Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 667

Negative gearing: quarantined, not killed

Negative gearing did not die on Budget night. It was placed in quarantine, which sounds gentler, right up until the arithmetic is done. Since 12 May, commentary has split into two camps: one declaring residential property investment dead, the other insisting nothing has changed because existing holdings are grandfathered and new builds are exempt. Both camps are wrong, for the same reason. Neither has calculated what quarantining a loss costs. This article does the sums, and the answer for a typical investor is roughly a quarter of the tax benefit.

A caveat first: none of this is law yet. The measures were announced in the 2026-27 Budget to start on 1 July 2027, and bills change between announcement and assent. But the grandfathering line was drawn at 7:30pm on Budget night, so anyone buying today is already living under the proposed rules.

What 'quarantined' actually means

From 1 July 2027, negative gearing for residential property will be limited to new builds. Investors who buy a newly constructed dwelling can keep deducting net rental losses against salary, exactly as now. Investors who buy an established dwelling after Budget night cannot.

Here is the part the headlines skipped: those losses are not denied. The ATO's summary confirms they can still be offset against other residential property income, including capital gains, with any excess carried forward indefinitely. Interest, rates, insurance and agent fees all remain deductible. What changes is when the deduction arrives and what it lands against. The deduction is deferred, not denied: the tax equivalent of 'the cheque is in the mail', except this mail can take a decade.

The change applies to individuals, companies and most trusts, but not superannuation funds (including SMSFs) or widely held trusts. Commercial property and geared share portfolios are untouched.

The $9,000 haircut: a worked example

Consider an investor on the top marginal rate (47% including Medicare levy) who buys an established unit for $750,000 with a $600,000 interest-only loan at 6%. Rent starts at $30,000, a 4% gross yield, growing at 3.5% a year. Cash expenses of $7,000 grow at 3%. The hold is 10 years.

Year one produces a $13,000 net rental loss. Under the old rules, that returns $6,110 in tax immediately. Under the new rules, it returns nothing. Yet.

Notice what the 'nothing has changed' camp misses. On an ordinary interest-only structure at current rates, this property never turns cash-positive within the decade. All $88,305 of losses ride along to the sale, where they offset the capital gain. Under the new CGT settings, that gain is taxed at the investor's marginal rate; the headline 30% is a floor, not the rate, and it bites only when that marginal rate would fall below it. For a top-rate investor the gain is taxed at 47%, so the loss bank returns roughly $41,500. Once. In year 10.

Discounting both streams at 6%, the old regime's annual refunds are worth about $32,100 today, while the new regime's single deferred offset is worth about $23,200. The cost of quarantining is roughly $9,000, or 28% of the tax benefit, even though no deduction was ever formally denied. The ATO is not confiscating deductions; it is running a cloakroom with no fixed closing time.

The damage is almost entirely time value. The same $41,500 of relief eventually arrives, but a lump in year 10 is worth far less than refunds collected along the way, and the investor funds the shortfall from after-tax salary in the meantime. Note what does not change: because the gain is taxed at the same 47% the losses would have been deducted at, there is no rate penalty here, only a timing one. A rate penalty appears only for an investor who sells on a lower marginal rate than they earned while holding, the retiree who disposes after their income has fallen, where the 30% floor could come into play. Under the old regime, maximum leverage maximised the tax benefit. Under the new one, heavy leverage on a low-yield established dwelling maximises the deferral penalty.

The carve-outs do the steering

This is less a revenue measure than a traffic system, and every exemption points capital somewhere. New builds keep full gearing, and their buyers can even choose at sale between the old 50% discount and the new indexation, a rare case of the tax system offering a genuine choice that does not require a private ruling. Commercial property and shares keep immediate deductibility, improving their relative appeal. And SMSFs sit outside the quarantine entirely, which mechanically improves residential property's standing inside super. Steering geared property into super was presumably not the plan, but tax incentives are like water: they find the cracks.

Lessons from 1985 (and Wellington)

Australia quarantined negative gearing once before, between July 1985 and September 1987. Folklore blames the experiment for Sydney rent spikes; the data is murkier, with rents rising in some cities, falling in others, and interest rates in the teens muddying everything. Both sides have now been citing the same two years of data for four decades, which must be some kind of productivity record. New Zealand offers a cleaner test: it ring-fenced rental losses in 2019 and the ring-fence survives today, through a change of government. Property investment across the Tasman did not end; it repriced. Grattan Institute modelling suggests prices 1% to 2% lower than they would otherwise be, while industry modelling warns of materially fewer housing starts. Hold all of these numbers loosely.

What investors should do now

Existing holders are grandfathered, and their main risk is legislative drift while the bill passes. Selling and rebuying now carries a hidden cost, because the replacement asset enters the new regime. Prospective buyers face a sharper fork: a new build keeps immediate deductibility, while an established dwelling carries the quarantine cost above, which belongs in the offer price. SMSF trustees should re-run their comparisons rather than rush, since a tax wedge is a poor sole basis for an asset allocation. And anyone with a negatively geared plan needs fresh cash flow modelling, because the refund that used to co-fund the shortfall now arrives at the end, not along the way.

Quarantining changes the timing and destination of tax benefits. In leveraged investing, timing and destination are most of the game. The example investor loses no deduction on paper and roughly a quarter of its value in practice. It is a repricing of property investment, and the best-placed investors will be the ones who did the present-value arithmetic before the market did.

 

Trevor Schmid has more than 20 years’ experience across superannuation, financial advice and member education. This article is general information only and does not consider any individual’s objectives, financial situation or needs.

 

  •   17 June 2026
  • 8
  •      
  •   
8 Comments
Trevor Schmid
June 22, 2026

You're right under the normal rules, but that's exactly what the Budget changed. For affected established dwellings, rental losses are quarantined and carried forward, and the measure specifically lets them be applied against residential property income, including the capital gain on sale. So it's a timing change, not a reclassification of the loss. Treasury's tax explainer sets it out: https://budget.gov.au/content/04-tax-reform.htm

Philip Rix
June 18, 2026

I appreciated the author's insight and clear manner in which it was described. I personally had not considered the treatment of annual rental losses against future capital gains.
As we have recently seen with the (just) announced changes to small business CGT rules it will be a case that we need to continue to watch for the details as they move through from 'announcements' to actual laws.

3
david
June 18, 2026

why do you say the gain is taxed at 30% and not 47%?

2
Trevor Schmid
June 19, 2026

You're right, and thank you. That's a fair catch. The 30% is a floor, not the rate. The indexed gain is taxed at the investor's marginal rate, with 30% only binding when that rate would otherwise sit below it. My example investor is on 47%, so their gain is taxed at 47% and the floor doesn't apply. The loss bank therefore returns at 47%, not 30%.
That matters for the headline number. Correcting it, the deferred offset is worth about $23,200 in present-value terms rather than $14,800, and the cost of quarantining comes down to roughly $9,000, or about 28% of the benefit (not the 54% I wrote).
So the thesis stands but at a smaller magnitude: quarantining still carries a genuine cost that both camps miss - it's just closer to a quarter or a third of the benefit rather than a half. I'll look at getting the piece updated to reflect this. Appreciate you running the numbers.

Trevor Schmid
June 20, 2026

You're right under the normal rules, but that's exactly what the Budget changed. For affected established dwellings, rental losses are quarantined and carried forward, and the measure specifically lets them be applied against residential property income, including the capital gain on sale. So it's a timing change, not a reclassification of the loss. Treasury's tax explainer sets it out: https://budget.gov.au/content/04-tax-reform.htm

1
Bryan
June 21, 2026

Will the capital gains discount of 50% on properties owned prior to the new rules be grandfathered in perpetuity - or will the grandfathering only apply to gains up to the date of the new laws being introduced? Will gains subsequent to that be taxed under the new rules?

Tony Dillon
June 21, 2026

Trevor, a fairer way would be to capitalise the losses as they occur and index them in line with the asset’s cost base. If you did that, the deferred losses in your example, would be worth about $27,000 if you indexed at say 3%. That is, the 28% cost drops to about 15%. Thanks for the article.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Div 296's million-dollar reset worth $25,000

The when and why of four million Australian retirees

Who needs the Caymans? 10 ways to avoid paying tax

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

Testamentary trusts have secured the CGT exemption

Treasury’s latest CGT reform draft delivers a win for testamentary trusts and deceased estates, exempting estate-derived gains from the 30% floor. However, questions on death and divorce rollovers remain unresolved.

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Latest Updates

Planning

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

Superannuation

There's a reason why your super is locked up until your 60s

For decades, it seemed settled. Then one controversial idea reignited a debate that could reshape the financial future of millions. The real question isn’t who’s right or wrong, but whether a long-held assumption deserves another look.

Property

The housing slide could become a crash

House prices are sliding across Australia, yet the most dangerous ingredient for a housing crash is still missing. If job losses surge amid growing economic risks, today's correction could become a historic property downturn.

Retirement

Under-retiring: The greatest retirement risk in a generation

Two retirees. Similar savings. Completely different lives. New research from Challenger reveals why some Australians confidently spend in retirement while others hold back and the overlooked factor shaping retirement decisions.

Five risks to watch in markets

Things you may often hear are: a recession is around the corner, markets are overpriced, the AI sector is about to flop at any moment. It’s like the never-ending laundry pile that sits in my house, it never really disappears.

Investment strategies

Do you qualify as ‘rich’?

What does it mean to be 'rich'? For something so universally desired, it is surprisingly difficult to define. That ambiguity creates a challenge for investors and raises a bigger question about what financial success really looks like.

Investment strategies

If you’re worried about your bond portfolio, you’re missing the point

Most investors think they know what bonds are for. But when markets turn volatile, a surprising misunderstanding can lead to costly decisions. Here’s the overlooked lesson that could change how you view your portfolio.

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.