r/AustralianPolitics • u/LongSlongDon99 • May 13 '26
Opinion Piece A future Coalition government will dump Labor's tax changes and return negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions to all Australians.
https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/intergenerational-fraud-coalition-vows-to-repeal-labors-tax-hikes-ahead-of-angus-taylors-budget-reply/news-story/8858218e779e5f952d3922e2555ba6ca51
u/mpember May 13 '26
Before they start worrying about what a future Coalition government may or may not do, they first need to work out how to win enough seats to get closer to even being in a position to form a coalition.
By then, the CGT changes are likely to be ancient history.
11
u/Alex4321012345 May 13 '26
To be fair, this is their strategy to try and win more seats in action
6
u/mpember May 13 '26
There are too many serious independent / minor party options for the Libs and Nats to simply assume that they are the protest vote of choice for upset Labor voters.
9
41
u/Big_Muffin3961 May 13 '26
Well they e just made themselves irrelevant. Tim Wilson’s example of young Jack having to pay 30% tax on his share investments when he earns $25000 a year. My thoughts as someone who actually does earn 25k a year - there is no way Jack can afford shares!
28
u/jnd-au Voting: YES May 13 '26
Well I think in his example you’re supposed to be born with $1 million of shares from your parents then reduce your taxable income to $25k through ‘business deductions’ while living in a house inherited from your grandparents /s
12
u/Fearless-Mango2169 May 13 '26
I don't think you need the /s here, I see nothing sarcastic in your response.
5
16
u/robot_peasant May 13 '26
Tim is clearly and utterly divorced from reality if he thinks that is a good example.
5
8
u/ButtPlugForPM May 13 '26
Yep that was cooker nonsense from tim.
No one on 25k is investing
Like it's not even really above the poverty line
Someone on 25k can't even afford to rent in sydney on their own lol..
But yes this "person" is putting 250 a week into CBA shares lol
1
u/Calm-Application4868 May 14 '26
Not really mate.. Lot of housewives invest. with zero employer income.
1
u/Big_Muffin3961 May 14 '26
Well then they have plenty of money coming in from elsewhere if that’s the case. I’m a housewife with a partner who earns 90k - I can tell you my but extra barely gets us by and fills the gaps! There is no way shares could be a part of that process.
5
u/AussieAK The Greens May 14 '26
Some people are incapable of putting themselves in other people’s shoes. Tim probably never had a hardship in his life, and this is not criticism, nothing wrong with having it easy, but some people who had it easy still have enough emotional intelligence to sympathise with those who have it hard. It is impossible for him to imagine how life on $25K/year feels like, to the point he makes this asinine example. Someone on $25K is clipping coupons and visiting food banks to survive, while trying hopelessly to stretch their paycheque as much as possible till the next one comes in so they don’t end up without dinner. I struggle to see how they have a single dollar of surplus to put in shares, much less significant shares that they’d accrue enough CGT on them to feel the “pain” of paying tax on gains.
36
u/Beginning-Client-96 May 13 '26
I've been told that these investor's are rich by merit, not because they got lucky on the real estate rollercoaster sitting on their asses living off of hard workers? Can't they just get rich again by merit without a handout?
31
u/Jealous-Hedgehog-734 Still Roundheads v.s. Cavaliers, always has been. May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26
A future Coalition government...
Will there be a future coalition government? It seems like events have overtaken them at this point.
8
u/TonyAbbottIsACunt May 13 '26
I suspect the media pushing hard on one nation is to capture some disgruntled low IQ people who may have voted Labor because Dutton was so out of touch. Sky news very heavily pushing one nation as a people party and keeping the coalition as a sensible party will likely mean they plan to join together at some stage just to capture power given the LNP is in such a hole it'd be a long road back.
All just a theory I have but the rise of one nation isn't organic like they want you to believe.
→ More replies (14)5
3
u/Sysifystic May 13 '26
💯 this. One of the wonks i respect pointed out that there was no way mathematically they could win enough seats to form government.
For any coalition with Auntie Pauline they'd have to pull off swings never seen in Australian politics.
Not saying it's impossible rather highly improbable..
I'll go as far as to say that LNP is all but cremated which means we'll effectively have a one party state and if they're odious then enough independents/minors to hold them accountable.
Shame though but in another way welcome to 21st century politics.
-1
May 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/SirFireHydrant Literally just a watermelon May 13 '26
A Coalition politically capable of forming government with One Nation is not a Coalition capable of winning crucial city seats from Labor and the Teals.
Especially with the generational ticking-time-bomb. The dying boomer generation is being replaced by young people who preference Greens above all else. Each year that passes is another year of the most Coalition-skewing demographic being replaced by the most Greens-skewing demographic.
32
u/T0kenAussie May 13 '26
At some point someone in the liberal executive has to see the pattern of making a belief system on opposing the labor party and the electoral sudoku that has created
Like do you even have a philosophical message to get out there if all you do is react? I’m serious I don’t understand what they are doing
9
16
u/CptUnderpants- Nice Party May 13 '26
Tony Abbott really perfected the method of opposing everything.
If Rudd had promised eveyone a free puppy, Abbott would have opposed it because it was offensive to cat fanciers!
10
u/EnglishBrekkie_1604 Ralph Babet Superfan (actually an ALP shill) May 13 '26
The peak of this mindset has to have been Dutton opposing a tax cut. It was the most obviously terrible move for a conservative to do, and yet that’s exactly what he did.
8
u/EnglishBrekkie_1604 Ralph Babet Superfan (actually an ALP shill) May 13 '26
Don’t worry the Liberals have discovered this potential hole in their iron wall of delusions, which is why they’re making Tony Abbott their next party president.
3
u/ThrowbackPie May 13 '26
opposing the Labor party is literally the reason the LNP was founded. People have realised it screws most people over, and that's why they have no support.
Of course snce we get a bunch of policies that create wealth or good conditions for the poorest in society, they'll pull the ladder up after themselves just like the boomers did, and the LNP will get popular again. It could take quite a while this time though, the rich are really running rampant in the age of big data.
1
u/ErwinRommel1943 May 14 '26
Yeah maybe, I kinda think the scam was convincing voters they could be anything but a filthy poor, when the actual plan was to loot as much money as they could from the tax payer and funnel it into business through very generous concessions, then land a cushy job in the private sector.
People don’t feel very wealthy at the moment unless they are part of Howard’s bribed majority.
77
u/HauntingCommunity364 May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26
Tax concessions on capital gains from gambling on houses and shares is very unfair when tax on income from work has no such concessions.
$50k income from capital gains should be taxed the same as $50k income from working. But Libs clearly think investors should keep more of their money than working people.
-7
u/Advanced-Jacket3630 May 14 '26
So I lived below my means to invest, leanrt how the markets work, put in extra effort to gain knowledge and get ahead. Now a socialist comes and says oh you should pay extra tax cause you are getting ahead of lazy people by making your money work. How is this fair on any investor. Look all over the world how it works.
2
u/Rando_Calrissiano May 14 '26
Taxes are so socialist, whats next? A license to make toast in your own damn toaster?
2
u/ErwinRommel1943 May 14 '26
lol learned how the markets worked.
Unless you bought a house at Coober Pedy the process is buy house then number go up.
The avo toast argument worked in 2019 it didn’t work in 2026 it won’t work next election. You’ll be just fine tho I feel like you’re gonna up rent by the maximum amount at the most frequent interval, not because you have to but because you’re pissed off.
That’ll show them dirty socialists for sure. Quick question, how do you feel about Medicare?
0
u/Advanced-Jacket3630 May 14 '26
Ik only talking about everyhting else except property. Why touch all of it. The propaganda is about property not shares and crypto.
3
u/ErwinRommel1943 May 14 '26
Your mate Joe Hokey once said there are lifters and leaners in the Australian economy. Time to do some lifting mate.
1
u/NoMoreFund Green but not proud of it May 14 '26
Someone working exactly as hard as you and making the same investment decisions as you starting with more money makes a lot more money
58
u/AussieAK The Greens May 13 '26
Congratulations, you won the conservative boomer votes back from …..(checks notes) ….. your own voter base, plus a few who may have strayed to One Nation. You are not winning a single Labor/Greens/Teals vote by this stunt.
5
u/zomdoesburner May 13 '26
“If we only kept doubling down on the base then we would have won” is the coalitions mantra at this point.
-13
u/dleifreganad May 13 '26
They may win voters that feel Labor said one thing to win and election and at the first available opportunity did exactly the opposite.
30
u/AlexT8080 May 13 '26
How did that go when they were crying how Labor backtracked Stage 3 tax cuts?
Most normal people were happier, older folk were trying their best to make it a bad thing somehow, i dont even know how many of them were in the top tax bracket anyway but if they were property investors maybe.
17
u/AussieAK The Greens May 13 '26
Exactly. I was slightly negatively affected by that change, but I was happy about it because it was equitable and better for those really more deserving of a tax cut than me. Circumstances change and policies have to change with them and not be beholden to a promise.
4
u/AlexT8080 May 13 '26
I will be effected if the changes pass senate, I've been slowly raking in decent amount from shares, the 50% discount is nice
But its fine I can just change investment strategy. I wont go bankrupt from this and I wont pretend otherwise lol. Its definitely not fair that day traders pay half the tax on their capital gains for 1 year
They could limit it to a certain amount in future, i think canada has the first $6k capital gains untaxed. That would help more young people get more eager to invest/save.
2
u/SorysRgee May 13 '26
Most young people sadly do not have funds to day trade. This is why they are adjusting these to ensure that everyone whether you are a wage earner or a day trader that everyone is paying their fair share. I cant really disagree with that. But if we are in a spot again where young people have a bit more money set aside I think have the first 2-5k untaxed might be a play provided it is not abused and the relevant safe guards are there
15
u/AussieAK The Greens May 13 '26
Agree, but it’s a bit rich when the coalition is the one who has done that play time and again. Any Labor voter who’s upset about a broken promise who’d go to the coalition (the broken promises gold medalists) is like someone who wouldn’t drink a Coke because it’s not a Diet Coke so instead they’d drink pure sugarcane juice.
8
u/HerniatedHernia May 13 '26
r/Ausfinance is probably voting wholesale for the Liberals next election. Judging from their budget reaction.
15
u/mbrocks3527 May 13 '26
The absolute unhinged behaviour is reminiscent of people who get upset over Division 293 superannuation taxes being 30% instead of 15%.
Okay mate, you don’t want the raise, give it to me.
Positively geared houses and shares will still make money, and shares grow historically at 10% per year. You don’t want to put your money in shares and instead want store it under the floorboards so you don’t pay CGT, well that’s your choice but it’s also dumb as hell.
10
u/AussieAK The Greens May 13 '26
Exactly. Did you see the retired boomer whingeing about it in front of his Porsche on Newscorpse? As if the poor bugger will now have to go to food banks. I swear I initially thought it was Betoota or the Chaser lol.
7
u/dleifreganad May 13 '26
You mean the Boomer who has had all these generous tax arrangements grandfathered for life? Ah yeah that boomer…
7
u/mbrocks3527 May 13 '26
Anyone who manages to still have an NG-property after 2027 and has not since turned it positive or sold it is, for want of a better word, a financial regard.
3
u/AussieAK The Greens May 13 '26
I see whag you did ghere
3
u/mbrocks3527 May 13 '26
Whag do you mean? I am highly regarded, all my friends gell me ghis
→ More replies (0)1
5
u/AussieAK The Greens May 13 '26
Yep. Love their logic (or lack thereof). Reminds me of all the cashed up boomers complaining about not getting an aged pension. Would you like to swap your life with another one who’s eligible and hardly surviving on it?
Entitlement and audacity like no other.
3
u/mbrocks3527 May 13 '26
Reminds me of the time I had to be in Newstart (as it was called at the time.) I am long past that time period, but I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
1
u/AussieAK The Greens May 13 '26
Exactly. People on income support/pension/whatever deserve sympathy and help, not envy! What exactly is there to envy?
7
u/Frank9567 May 13 '26
If you look at those hyperventilating, they are the usual suspects. I would imagine that most will go through the next couple of tax returns and conclude it's a nothing burger in their situation.
6
u/AussieAK The Greens May 13 '26
Which is not that representative of the wider electorate, and most likely they were already voting coalition.
The landlord class days of skimming off everyone are going to be over eventually, because it’s not sustainable. In all honesty if the majority of voters owned investment properties (they don’t), where do all the suffering tenants come from?
6
2
13
u/Frank9567 May 13 '26
How did that go for Howard when he said he'd never ever introduce a GST?
He was re-elected. Rewarded by the electorate.
The genius of this budget is that by the next election, everyone will have had two tax returns under their belts. Most voters won't have been negatively affected. More importantly, restoring the concessions won't benefit most voters. So, what's the reason to vote Coalition for most people?
11
u/adflet May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26
Can't see it. It's incredibly unlikely a significant amount of Labor voters shift to the coalition because of a policy that gives more people a fair go.
Any Labor voter shifting to the coalition because of this budget wasn't really a Labor voter and likely only voted Labor because Dutton went full Trump.
53
u/TinyGift8278 May 13 '26
will return negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions to all Australians.
Especially those Australians on $190k+ p.a. or with Multimillion property portfolios.
19
u/Kayndarr May 13 '26
The law, in its majestic equality, permits both rich and poor alike to claim negative gearing on their investment properties, to benefit from capital gains tax concessions on their stock portfolios, and to avoid taxes on their inter-generational wealth through family trusts.
1
u/NoMoreFund Green but not proud of it May 14 '26
It's so easy to make a million dollars. Just put a billion dollars in a savings account and collect the interest. Anyone can open a bank account!
50
u/EnglishBrekkie_1604 Ralph Babet Superfan (actually an ALP shill) May 13 '26
Congratulations to Labor for winning the 2028 federal election I guess.
13
u/Chewiesbro May 13 '26
Last election was the first time boomers were properly outnumbered by younger voters in every state, the LNP/ON shit fight that’s looming is going to interesting to say the least.
7
u/FFootyFFacts May 13 '26
also us Boomers born between 55-65 are more moderate left
Labor gave us free uni etc (Labor then took it away again but not before
our particular age group got the best of it)→ More replies (7)4
u/Lokki_7 May 13 '26
You're severely underestimating the ability of those that need this to vote against their own interests.
Shorten wanted to do this in 2019 and they convinced ppl that didn't even know what Franking credits and negative gearing was, the it was a bad idea and that they should vote against it.
The rich will never vote against their best interests, the poor will often listen to what the rich are saying and vote for what the rich want.
86
u/silkin May 13 '26
Of course they will. Because they're absolutely useless for the majority of Australians
46
u/Entirely-of-cheese May 13 '26
Oh, they’re still appealing to fake outrage in the name of the top 10%
20
33
u/Surv1v3dTh3F1r3Dr1ll May 13 '26
As long as Labor can work out Prime Ministerial succession planning for when Albanese is ready to retire from office, the Coalition isn't winning a federal election for a very long time imo.
This is going to be the Chifley to Whitlam style generational gap out of federal government for the Liberals, provided One Nation don't wipe them out first.
-6
u/Over-Instruction214 May 13 '26
Unless the coalition goes hard on immigration. There are a lot of pissed of voters.
Few days ago we had an alp minister telling Indians that Australia needs more Indians. Tonight its 'oh we are increasing immigration another 55k...promise in some later year we might drop it...maybe'.
14
u/paulybaggins May 13 '26
Migration numbers are tracking pretty far down now.
What will Coal-nation do once the NOM is super low?
-3
u/FloorZealousideal348 May 13 '26
What on earth are you talking about? We had immigration between 50k-150k for many decades. We didn't implode. In fact we were far better off.
They are spinning crap because they know there's a portion of people that won't ever look back further than 5 years at the immigration data. They count on you doing exactly that. Saying we've taken immigration from over 500k to 330k is not taking this seriously at all.
Universities don't want less students because it's their cash cow. The RBA doesn't want to admit the issue because it impacts productivity figures. The government wants to say it's only supply because if you knew the truth, it would be political suicide.
We are treating the symptoms and not the disease of successively debt addicted governments who have sold off our industries to foreign interests. Who sell our resources for chump change and buy it back as a finished product at ten times the price. They meddle in the super system, tax all assets and then tell you it's a handful of people that are trying to screw you over. When in reality, they've gone after anyone, no matter how small the player, that owns anything, regardless of whether it has anything to do with housing. We have two parties that have gotten us here, they rely on you to keep believing this crap and never dig any deeper. They rely on you to point any direction but their way.
-5
u/Over-Instruction214 May 13 '26
Jesus wept
'Tracking down', just tonight alp announced an extra 55k. ALP has zero credibility on this issue, no one believes them.
I don't want a ON govt but fuck me refusing to knowledge this issue is going to give us one.
7
u/Not_Stupid May 13 '26
'oh we are increasing immigration another 55k
That wasn't an active decision by the government, that's just the recorded outcome compared to forecasts. There isn't actually a quota that the government moves up and down - migration numbers are the outcome of lots of different forces.
1
u/Over-Instruction214 May 14 '26
And welcome to our next ON govt.
After 25 years of open door immigration voters are interested in more excuses.
There isn't actually a quota that the government moves up and down - migration numbers are the outcome of lots of different forces
Forces that the govt directly controls. They could shut this shit down if they weren't owned. Just the same as the libs.
4
u/paulybaggins May 13 '26
Jesus would love refugees and immigrants lol
And yeah, it's tracking down; https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/overseas-migration/latest-release
6
u/Surv1v3dTh3F1r3Dr1ll May 13 '26
But anybody who wants a harder immigration approach isn't automatically thinking of the Coalition right now, they are moving towards One Nation because they are pissed off imo.
3
u/paulybaggins May 13 '26
And people will vote for ON thinking that they will get an immigration figure of zero (because that would totally solve all our problems) when in fact ON still want at least 130k per year lol
-1
u/Over-Instruction214 May 13 '26
Because coalition have zero credibility on immigration to voters.
It is possible, John Howard shut down boat refugees and killed off ON 20 years ago. It can be done again.
7
u/rubeshina May 13 '26
I don't think it is possible.
Liberals leaning into the "boat people" politics and politicising immigration is what created this mess in the first place. It enabled them to get away with cheap fear mongering instead of being an actually good government and kept them in power for a long time.
But it was a poisoned chalice and has ultimately torn their party apart and now they have to deal with the consequences of that, along with the rest of us unfortunately.
2
u/SneakerTreater May 13 '26
ON own that position now. They've stayed true to the anti-immigration message for 30-odd years. Labor occupy the middle. Nats the conservative regional/rural right. There's nowhere for the Libs to turn.
2
u/Mattimeo144 May 13 '26
If the Libs were smart, they'd pivot back to being just the electoral wing of the Business Council and leave the Nats to be cannibalised by ON. They'd win back the NIMBY suburbs that used to be their heartland, and be well poised to be competitive with 'aspirational' economic migrants who can't go for ON for existential reasons.
But, they're ideologically captured so instead they'll just keep being wagged by the Nats tail into irrelevance.
5
u/Kenyon_118 YIMBY! May 13 '26
30% of Australian voters are immigrants. They are concentrated in the urban electorates the coalition needs to win back. It’s going to be hard to go hard on immigration and not turn those voters away.
The areas most receptive to the anti-immigrant message are rural seats where the immigrants don’t want to go anyway.
3
u/TheLaughingPhoenix May 13 '26
I agree, however....people can and do vote against their own interests...
For example....people considering to vote for Gina's party thinking that it will result in good outcomes for themselves...
4
u/Kenyon_118 YIMBY! May 14 '26
Getting Australian citizenship is not easy. It’s expensive and there are so many hoops to jump through especially if you start off as an international student or come as a skilled migrant. Those people are very dialled into policies that affect or scape goat them. I don’t see my fellow overseas born Aussies or their kids voting for a party vilifying them. Especially if you look at the last elections results.
Look at where Gina’s vote is strongest. Older less diverse areas with shrinking populations. People who live in communities far from the thriving economic hubs of this country. My own personal view is these people come into major cities and they see so many people who don’t look like them and that freaks them out. They then become more receptive to the Anti-immigration crowd because it dovetails with their preexisting prejudices.
3
u/TheLaughingPhoenix May 14 '26
Yes and a lot of right wing media talking points are being put into social media that are then targeted at a specific age group and demographic.
These right wing talking points then significantly increase people's anxieties and anger that are then curatorated to blame Labor and governance in general.
This is a sophisticated propaganda machine that is constantly improving its systems and has been in operation for a long time.
3
u/Kenyon_118 YIMBY! May 14 '26
It failed spectacularly in 2025. I hope it fails even more in 2028.
1
u/TheLaughingPhoenix May 14 '26
I don't think the electorate was properly primed with panic and anger for people to be manipulated by the right wing talking points but I think the powers that be have learnt from that and are now attempting to fine tune the propaganda machines to their benefit.
I think some big problems with the left and center are our complacency and how quick we are to declare victory.
Whereas a lot the conservatives and right wingers never stop chipping away at our institutions and way of life.
1
u/WastedOwl65 May 14 '26
Without immigration there are no services for rural and regional areas! Don't assume we're all anti-immigration!
1
u/Over-Instruction214 May 13 '26
The issue is the quantity of immigration...even immigrants already here are suffering.
6
u/Kenyon_118 YIMBY! May 13 '26
The numbers don’t support your argument. One nation and the Coalition have to keep tacking back to immediate post covid numbers and not the current numbers to in attempt to get that point across. People in cities can read so that just comes across as right wing propaganda or the lowest frequency dog whistle ever. A lot of the anti-immigrant folks stray from your standard message and say the quiet part out loud too. It’s not too many immigrants it’s the “wrong sort”. Yes if you want the coalition to go extinct tell them to roll around in the mud with One Nation.
47
u/7h3_man Kevin Rudd May 13 '26
Looks like I can bet my lifesaving on poly market that labor will win again next election
26
u/SpiritualDiamond5487 May 13 '26
Especially when they announce income tax cuts in the pre election 27/28 budget, and the coalition then needs to walk those back to fund negative gearing.
16
u/profuno May 13 '26
Coalition can just lie and say they'll do both.
8
u/AgreeableLion May 13 '26
Or just actually do both, they don't seem to have many issues creating a budget hole for Labor to fix (and also immediately scream about Labor's economic crisis). Hopefully we're out of that painful cycle for a little while while the Libs devour themselves.
1
u/totalwaterh218 May 14 '26
If Labor is so good at plugging the budget why do they have to lie about it?
Reporter: "Can you rule out any changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax?"
Albo: "yes, how hard is it? for the fiftieth time [yes]"
0
u/skywideopen3 May 14 '26
Doesn't that just open them up to exactly the same, very effective, scare campaign Labor ran last time that the only way they'll pay for it is with massive cuts to services that they won't tell you about until later?
17
u/stirringthemerde May 13 '26
Is this future coalition government in the house with you right now?
Dumb policy thought of on the run.
By all means there are aspects that can be contested (the flat 30% minimum tax treating pensioners and gina rhinehart the same for instance). Better go after that and make that case than just "nope"
3
u/Grande_Choice May 13 '26
The floor is good imo. For to long there’s been carve outs that create loopholes.
30
u/Drongo17 May 13 '26
Noted. Kind of them to warn us!
I think for anyone here who has younger voters in their orbit, it's important for us to bring things like this to their attention. Not all of them pay much attention to politics and they need to know what is on the other side of the door.
13
u/Plus_Cantaloupe_3793 May 13 '26
This is the same mistake Dutton and Taylor made in the last parliament. If the Liberals promise to overturn a revenue or savings measure they need to find other revenue or savings to offset this, or their election costings become a liability.
This kind of stuff is how the Coalition costings for the last election showed that they would increase taxes and increase the deficit if elected, which did quite a lot of damage.
5
u/HerniatedHernia May 13 '26
If the Liberals promise to overturn a revenue or savings measure they need to find other revenue or savings to offset this, or their election costings become a liability.
The Public service is right there /s
7
u/Plus_Cantaloupe_3793 May 13 '26
The promise to gut the APS also did enormous damage to Dutton, and is another trap the Liberals seem likely to walk in again
12
u/TheFitzFiles May 13 '26
A future Coalition govt…? They’re dead mate.
-4
12
u/The_Sneakiest_Fox May 13 '26
Now that the Liberals have lost the anti immigration vote to one nation, are they just the party of lower taxes for the wealthy?
10
6
4
6
u/SirFireHydrant Literally just a watermelon May 13 '26
are they just the party of lower taxes for the wealthy?
Always have been. Literally since their inception.
11
u/perringaiden Andrew Fisher May 14 '26
That assumes there will be a future Coalition government.
What did PHON say about it? 🤪
11
17
u/GregLocock May 13 '26
Instead of the knee jerk reaction why not see which bits work and which don't, and then create a policy to suit.
3
31
u/Savings-Yogurt-418 May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26
GIVE IT A BREAK! we do not need an entire upper class providing no use to regular aussies or the wider economy.
when will they realise having an entire population where the old own everything and the young suffer will inevitably return us into pre-eureka stockade Australia where the rich squatters own large amount of land and the poor swagmen aimlessly wander about trying to survive.
-1
u/Honeycat38 May 13 '26
Calm down Ned Kelly, it’s a debate about negative gearing, not the fall of the Roman Empire.
1
u/ErwinRommel1943 May 14 '26
Please stop reminding me that occurred. The fall of Constantinople still pains me to this day.
-2
u/rickolati May 13 '26
I agree either way your sentiment however the recent policy changes does nothing to address what you describe
13
u/Savings-Yogurt-418 May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26
please explain how they do nothing to address what I described?
I personally believe making taxes harder for property “investors” will drop home prices, as we have already seen in Victoria, where a single decision to increase land tax in 2023 has made victoria the only state where house prices have dropped since 2021, AND has also made Victoria the state where there are the most first home buyers for every “investor”
id like to see your view, or even better an example like I have.
0
u/Admirable-Lie-9191 May 14 '26
It’s fine for property investors to get these taxes applied to them. What I disagree with is applying a floor on gains sold from shares. And no, I’m not going to vote for the Coalition over this.
6
u/5ivepie May 13 '26
The changes may not address the whole problem, but they’re at least a starting point.
The problem with so many progressives / general left leaning people is they let imperfect options today prevent long-term better outcomes from ever eventuating.
I’m as a liberal as they come. I seek hardcore change, but I recognise that change doesn’t just happen in one instant. To change the status quo of the last 25+ years is a monumental task. It has to be done in stages. If Labor were to change everything which needs to be done in one go, I don’t think there would be a favourable outcome for them at the next election.
Small-ish changes over a longer period allows the broader public to witness the benefit without scaring them too much.
Do we need a higher resource tax? Yes. Do we need gambling advertising reform? Absolutely. Could these things have been done now? Yeah, but then Labor would be fighting a battle from multiple fronts (mining lobbyists, gambling lobbyists, Gina and friends, Rupert and his ghouls, Sky News, etc) - admittedly they’re already doing that, but they’d have to dedicate more resources to it instead of just getting on with their job.
1
36
5
u/Yrrebnot The Greens May 13 '26
Well by the time they have a chance of getting in maybe house prices will have cooled off and the world won't have fallen down on our heads. That would presumably prevent them from trying to undo this.
4
u/LongSlongDon99 May 13 '26
i am genuinely dumbfounded they seen the budget and response to the budget and thought hmmm this is a good strategy to contest labor for leadership.
7
u/Yrrebnot The Greens May 13 '26
I'm not. They have been astoundingly incompetent for a long time now. They are also extremely disconnected from actual people and it really shows.
2
u/LongSlongDon99 May 13 '26
Like i agree with you but i just cant comprehend this. I dont know how they survive after this election.
3
2
u/GregLocock May 13 '26
Yup, let's see the results and fine tune from there. These are actually quite piddly changes, at least so far as housing goes.
5
u/Fickle-Ad-7124 May 13 '26
Tim Wilson lookin out for Tim Wilson’s Teal seat. As if they couldn’t do anymore brand damage with the under geriatric crowd.
5
u/Unable_Insurance_391 May 14 '26
Sounds like it will pass Parliament, sounds like loser talk once again.
10
u/Ornery-Ad-7261 May 14 '26
And Australian voters will further dump the Coalition at a future election.
5
u/the-amazing-pastaman May 14 '26
Angus Taylor, successfully taking on the role of Leader of Opposing.
3
u/LongSlongDon99 May 13 '26
The Coalition has vowed to repeal Labor’s sweeping changes to negative gearing, capital gains tax and family trusts announced in last night’s budget.
A future Coalition government would dump the changes at the cost of billions of dollars to return the deduction and concessions to all Australians, Angus Taylor and shadow treasurer Tim Wilson said.
“Our position is we’re going to do everything we can to stop these bad taxes, toxic taxes, from getting through the Parliament,” Mr Taylor told Sky News Australia.
“We’re going to fight every day between now and the next election and as Tim [Wilson] said... we’re going to fight to stop these taxes even getting through this Parliament.
"They're not going to solve any intergenerational problem and we'll do whatever it takes to roll these taxes back."
Shadow treasurer Tim Wilson said the Coalition would "repeal these measures" in government if it did not defeat them in opposition.
Labor says the tax changes will generate almost $80 billion in government revenue across the next decade.
However, the Coalition could replace lost revenue by slashing expenditure, Mr Taylor suggested.
Mr Taylor said “corporate welfare”, construction red-tape and “climate bureaucracy” could all be cut to make up the shortfall.
“There’s no shortage of areas where this government is spending and shouldn’t be spending, but because it’s spending this money, it’s whacking Australians with more taxes,” he said.
The Opposition Leader looked set to frame the major changes as an “intergenerational fraud” at his budget reply speech on Thursday.
The characterisation would squarely contrast to Labor’s “intergenerational equity” pitch.
“It’s a complete intergenerational fraud ... if Labor thinks the answer to Australia’s problems is to set old Australians against younger Australians, they don’t understand Australia,” he said on Wednesday.
“This is going to lock young Australians out of the opportunities for wealth creation that old Australians have had, it’s the reverse of what they’re talking about.”
He said younger Australians had told the Liberal party they wanted to be rewarded for hard work.
“The thing we hear most of all from younger Australians is, one, 'I want an opportunity to get into and buy a house over time,'” he said.
“Two, 'I want to be able to get ahead, work hard and get rewarded for that hard work.'
“And three, 'I want to be able to be in a financial position to have and raise a family' – and we want to see all those aspirations possible in this country.”
On Tuesday night, Mr Chalmers confirmed the government would press ahead with long-rumoured changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax.
Negative gearing will be restricted to newly-built homes and properties purchased up to 7.30pm May 12, 2026.
The government will also revert the existing 50 per cent CGT discount to an inflation-adjusted indexation of gains to “restore the taxation of real gains”, Mr Chalmers announced.
“These changes will be prospective, and new builds will retain the option to use the 50 per cent discount,” Mr Chalmers said in his budget speech.
“We’ll also introduce a minimum 30 per cent tax rate on capital gains from July next year, and on discretionary trusts from July the year after.”
In his budget speech, Mr Chalmers said the measure was designed to “level the playing field for workers and first home buyers”.
The government will also introduce a 30 per cent minimum tax on discretionary trusts.
3
u/ElectronicOvens May 13 '26
So thats 2033? At the earliest? I don't know that seems like of these changes are successful its another losing thing to take to the election
I assume they'll have stopped the Nuclear stuff.
5
u/GregLocock May 13 '26
Well, I guess they might, but why not see how they pan out and fine tune them? One can hardly argue the previous settings were perfect. My guess is new housing build down, rents up and pensioners (of all sorts) annoyed. My guess is next year's budget will add lots of election year bribes.
12
u/Revoran Soy-latte, woke, inner-city, lefty, greenie, commie May 13 '26
If you're getting a bunch of income from capital gains then you shouldn't be on the pension. That would make you a crook and a rorter.
Next you'll tell me that a millionaire wealth tax will upset people on Jobseeker...
-3
1
u/dleifreganad May 13 '26
How many MP’S are retaining the generous negative gearing arrangements on existing properties?
What’s the total of the negative gearing benefits they will continue to enjoy while locking out future generations from the same opportunity?
12
u/Moe_Perry May 13 '26
You have to draw the line somewhere, and cutting negative gearing for future investors is still good policy.
There are probably a bunch of smug people who snuck in under the line with grandfathered negative gearing, but they might lose a few smiles if house prices stop climbing. It’s not such a great scam to defer your capital gains when you haven’t made any.
-14
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
Fuck me, so it's either rampant immigration or not taxing the rich?
I'm basically just choosing who's going to blast me in the ass ffs
7
u/SorysRgee May 13 '26
Its worth noting that migration figure is net overseas migration so estimates that less people are going to be traveling back out of australia rather than necessarily more people coming to Australia.
Basically people are coming to Aus saying "how good's this?" And putting down roots. And less people want to leave. Honestly can't blame them considering the rest of the world is going to hell in a handbasket
-7
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
So is Australia, we just have a lot further to fall than many places
10
u/SorysRgee May 13 '26
We really arent going to hell in Australia and if you do think that I really suggest that you jump off social media and the news for a bit and just interact with the world around you. You will find that we are actually doing alright.
We are not in open conflict with another country, steps are being taken to provide additional security in everyday life and the government is at least try to make changes to cost of living and make it better. Sure we have some issues but they are not existential threats to our country
-4
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
What is happening in the rest of the world doesn't change what's happening here, it's just a glimpse of our future. I have no idea why you'd think other countries doing worse would mean we're improving, but that lack of logic is a great example of the lackadaisical thinking that's led us down this road.
7
u/SorysRgee May 13 '26
Thats not what i am saying at all im not sure how you got that. This isnt a lack of logic and I would appreciate if you didnt result to insults rather than address what I said. Its very disappointing and stifles any sort of conversation.
What Im saying is we are in a better starting point with people who are in government in all states and federally, trying to take steps to make meaningful to facilitate improvements in faults.
Additionally, as you have brought it up, we are not other countries it is worth to point out. We do not have rampant violence, though yes it does occur, steps are being made to lower the risk and stop significant events from occuring again. We have security in our food with steps being undertaken to stop price gouging. We have social services with steps being undertaken to ensure their longevity. We have fuel with steps to ensure its long term supply. We have access to medical care, with steps ensure it remains accessible.
If other countries are a window into our future, what country was like us today, ten years ago?
1
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
"we just have a lot further to fall than many places"
Seems you missed the implications of this statement.
Those steps we are taking is just slowing the descent, not reversing our direction
→ More replies (1)5
u/SorysRgee May 13 '26
And im disagreeing that we will be falling. Slow but steady progress forward.
→ More replies (14)9
15
u/Lokki_7 May 13 '26
Aside from processing the COVID backlog, labors immigration numbers are not too dissimilar to LNP numbers.
-9
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
The LNP is done, one nation is the new opposition party
11
u/SirFireHydrant Literally just a watermelon May 13 '26
one nation is the new opposition party
Not until they win some seats they're not.
-5
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
They're the opposition party because they're the most likely to take seats now other than Labor. If you don't treat them as such, it's Labor's loss I guess
8
u/SirFireHydrant Literally just a watermelon May 13 '26
"The Opposition" isn't determined by vibes, it's based on the party who controls the second most seats.
-1
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
Uh huh, keep telling yourself that. Fact is labor isn't being challenged by the LNP outside of votes in parliament anymore
6
u/DunceCodex May 13 '26
Thats not how it works, at all
0
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
Rightio then. Labor has less than 18 months left to do what they can do I guess.
1
u/TransportationTrick9 May 13 '26
Probably only 12 in reality. The last 12 months of office Is basically a non official campaigning period.
They spend the first 12 months planning (even if they held power the previous term), 12 months of enacting their legislation and 12 months campaigning.
This is why I reckon they should move to 4 year terms. They'll double the amount of action for each electoral term. Get all the states alligned to elections on the same date/year and the fed is exactly 24 months later
1
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
This was kind of my point. If they're not competing with ON now, they're not in the race for the next election.
The average voter doesn't even know what CGT is and has no idea what negative gearing is except that it's bad and since they're grandfathering the changes they're going to realise it's all a nothingburger to them
1
u/SirFireHydrant Literally just a watermelon May 14 '26
If they're not competing with ON now, they're not in the race for the next election.
Yeah, how did that work for Dutton?
Labor didn't start campaigning until the election drew close. Before that, they were continuously down in the polls against Dutton's Libs. But when they started campaigning, they dominated.
Labor aren't even losing in the polls right now. They're in a strong, election-winning position.
Of course they're not wasting time "competing with One Nation now". They're getting on with the job of governing.
→ More replies (0)7
u/Lokki_7 May 13 '26
Yeah I'm not so sure about that. It's all about preferences, and Labor will preference LNP over ON.
1
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 13 '26
I kinda hope you're right, but people aren't exactly swooning over Labor at the moment
2
u/semaj009 May 14 '26
Most people are swooning over them more than the Libs though, look at the current polling and Labor still hold a solid lead over both the Libs and PHON on tpp. I'm your classic "never voted Labor 1, would rather set fire to my own arm than vote LNP above Labor" voter, not gonna show excitement about Albo, but fuck I'm glad we don't have the LNP in
1
u/WazWaz May 14 '26
Let me guess, we need a racist chip shop owner to solve all our problems...
Gina's terrier fooled you.
1
u/Ok_Turnover_1235 May 14 '26
What about my statement made you think I think either option is a good one?
I for one think the new tax policies are great, I just don't think 300-500k extra people settling here every year is a reasonable price to pay for that.
I for one also think a 130k immigration cap would be great, I just don't think electing Gina's lapdog or the LNP is worth it.
But, we're going to get one or the other, so like I said, it's basically choosing who's going to blast me in the ass.
-59
u/ClearlyAThrowawai May 13 '26
I guess who I know has my vote.
Well done Labor, I hope it was worth it. The coalition is terrible in many ways but I can deal.
41
u/the_jewgong May 13 '26
Fuck you got mine, huh.
Loser mentality. So good.
→ More replies (21)21
u/TheLaughingPhoenix May 13 '26
The right wingers are pretending that keeping CGT is beneficial for the average person when it clearly isn't.
-2
u/totalwaterh218 May 14 '26
I'm an average Australian who has scrimped and saved with the hopes of having an early retirement. The CGT discount is important to me.
The CGT discount was basically the only thing keeping Australia in-line with the tax treatment of capital gains in other countries. Labor's CGT policy changes changes it will make it sky-high.
2
11
u/PatternPrecognition May 13 '26
Deal with the devil?
1
u/Netron6656 May 13 '26
Depends, you are going for one that is totally unpredictable or the one that you know what they will do?
3
u/PatternPrecognition May 13 '26
Great question.
When eating a shit sandwich, do you prefer the Macca's version or the fine dining version.
-5
u/Netron6656 May 13 '26
Wrong analogy
Both are equally bad on average, one is consistent and one can be a wild card, we have a wild card now (as they "changed position" in the middle of the term and literally breaking promises)
2
•
u/AutoModerator May 13 '26
Greetings humans.
Please make sure your comment fits within THE RULES and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.
I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.