to drive up rents over the medium term. While that is a plus for investors, tenants won’t be happy with the government.

The March issue of NZ Property Investor will be giving you lots more information about what these changes mean and what you can do adjust.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on the changes and how you plan to adjust to them. You can comment below or send an email to thelandlord@landlords.co.nz

PS: I was in Auckland this week and attended one of Kieran Trass’s breakfast presentations. He has plenty of views on the changes and also some ideas on what to do. If you are in Auckland and want to attend one of these Wednesday sessions click here.

Residential property investors have been a political target for some time now and today’s report from the Tax Working Group (TWG) made it clear they, unfairly, remain in the sights.

The TWG has put the acid on the government throughout the report and raised ideas which will be clearly more than the government can stomach.

The question that I struggle with is how far would a National-led government be prepared to go and clobber the property investment sector?

There is little doubt in my mind that the vast majority of property investors would vote National or some other party on the right of the political spectrum. To penalise several hundred thousand of its core supporters is the equivalent of political suicide.

National has plenty of political capital to burn, but moves such as the TWG have proposed are like lighting a bonfire.

I suspect there is some “low-hanging” fruit the government can pick. For instance the land tax idea is something that wouldn’t be too hard to do, and could raise a reasonable sum of money.

I am told there used to be a land tax (apparently it was a pink form filled out each year which had to be filed by the end of May).

Likewise changes to depreciation are possible. There is an argument which suggests depreciation isn’t really justified when the asset is generally appreciating. There maybe some instances, such as leaky buildings, where there is a genuine reason for depreciation, and the rules could be made to accommodate this.

Also an increase in GST would mean that property investors paid more tax.

One thing which was good to see is that the TWG didn’t get stuck into the argument about loss attributing qualifying companies. Many commentators have described this as a rort that property investors shamelessly exploit.

I have always had trouble with these arguments. The view being that property investors are in business providing a service (accommodation) to customers. They should be allowed to operate under the same rules as any other business. LAQC’s are legitimate structures for them to use.

This was summed up by the Institute of Chartered Accountants tax director, Craig Macalister, at www.netprophet.co.nz when he queried whether the current “emotion” around property investment was getting out of hand.

“We need to be careful not to fall into the trap of selected taxes for different assets or investments for all the reasons why these were a failure in the past,” he said.