I agree with your first point. The six year rule does address...

  1. 1,995 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 27
    I agree with your first point.
    The six year rule does address this somewhat though.

    As I said above, i don't like the idea of paying land tax through retirement.
    Especially seeing as I have already paid my fair share of SD.

    Investors already pay land tax. The gov gets double whammy from non PPOR property.
    So effectively by removing SD and adding LT for PPOR you are only penalising home owners and making it easier for investors to buy and sell. Political suicide. As I said before, it simply ain't going to happen.

    Again for the record. I hate SD with a passion, every time I write those cheques i get mad as hell!!
    So..... If someone can propose a way to remove SD that means the average Aussie who owns their own home doesn't have to pay land tax in perpetuity, whilst maintaining required government revenue. Bring it on.
    But otherwise it is just another political side show that will never happen.
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.