Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 682

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

The federal government’s tax reforms are the most significant changes for housing investors Australia has seen since 1999. From July 1 2027, three things will change:

Some have called these housing tax changes broken promises, which risk crashing the housing market. But others consider it a long overdue change to level the playing field for first home buyers.

Amid so much heated debate, how many investors are actually likely to be worse or better off under these changes?

That’s what we set out to shed light on. Our new modelling draws on 920,000 pieces of individual property data – covering all residential sales in Australia and about 75% of new tenant rents – from July 2007 to June 2025.

We used that data to estimate how many of those investments would have ended up paying more or less tax in that 18-year period, if the reforms starting in July 2027 had already been in place.

What our modelling found

After comparing the pre- and post-reform tax systems, we found that about 53% of property investments would have paid more tax in total under the new reforms. This means a surprisingly high proportion, 47%, would have paid the same, or less, in total tax on housing investments.

Each investor’s “total tax” change is their change in rental income tax, plus their change in CGT. While much of the public focus has been on negative gearing, we found the CGT changes have a bigger impact.

About 50% of investments are negatively geared: in other words, they make losses on rental income. Most of those investments would have paid more rental income tax if the July 2027 tax changes had been introduced earlier. But those rental income tax increases tended to be small relative to the CGT changes.

We found the incoming CGT changes actually would have benefited the majority (54%) of property investments from mid-2007 to mid-2025.

Why the size of your capital gain is key

The new capital gains tax system starting in July 2027 will tax only capital gains that exceed the rate of inflation, as measured by the consumer price index (CPI). This gives all investments a similar tax-free component of gains.

In contrast, the pre-reform 50% CGT discount has given investments that realise high capital gains a substantially larger tax-free component than others.

Therefore, next year’s reforms will increase the CGT payable for properties with relatively high gains (roughly more than double the rate of inflation), while lowering it for other properties.

Our results show that, at least in the past 18 years, most investments have been below this cutoff of growing by less than roughly double inflation.

Still, if an investment makes a high capital gain, its tax rise is likely to be bigger than its tax cut if it makes a small gain.

As this chart shows, for investments in the top 20% of capital gain performance, our modelling found average capital gains tax would have risen by about 11% of the purchase price. In contrast, for the bottom 60%, it would have fallen by about 3–4%.

So while CGT would have fallen for the majority of investments, we estimate that the average CGT rate would have risen – and therefore the total tax revenue would have too.

Overall, investors would have faced less risk under the reforms. Why? The reduction of tax for low capital gains improves the worst-case outcomes.

Who pays more tax?

Who would be most affected by the introduction of the new 30% minimum capital gains tax rate? This change is particularly aimed at people selling property in low-income years – who are often retirees.

Retirees who own an investment property are unlikely to qualify for the age-pensioner exemption to the 30% minimum tax. So they will be among the investors most affected by the July 2027 changes.

Investors with highly leveraged properties are also among the worst off. These investors pay more in interest and have a higher likelihood of being negatively geared. For these investments, the negative gearing changes can be more consequential than the CGT changes.

What does this tell us about housing market impact?

Our estimates suggest the impact on housing investor taxes will be less dramatic than many headlines have made out. After July 1 next year, the majority of investors are likely to pay more in tax, but it may be a slim majority.

Investors are unlikely to know whether they’re in tax rise or tax cut territory. It’s mainly determined by the size of their capital gain, which is unknown until they sell. Like stock returns, capital gains are unpredictable.

Under these reforms, the downside is there now appears less prospect of high after-tax gains. But on the upside, there is also less chance of large after-tax losses. So how investors will react to these tax changes from July next year will depend on their personal preferences around risk.The Conversation

 

Nick Garvin, Visiting Fellow, School of Economics, UNSW and Elyse Dwyer, Visiting Fellow, School of Economics, UNSW

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

 

  •   30 September 2026
  • 15
  •      
  •   
15 Comments
John
October 01, 2026

How convenient for the Treasurer that his tax "reforms" have crashed the housing market. This ensures that come 30 June 2027, when property (and other) investments will have to be formally valued, properties will be valued much lower (10-15% less) than a year ago. This means that when the recovery comes, a greater proportion of the property will be hit with the new tax regime for a given selling price.

7
OldbutSane
October 04, 2026

It's a bit rich to say that these reforms have crashed the market! Not only were prices here rising at an unsustainable rate but they had moderated before the tax changes. Also, look at what property prices overseas have been doing in recent years and you will find the fall here is nothing unusual and I'm sure tax changes in Australia have nothing to do with that!

IMHO the CGT reforms will have a much bigger impact on share investors, particularly, from what I understand is the inability to offset capital gains with a deduction eg into superannuation (a common pre- and retirement strategy).

3
John Corbin
October 01, 2026

I reckon the pimple on the bum of it all is the CPI. My view is that the basket of goodies used for the CPI figures as released by the ABS do not adequately represent the actual increase in cost of living i.e. effect on individual purchasing power. When was the last time you went to the supermarket and commented on a price rise of 4%. Prices are constantly rising above that figure and you'd be lucky not to be hit with a minimum of a 10% increase. Interesting conspiracy thought, is the basket being played, prices being kept down on necessities whilst everywhere else prices go up 30%. In the last 12 months I've seen a myriad of price increases of 25 - 30%. So to finish, is the CPI as published, a valid base figure for an "in actuality" calculation of capital gain and what about the differences between various cities and States?

5
OldbutSane
October 04, 2026

Yes well my weekly pot if tea has gone from $5 in April to $5.20 from June til last week and yesterday was $5 90 plus new 10% weekend surcharge, so $6 49. So it is now 25% more expensive than last week when the had a credit card surcharge.

2
Sammm
October 05, 2026

Wow.

I have been oversees for 2 months. I am coming back this Friday. It will be interesting to see the price increases.

1
Allan Abrahams
October 05, 2026

John,
You are 100.0% correct.
Anyone in doubt please compare the price of what a loaf of bread cost 5 years ago and see if you can see how much it cost today!
That comparison can be used on just about anything you buy in a supermarket.

Wildcat
October 01, 2026

I’m not going to argue the technical matters as I’ve simply not done the modelling.

What I can argue is not the reality of the tax situation it’s the psychological aspect. Most punters will view the tax changes as being very negative, notwithstanding the current buyer drought and property price falls that will compound the negative perception.

The attractiveness to the average mum and dad investor is falling, boomers are moving to settling phase as they want to rid themselves of the hassle and regulatory overreach against landlords. This started in Victoria and is spreading.

If you want your kids to have a place to rent that they can afford you’ll probably have to buy it yourself. Rental inflation in the next 5 years Is going to be painful.

If you want less of something you tax it (eg cigarettes and alcohol) and they are taxing property more, whether in reality more is real or simply a perception of a potential landlord.

4
GeorgeB
October 05, 2026

"Rental inflation in the next 5 years Is going to be painful"

The sad fact is is we've been here before. When the Hawke government quarantined negative gearing between 1985 and 1987, rents increased sharply due to pre-existing low vacancy rates (around 1% to 1.4%) and local supply shortages. The Hawke Government then reinstated full negative gearing in 1987. So is that where we are heading?

1
Dudley
October 05, 2026


"is that where we are heading?":
Gina Reinhart sell a few mines and build a swag of new homes then have Prime Minister Hanson do the u-ie switcheroo.

Scott
October 01, 2026

A bit of trivia to lighten the topic.
I did an interesting exercise on long term house prices for a house sold in the 1880s up until 2021 for $40M, about 140 years.
It has been refurbished probably many times but land area is intact. Average price increase per annum is about 6.3% assuming 2 AUD to GBP. Todays rate about 1.9.
The power of compounding my accountant friend tells me but, surprisingly, less than I expected especially with inflation and maintenance eating away at profitability.
Today at that rate it would be worth about $54m but with headline inflation over that time at say 4%, ongoing maintenace and building costs increasing 30 to 40% over that period says maybe more.
So clearly, high immigration relative to constructed dwellings, inflation and the fact that disposable income hasn't kept up combined with low productivity to enable that are the real drivers.

Changing tax regimes as shown are at best window dressing and at worst, for low income first home buyers, prices are going to increase even as the higher cost houses tumble resulting average home prices dropping as retirees downsize.

My opinion but others have stated as much

1
Dudley
October 05, 2026


"daily sustenance of a can of" ..."baked beans @ .90c a can":

Protein in baked beans can;
= (5.9 g / 100 g ) * 420 g / d
= 24.78 g / d
About same as canned dog food but quarter the price.
Insufficient to prevent sarcopenia.
Need 4 * 420 g cans for 100 g protein / d. 4 * $0.90 = $3.60 / d.

Protein in broad beans dry (add water);
= (25 g / 100 g) * 400 g / d
= 100 g / d.
Cost ~ $2.00 / d.

Flavour with dog food to personal taste.

1
Rod in Oz
October 01, 2026

Interesting point John Corbin. Wonder what others think?
Maybe Dudley can do the maths... !

Dudley
October 04, 2026


My once a day coffee costing $0.10 has become a twice a day tea at a quarter of the cost.
(While I retain self brewing capability.)

John Corbin
October 05, 2026

Mmm.....well my daily sustenance of a can of dog food has gone from $3.95 to $4.65 so I've decided to cliff fall down to home brand baked beans @ .90c a can whilst the government fails to legislate against this workaround!

1
 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

How cutting the CGT discount could help rebalance housing market

Time and tide should dampen negative gearing proposal

Busting tax myths for better reform

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.

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

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.

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.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

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.

Latest Updates

Fixed interest

Higher yields are creating opportunities in global bonds

Bond markets are adjusting to a new reality, but not in the ways investors expect. With markets repricing and capital competing for attention, investors may need to rethink where resilience and opportunity lie. 

Economy

Are we in a recession?

What if the warning signs are already everywhere? From supermarket aisles to company failures, investors are being bombarded with recession signals. But most face a different risk that can be just as dangerous for portfolios. 

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs - Division 296 actuarial certificates

The tax bill might be yours, but the event that caused it may not be. A key Division 296 calculation can sometimes attribute earnings in ways that many SMSF trustees won't instinctively expect or fully appreciate.

Property

The first impact of negative gearing reform is not the tax bill

Negative gearing changes formally begin in 2027, but the first consequences may already be here. A subtle shift is quietly influencing who can borrow, how much they can access and which property strategies still stack up.

Economy

The oil market is running out of easy answers

The biggest threat to markets may not be what investors are watching. The numbers have stopped adding up and supply is harder to measure, with forecasts becoming simple guesses. A more fragile reality is being masked.

Investment strategies

The state of investor knowledge in Australia

Australians are investing more than ever, yet a surprising divide is emerging between those building wealth effectively and those making costly mistakes. Surprisingly, the gap has little to do with income, age or starting capital.

Taxation

Complexity and capital gains

A case study shows that the ‘30% minimum CGT’ is a poorly conceived tax that adds significant complexity to an already over-complex system. A less complicated model would create a much fairer progressive tax scale.

Sponsors

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.