Property investment

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
GUEST OBSERVER
There are two ways to be a consistent winner in investment: information asymmetry (mostly through insider trading, which is illegal) and holding assets in the long term. Both of these methods are protected from short-term volatility. 
The first expects and profits from these movements (often very risky as all public information is already factored in the price), while the latter can safely ignore the daily peaks and troughs, knowing that these will cancel out over a longer period of time. 
Investing for long-term returns and robustness is the appropriate reason to buy treasury bonds, yet it is very counterintuitive for most of us to ignore weekly or monthly yields (even changes over one year can be irrelevant with the right strategy).
<a href="/images/2016/09/22/Screen%20Shot%202016-09-22%20at%202.25.20%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/09/22/Screen%20Shot%202016-09-22%20at%202.25.20%20PM.png" alt="">
Business Insider recently published a story called “The week is underway and Australian bonds are getting destroyed” with an image of a building being demolished. Yet as the article correctly points out, yields are still below pre-Brexit levels (bond yields rise as prices fall), which was less than three months ago. It can be difficult to separate signal and noise from information when there is such an abundance of data. 
In our April report on the bond market, the connection between the yield curve (which is a reflection of investor expectations) and changes in the official cash rate was established. A flattening or inverted yield curve almost always leads to interest rate cuts, as the RBA tries to reduce the cost of borrowing. If short-term rates are equal or above long-term rates, there is a disincentive for banks to lend out money. 
Looking at the yield curve for August, while the 25-point rate cut at the start of the month has lowered interest rates across the entire range, it has pushed short-term rates below 10- year yields, meaning the curve is no longer fully inverted. This see-saw action (investors lowering long-term expectations, followed by cuts to short-term rates) can be clearly seen in Figure 1 above.
<a href="/images/2016/09/22/Screen%20Shot%202016-09-22%20at%202.26.50%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/09/22/Screen%20Shot%202016-09-22%20at%202.26.50%20PM.png" alt="">
In the past few weeks there has been some saving grace for the reserve bank. Investors have improved their long-term outlook, pushing bond yields up and prices down. This makes another rate cut in the next few months unlikely. 
 For more information, <a href="https://secretagent.com.au/" target="_blank">click here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Saving grace for the Reserve Bank: Secret Agent

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Regardless of their size, investors and fund managers such as superannuation funds, syndicators, listed property trusts, charitable trusts or larger high net worth families, are often out on the market looking for the same type of investment product - properties that are ‘accretive’. 
Put simply, this means that several tick boxes need to be ticked for the ideal investment property, such as:
<ul>
<li>
Lease term - ideally needs to be longer than the average Weighted Average Lease Term (WALT) of the portfolio (generally this is 4-5 years)</li>
<li>
Yield – ideally needs to be higher than the running average return and higher than debt costs </li>
<li>
Building Quality / Location – this typically means relatively modern in an established location</li>
</ul>
 
With many buyers searching for the same type of investment, the competition quickly becomes crowded for property that ticks all the boxes, and the above criteria becomes an investment hurdle.
This is where Core Plus investments come in
As the investment hurdles can be difficult to overcome, some investors are turning to Core Plus investments.
Core Plus is a value-add story, where the core is the initial yield on which the property is bought and the plus relates to an immediate increase in the property’s value.
Investopedia defines Core Plus as a fixed-income investment management style that permits managers to add instruments with greater risk and greater potential return to core portfolios. This type of investment is considered moderate risk/moderate return, and is slightly higher on the risk scale due to the additional enhancements needed to bring the property to value.
Supplementing the core yield
The core yield may be supplemented by any one or a number of the following:
<ul>
<li>
Surplus Land – where a building provides the initial running yield but surplus land can be developed or sold to increase the return</li>
<li>
Lease Extension – where the tenant may have a long right of lease renewal or no renewal at all and the purchaser backs themselves to be able to renegotiate a better lease position offering immediate upside value </li>
<li>
Under Rented – when the passing rent is less than the estimated rental value. After purchase,  the investor backs themselves to increase the rent to achieve a better running yield</li>
<li>
Change of Use – where a building is zoned as one type but then redeveloped as another (for example an industrial building can be redeveloped to accommodate retail to provide higher rents, or even residential where “air space” can be developed) </li>
<li>
Land Fragmentation – where a large unsubdivided or englobo block of land is subdivided into small parcels where the end result is a higher overall value</li>
<li>
Land/Building Purchase – where the ‘existing’ building on the site is deemed obsolete or unleasable, so the investor purchases at land value with the building free</li>
</ul>
Investment hurdles are difficult to move past, so Core Plus is becoming an innovative way for investors to take on increased risk to boost their portfolios. The reality is that investors are using Core Plus as an alternative investment formula.
Paddy Callesen is a managing director of the Savills Auckland office and can be contacted <a href="https://www.savills.com.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Adding the ‘plus’ into core plus investments: Paddy Callesen

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The price gap between houses and apartments in many Australian cities is closing as property investors exhibit a significant degree of herding behaviour, according to new research.
The research comes amid speculation that Australia is in a housing bubble. Herding behaviour is leading to excessive borrowing, further fuelling apartment prices, particularly in Sydney.
A major cause of the sub-prime crisis in the US was a herd mentality, in which home buyers were influenced by purchasing behaviour of others. More recently a widely publicised 2015 report by global fund manager PIMCO suggested that low interest rates and rising house prices in Australia were driving similar behaviour.
We examined whether there was formal evidence of a herd mentality in Australian metropolitan property markets. To do so, we looked at the dynamic interaction between house prices and apartment prices in Australian capital cities using monthly CoreLogic RP Data from December 1995 to June 2015.
<h4><a href="/images/2016/05/12/image-20160416-26305-8y7601.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></h4>
<img src="/images/2016/05/12/image-20160416-26305-8y7601.png" alt="">
<h4>
Figure 1. Monthly house and Apartment prices (December 1995- June 2015) Note: Green dotted lines show the narrowing of the pairs over time. CoreLogic RP Data
</h4>
Figure 1 shows house and apartment prices exhibit a strong degree of co-movement and both prices tend to deviate from each other quite often. Nevertheless, every now and then the price gap has narrowed.
Except for Canberra, in all cities the narrowing takes place after a long period of widening. There are at least two reasons why there is a long-run relationship between house and apartment prices. First, houses and apartments are considered as substitutable investments. Second, negative gearing and capital gains provisions encourage people to borrow against the equity in their home to purchase an investment property, which is typically an apartment. When the price of the family home increases, this boosts demand for apartments, pushing up their price as well.
We found that in some cities such as Sydney, investors can equally profit by purchasing apartments because rising house prices eventually push up apartment prices and vice versa.
We found house prices significantly affect apartment prices across all cities. But in only four cities (Adelaide, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney) apartment and house prices influenced each other equally. However, when apartment prices are on the rise (i.e. the market is bullish), the positive impact of house prices on apartment prices is substantially larger. This implies that investors exhibit a significant degree of herding behaviour. Such evidence of herd mentality is highest in Sydney and lowest in Darwin.
Our finding for Sydney is consistent with a widely accepted view by RBA officials who argue that prices have grown too fast and there is a housing bubble threatening to burst. Vernon Smith, who won the 2002 Nobel Prize in Economics and visited Australia in July 2015, also recently said Sydney house prices are in a bubble.
There are various ways in which this herd mentality might be reined in, including adjusting interest rates, tightening lending criteria, changing negative gearing and reforms to self-managed superannuation. Some of these initiatives have already been introduced.
In order to address a similar problem, in February 2014 Canada decided to ban rich foreign nationals from purchasing property and, as a result, some turned to Australia as their next favourite destination.
Although Australia has partially recognised this issue by prohibiting the purchase of established properties by foreign investors, there still remains several loopholes that go undetected, making housing extremely unaffordable for young Australians. This has increased intergenerational inequality between millennials and baby boomers that policy makers must be brave enough to make hard decisions about based on evidence rather than election outcomes.
Abbas Valadkhani is professor of economics, Swinburne University of Technology and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/abbas-valadkhani-177513" target="_blank">here</a>.
Russell Smyth is professor, Department of Economics, Monash Business School, Monash University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/russell-smyth-144621" target="_blank">here</a>.
Both are authors for The Conversation. 
</body></html>

The herd driven housing bubble that could trigger an apartment bust

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Home loans: The number of loans (commitments) for people who are buying or building homes to live in (owner-occupiers) fell by 0.9 per cent in March after rising by 0.9 per cent in February. The number of refinancing transactions rose by 8 per cent.
The value of loans by owner-occupiers and investors to build new homes rose by 1.7 percent in March after a rise of 2.7 per cent in February. The value of loans to build new homes stood at a record high $3.59 billion.
The average home loan cross Australia stood at $357,500 in March, up 5.9 per cent on a year ago, but down 7.4 per cent in the past four months.
Consumer sentiment:The Westpac/Melbourne Institute index of consumer confidence rose by 8.5 per cent in May to 103.2 after sliding by 4 per cent in April. The confidence index is up 0.8 per cent on a year ago. A reading of 100 is the dividing line separating optimism from pessimism.
The housing finance data has implications for banks, building material suppliers and retailers. The consumer confidence data is important for retailers and consumer-facing businesses. Building &amp; building material companies are affected by dwelling starts including Boral, James Hardie, Adelaide Brighton, Brickworks, AV Jennings Limited, Devine Limited and Beacon Lighting.
What does it all mean?
The latest data onthe housing sector could be classified as somewhat old news given that it predates the Reserve Bank interest rate cut last week. What it does do is provide a useful barometer for housing activity earlier this year. And in that context housing activity remains solid. The value of loans to build new homes stood at a record high $3.59 billion. There is a healthy pipeline of work, with owner occupiers likely to dominate home building and buying.
Interestingly the number of home loan refinancing transactions lifted sharply up by 8 per cent in March. And the proportion of fixed rate loans jumped to 14.9 per cent - the highest reading in 16 months. The intense competition by lenders has resulted in home owners shopping around for the best rates on offer and more are locking in those cheaper rates. The lift in refinancing will provide additional savings to household budgets – injecting fresh spending power into the economy. No doubt the latest interest rate cut will spur another round of refinancing although the increasing likelihood of further cuts to the cash rate may result in less fixed rates being taken up.
<a href="/images/2016/05/12/Screen%20Shot%202016-05-12%20at%2010.43.09%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/05/12/Screen%20Shot%202016-05-12%20at%2010.43.09%20AM.png" alt="">
The monthly consumer confidence data is now merely useful as a check against the timelier weekly survey. The ANZ-Roy Morgan survey has the same number of survey respondents as the monthly series, has been running over the same number of years and covers the same questions but is conducted each week. And what is clear from both surveys is that confidence levels are a little higher than where they were a month ago.
Importantly the weekly consumer confidence survey provides a better picture of the shifting landscape in regards to the Federal budget, latest interest rate cut and movement in the Australian dollar. And in that regard confidence levels are healthy although it is unlikely to translate through a substantial lift in spending. The weekly confidence data will be analysed more closely given the Federal Election campaign currently underway.
What do the figures show?
Housing finance - number
The number of new owner-occupier housing loans (commitments) fell by 0.9 percent in March after rising by 0.9 percent in February. Excluding therefinancing of dwellings, the number of loans was up by 6.7 percent.
Loans by owner-occupiers for the construction of homes fell by 2 percent in March; loans to buy newly-erected dwellings fell by 5.2 percent; and loans for the purchase of established dwellings (excluding refinancing) fell by 0.5 percent. The number of refinancing transactions rose by 8 percent.
Housing finance - value
The value of new housing commitments (owner occupier and investment) fell by 0.2 percent in March after a 2.2 percent increase in February. Owner-occupier loans fell by 1.2 percent while investment loans rose by 1.5 percent.
The value of loans by owner-occupiers and investors to build new homes rose by 1.7 percent in March after a rise of 2.7 percent in February. The value of loans to build new homes stood at a record high $3.59 billion.
Housing finance – other statistics
The proportion of first-time buyers in the home loan market fell from 14.6 percent to 14.2 percent in March – a 12 year low. (However the figures take into account refinancing loans and as such the figures may misrepresent the true situation). The proportion of fixed rate loans rose from 13.2 percent to 14.9 percent in March. And the average home loan across Australia stood at $357,500 in March, up 5.9 percent on a year ago, but down 7.4 percent in the past four months.
Consumer sentiment:
The Westpac/Melbourne Institute index of consumer confidence rose by 8.5 percent in May to 103.2 after sliding by 4 percent in April. The confidence index is up 0.8 percent on a year ago.
The current conditions index rose by 4.2 percent while the expectations index rose by 11.6 percent.
All five components of the index rose in May:
The estimate of family finances compared with a year ago was up by 3.2 percent;
The estimate of family finances over the next year was up by 7.2 percent;
Economic conditions over the next 12 months was up by 13.2 percent;
Economic conditions over the next 5 years was up by 14.8 percent;
The measure on whether it was a good time to buy a major household item was up by 4.9 percent.
<a href="/images/2016/05/12/Screen%20Shot%202016-05-12%20at%2010.48.23%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/05/12/Screen%20Shot%202016-05-12%20at%2010.48.23%20AM.png" alt="">
Gender &amp; demographics: Men (index reading of 107.8, up 8.6 percent) were more optimistic than Women 98.8, up 8.3 percent). The sentiment index for young people fell by 3.4 percent to 105.9 in May. Across the other demographics: 25-44 years (index 110.4, up by 11.1 percent); 45 years plus (index 97.5, up 9.9 per cent).
Housing outlook: A good time to buy a dwelling? – Index up 12.1 percent in the month but down 6.4 per cent on the year.
What is the importance of the economic data?
Housing Finance data is produced monthly by the Bureau of Statistics and shows commitments by lenders, such as banks, to provide finance for housing purposes. The lending figures relate to those looking to buy or build homes to live in as well as those seeking to buy or build homes for investment purposes. Generally people get their finance organised first, so the figures are regarded as a leading indicator onthe housing market.
Westpac and the Melbourne Institute release the Index of Consumer Sentiment each month. According to Melbourne Institute: “The survey of consumer sentiment was first undertaken in 1973 and was conducted on a quarterly basis until 1976, a six-weekly basis from 1976 to 1986, and has been conducted monthly ever since.” Confident consumers may be more inclined to spend, especially on major items.
What are the implications for interest rates and investors?
It’s important not to ‘over-think’ consumer confidence. For most punters, the Aussie dollar, interest rates, petrol prices, home prices and the job market are the key factors determining whether someone is positive or negative on supposedly ‘economic’ issues
The Reserve Bank will look to next week’s jobs data to gauge how the labour market is tracking. CommSec expects a further rate cut in coming months.
Savanth Sebastian is an economist for <a href="https://www.commsec.com.au/" target="_blank">CommSec</a>
</body></html>

Refinancing on the rise, confidence “Ok”: CommSec's Savanth Sebastian

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
I’m a big believer that property investment can be a worthwhile and rewarding experience.
Financially, it can provide excellent longer-term returns through capital appreciation while the monthly rental income can help offset property holding costs. Personally, you can get a lot of satisfaction and comfort knowing that if you’ve invested wisely your property can provide future financial security for you and your family.
However, all this doesn’t necessarily mean you must, should or are ready to become a landlord and undertake what may well be the biggest investment decision in your lifetime.
With ongoing media coverage about the level and direction of property values, strong auction clearance rates, strong median price growth in the major capitals and of course targeted marketing campaigns espousing the benefits of being a property investor, it is easy to get caught up in the excitement and opportunities this type of investment promises.
In addition, many potential investors may harbour the fear of missing out, which property marketers attempt to exploit. Their argument goes along the lines that if you don’t buy now, you may miss out forever. However, my advice is don’t get sucked-in by this marketing hype.
Before you commit to becoming a property investor (and I say commit because normally you’re looking at a 7-10 year investment timeline) here are ten warning signs that you might not ready…
1. You haven’t set your investment objectives
Don’t be a lemming and buy an investment property because that’s what others are doing. You should be clear about why you’re investing and what type of return you’re after. You also have to be ready, willing and able to take on the obligations of being a landlord.
The dangers of not being clear on your objectives include: 
<ul>
<li>You may choose the wrong property</li>
<li>Select the wrong loan product</li>
<li>Not know when to sell</li>
<li>And as result of the preceding points, you could lose money</li>
</ul>
2. You haven’t researched the market
There are many factors to consider when selecting a property and you should research these by property type and location. Without adequate research it will be difficult to identify and choose between properties most likely to deliver your investment objectives. Factors you need to consider include: capital growth potential, vacancy rates, rental returns and the cost of ownership.
Speaking to local selling agents, reading property articles and news feeds and subscribing to property reports from independent research organisations (like www.onthehouse.com.au) are great ways to improve your knowledge and understanding of the markets you’re considering buying into.
3. You’re convinced property investment is a sure thing
I hate to burst your bubble (no pun intended) but there is no guarantee that investing in property will meet your financial expectations. Prices can go down as well as up and they can remain flat or stagnant for many years. And remember, the property market can be broken down into various sub-markets including: national, state, suburb and street markets, all of which may interact with and diverge from one another (positively or negatively), depending on what’s happening from a macro or micro economic perspective. Never assume that investing in property is the right thing to because the only way is up. This is certainly not the case.
4. You don’t understand your legal obligations
When you invest in residential property you’re not only taking on the financial commitment of a long-term loan, you’re also taking on a number of legal responsibilities. Some of these include being a landlord, certain tax and reporting obligations or those of a company director if you purchase your property through a separate incorporated entity. Importantly, you must be aware of all your legal obligations to ensure you comply with the law because if you don’t, the consequences could be severe, such as being hit with a fine or worse.
5. You haven’t set a realistic investment timeframe
Don’t invest if you’re looking to make a quick buck. Sure you may have heard stories where lucky investors have managed to “flip” (that is buy and then quickly sell) a property within a relatively short period of time and make a profit (after taking into account all purchases costs including stamp duty), but these success stories are few and far between. And I think they’re more likely to arise from good fortune rather than necessarily good buying.
As mentioned above, you need to view your investment as a medium to long-term one – at least five years and more likely closer to ten. This investment horizon provides the time needed to recover your upfront purchase costs (which can add additional costs of anywhere between 3% and 7% to the purchase price) and provide the time needed to ride out any downward trends in the property cycle.
6. You don’t understand property cash flows
If you don’t understand the quantum and timing of your investment property’s cash flow then you’re asking for trouble. There are numerous stories of highly geared investors getting themselves into financial difficulty because they’ve taken on too much debt and eventually discover they can’t afford to meet their ongoing financial commitments. And this situation can be exacerbated if they’re negatively geared or if there’s a reduction in their household income where a reasonable portion of that income is needed to support their investment.
So don’t proceed until you’ve prepared a cash flow budget that you understand and that indicates you can afford the investment. And make sure you flex it to see what would happen in a worst case scenario. I would also suggest you set up a reserve fund to be used to help cover the unexpected – like an unforeseen major repair bill.
7. You’re not sure how much you should pay for a property
There are two big risks if you don’t know what you should reasonably offer for your investment property. First, you could end up paying too much (which costs you money) and second, by paying too much you could adversely affect both the level of growth and quantum of any capital gain you hope to make. In addition, it could add years to your investment timeline whereby you have to wait for the market to catch up to the price you paid, as well as cover all your acquisition costs.
So never put in an offer or sign on the dotted line unless you have a reasonable understanding of what a property is worth. This is where doing some legwork by attending open houses and auctions, speaking to local selling agents to get a sense of value and subscribing to independent property reports can pay real dividends.
8. You think negative gearing is a way to make money
This is another marketing ploy used by spruikers. Their argument is you can reduce your tax bill by losing money. Let’s just think about that for a moment…… You don’t make money by paying less tax as a result of a negatively geared property. You only make money if you’re able to sell your property for more than you paid for it plus (hopefully) what you paid out in interest and other costs less the rent you received over the period you owned it.
So you should think very carefully if the only way you can afford to buy an investment property is to lose money. From a loan affordability perspective, ask yourself this question, “What would happen if I lost my job or a big unexpected bill came in?” Just remember that if you can’t meet your ongoing investment property mortgage payments the benefits of negative gearing go right out the door.
9. Your don’t have the right investment structure in place
If you get this wrong it could adversely affect your personal tax situation including capital gains tax, the property’s overall investment returns and otherwise undermine the achievement of your investment objectives.
It’s therefore important that you focus on things like ensuring your property loan supports your investment strategy and that structure used to buy the property meets your personal, family and of course taxation needs.
10. Going solo
We’ve looked at nine examples where things can wrong, and thinking you can do it all yourself is example number ten. There are plenty of traps you need to steer clear of, whether you’re a novice or even a more experienced investor. For instance, you have to be across issues and risks encompassing: financial, property, tax, accounting, legal, insurance and even estate planning matters. Just bear in mind it takes years of training and experience and in most cases requires academic and professional qualification to be able to understand and/or provide advice on these matters.
You need to ask yourself, do I know everything I need to know? For most of us the answer is likely to be “no”. This is why you should always seek independent and unbiased advice before you invest.
Peter Boehm is the finance editor for Onthehouse.com.au and ca be contacted <a href="https://www.onthehouse.com.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Property 101: Ten reasons not to invest in residential property

<html><body>
Australian Government should formulate a national housing strategy that sets clear directions for Australia’s housing sector, is the recommendation of the National Seniors Australia.
In the submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, National Seniors also recommended the examination of all types of housing and issues associated with access, adequacy, affordability and security by utilising findings from the Inquiry on Homeownership, the Inquiry on Affordable Housing, the Federation Review and the Tax Review. 
"Outright homeownership has been falling for people aged 55 and over (39.7% in 2001 to 32.1% in 2011)meaning that a greater number of older Australians are either paying off mortgages during retirement or moving from homeowner-occupier into alternative forms of accommodation.
"Other reasons for a fall in homeownership amongst older Australians include loss of paid employment and significant life events such as divorce or losing a partner. 
"Research suggests that insecurity within the private rental market amongst older Australians has led to a shift to public housing.The Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) has found that older public housing households are expected to increase from 87,940 in 2001 to 109,560 in 2016, an increase of 24%.
"In the 85+ age group these are expected to increase by 155%. 
"Furthermore, by 2026 the number of lower-income people aged 65 and over who are living in rental households (as homeownership falls) are projected to far exceed the supply capacity of the social housing system. 
"Census data from 2006 to 2011 shows a steady increase in the number of renters aged 55 and over in the private market."
National Seniors Australia recommends that the Australian Government, in collaboration with state and territory governments, examine tenancy regulations, rights and advice services.
The aim would be to deliver security and support for long-term renters; recognise that renting in the private market is a significant form of tenure for many Australians; and increase the attractiveness of this form of tenure for Australia’s long term housing needs. 
"Older renters experience significant anxiety linked to their security of rental tenure and many experience housing stress.Such housing stress is magnified due to rent increasing well above CPI and the insufficiency of Commonwealth Rent Assistance.
"Renters face a number of disadvantages including forced moves which greatly contribute to instability. The frequency of moving between owners and renters in Australia is the highest in the OECD.
"The lack of long term (beyond 6-12 months) leases available to Australian renters increases instability.  
"Limiting the ability of property investors to terminate leases for ‘any reason with notice’ to a list of prescribed criteria, allowing pet ownership and minor alterations to the rental property would greatly enhance the lifestyle available to renters. 
"Improving the stability and security of tenure for a renter would provide them with the ability to receive similar non-financial benefits available to home owners.
"Creating greater equity in the Australian housing market would reduce the desire to become a homeowner, subsequently reducing the demand which is currently driving high housing prices in the market. 
"National Seniors recommends that the government investigate policies that will address barriers to downsizing (or 'rightsizing') for older Australians, for example, a national ‘rightsizing’ program. 
"Older Australians face barriers to relocating including: the inability to find value for money, stamp duty, moving costs, lack of suitable housing in familiar surroundings with easy access to required amenities, and impacts of selling the home on Age Pension eligibility. 
"These barriers also decrease capacity for older Australians to access equity in their home to assist with living costs during retirement.  
"Proceeds from the sale of the family home continue to remain exempt from the Age Pension assets test for up to 12 months, as long as the funds are intended to buy another home.  
"However, any interest earned on sale proceeds is counted under the income test, and, if a cheaper home is purchased, any surplus cash is included in the Age Pension asset test.  
"Concerns regarding the proceeds of the sale of the home being subject to the Age Pension assets test discourage 20% of all seniors, and 30% of Age Pensioners from selling the home.
"In 2013 the then Labor government announced the Supporting Senior Australians—housing help for seniors pilot,to address some of the barriers to downsizing that older Australians face. 
"The pilot exempted a portion of sale proceeds from the Age Pension asset test. However, it also applied restrictive conditions, including the requirement that a homeowner had to own their home for more than 25 years and quarantining the proceeds for ten years. 
"As an alternative National Seniors has called for the implementation of a ‘Rightsizing’ program that exempts up to $150,000 in proceeds from the sale of the home from the Age Pension income or asset test.  
"Excess sale funds could then go towards critical services, such as health costs, significantly reducing the burden on government-supported health systems. 
"The recent changes to the Age Pension asset test (legislated in June 2015) will provide an even greater deterrent for seniors to right-size. Reconsideration should be given to a program that allows seniors to right-size without the threat of future reductions to their Age Pension payments."
National Seniors recommends that the states and territories provide concessional stamp duty to older Australians to encourage downsizing and maintenance of homeowner-occupier tenure.  
"A reduction in stamp duty would encourage older people to right-size their homes and improve quality of life, while also providing many younger Australians access to suitable family homes which would not otherwise be available."
</body></html>

Stamp duty reduction may drive senior property re-investment

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/65092/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull recently said:
“China has more freedom to invest in Australia, indeed all foreigners have more freedom to invest in Australia, than almost any other country.”
But is this true? We asked two experts to discuss the evidence for and against this statement.
Gennadi Kazakevitch argues Turnbull is right given Australia’s ranking as a free and open market, while Jeffrey Wilson presents evidence to show Australia’s foreign investment regime has become much more closed in recent years.
Gennadi Kazakevitch:
I think Mr Turnbull is right.
One measure to support this is the well-established inter-country comparison of economic freedom regularly published by the Heritage Foundation and Wall Street Journal. This measure also looks specifically at foreign investment freedom.
The economic freedom measure ranks countries according to rule of law, government size, regulatory efficiency and – of most relevance to this discussion – market openness. This includes trade freedom, investment freedom, and financial freedom.
In terms of general economic freedom, Australia ranked fifth behind Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, and Switzerland in 2016. Within the “Open Market” component of the index, Australia scores 80 out 100 for investment freedom, putting us among the most free of the 200 countries ranked.
To score a perfect 100, according to the index, a country would have to have no constraints on the flow of investment capital. Individuals and firms would be allowed to move their resources into and out of specific activities, both internally and across the country’s borders, without restriction.
Points are deducted for different sorts of freedom “imperfections”. For Australia, one “imperfection” is the regime of foreign investment reviewwhich requires government approval of investment amounts above a particular level. But Australia’s current review regime does not discriminate against China or indeed any other country.
Jeffrey Wilson:
Australia’s foreign investment regime is more open than many other countries. However, it also remains the case that it has become much more closed in recent years.
Since taking office in September 2013, the Liberal-National Coalition government has imposed several new barriers to foreign investment coming into Australia. These policies include:
<ul>
<li>
The introduction of fees for FIRB applications, and an expansion of the range of sanctions and fines applied to breaches.
</li>
<li>
Instituting new and very low FIRB screening thresholds for investment in the rural sector, including A$15 million for agricultural land and A$55 million for agribusinesses. The threshold had previously been A$255 million.
</li>
<li>
The establishment of a register of ownership of agricultural land. While this is ostensibly designed to “increase transparency”, Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce explained the intention was to produce a map that would allow people to “see who owns what”.
</li>
<li>
The appointment of two new FIRB Members – David Irvine and David Peever – in order to add further “national security expertise”to the board.
</li>
<li>
Extending the application of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act (Cth, as amended) to infrastructure sales made by state governments.
</li>
</ul>
The LNP Coalition government has also rejected a number of foreign investment applications on controversial grounds:
<ul>
<li>
Archer Daniels Midland (US) takeover bid for GrainCorp, 2013. The former head of the FIRB has claimed the deal was killed for political reasons.
</li>
<li>
Dakang Holdings and Pengxin Group (China) bids for Kidman cattle properties, 2016. The bidders appear to have been rejected simply because no Australian buyer made a competitive offer.
</li>
<li>
China State Grid bid for Ausgrid in NSW privatisation program, 2016. Treasurer Scott Morrison refused to explain the full reasons for the rejection, citing national security and confidentiality concerns.
</li>
</ul>
Tellingly, in its entire six-year term in office, the Rudd/Gillard ALP governments rejected only a single large foreign investment application: A bid by the Shanghai Stock Exchange to acquire the ASX in 2011.
As a result of these policy changes and investment decisions, the Australian foreign investment regime is now less open than it has been for over 20 years.
The prime minister’s claim was about the freedom of Chinese companies to make foreign investments into Australia. Unfortunately, there is no quantifiable metric that measures the openness of a country’s foreign investment regime specifically. The Economic Freedom statistics Gennadi cites are instead a broader measure of economic openness and transparency. Thus, they cannot be used to evaluate the prime minister’s claim.
Gennadi Kazakevitch:
The investment freedom component of the economic freedom index is not a perfect measure, but it is sophisticated. It allows for comparing “apples with apples” based on eight qualitative characteristics: national treatment of foreign investments; transparency; policy implementation; restrictions on land ownership; sectoral restrictions; expropriation of investments without fair compensation; foreign exchange controls; and capital controls. For each of those characteristics, there is a breakdown into several levels of restrictions, rules or practices.
It is true that in the most resent years (2012-2016) the investment freedom score for Australia has decreased from 83.7 to 80. But it is also true that Australia remains within a cluster of free economies.
It would be easy to attribute the decline in Australia’s score to the recent changes to regulation rules and practices. However, those changes have not critically affected the investment freedom index for Australia, nor are they discriminatory against a particular country. Therefore, Mr Turnbull’s statement is quite justified.
The six years of Rudd/Gillard ALP governments Jeffrey is referring to was business as usual as far as foreign investment was concerned. However, it is not business as usual any anymore. The most recent cases, such as the Port of Darwin, the Kidman station, and the Ausgrid power transmission business in NSW, have alerted the government and public to national security issues, and rightfully so.
As I proposed in my submission to the Senate inquiry on the foreign investment review framework, the world has changed dramatically since the current regulation was established in 1975.
Until the late 1980s, Australia’s investing partners were mostly persons and companies from developed market economies with similar values and similar foreign investment perceptions of independent entrepreneurship. Economic transition in communist countries, market reforms in one-party controlled countries, and emerging developing market economies have created a variety of economic systems with very different sovereign involvement in running economies and companies. Therefore a “foreign interest independence test” and security risk assessment should be done that takes into account which country the foreign investor is from.
If Australia eventually goes down this path, freedom of investment might be further compromised. If so it will arguably be for a good reason.
Jeffrey Wilson:
It is certainly true Australia’s foreign investment partners have changed many times through history. Prior to the 1950s the main foreign investor was Great Britain, which remains a major investor to this date. But progressive waves of new investors have also arrived: America during the 1960s; Japan in the 1970s; Singapore and Hong Kong in the 1990s; and more recently Chinese investors since 2005.
The arrival of each of these groups has presented Australia with distinct political tension. American investors faced accusations of “neo-imperialism” and threats to Australia’s independence in the world. Japanese investors faced considerable xenophobia, particularly as a result of “war memories”. And today, we are dealing with the fact that many Chinese investors are state-owned corporations, which pose their own unique political and regulatory challenges.
However, these are arguably issues to be managed rather than reasons to reject foreign investment. Australia is a small open economy, which depends on foreign investment to bring in the capital, technology, skills and marketing channels critical for 21st century industries.
In each previous wave, Australian governments have had to devise novel solutions for how to remain open to foreign investment, while managing their distinct political sensitivities. This has been successful in previous years, and there is no reason it should not be possible with Chinese investors today.
Jeffrey Wilson is fellow of the Asia Research Centre, Murdoch University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jeffrey-wilson-12717" target="_blank">here</a>. Gennadi Kazakevitch deputy head, Department of Economics, Monash University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gennadi-kazakevitch-90201" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Do foreigners have more freedom to invest in Australia than in almost any other country?

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Whenever you buy a property for the purpose of taking advantage of capital growth, it's going to be a process that comes with an assortment of expenses.
You'll want to be prepared for the various costs you're going to have to cover and know how to get the most out of your investment.
First of all are the costs directly related to the purchase of the property. That means paying stamp duty on top of the property value, which depends on both the price of the home and on which state you're in. Note that you can reduce stamp duty on house and land packages - depending on if the land falls within your particular state's guidelines, you could end up paying it on the land and not the house. You may also have to pay for the services of a solicitor or conveyor, who will oversee the settlement process and ensure it goes smoothly.
If you require investment finance, which you almost certainly will, you'll also need to pay for the various costs involved in a loan application and have a deposit of at least 10 per cent of the value, whether through savings or home equity. Depending on how much of the value you're borrowing, you may also need to pay for lenders mortgage insurance.
<div class="columns small-10 large-5 vgrid-small-offset-bottom-1 vgrid-small-offset-top-0 large-push-1 right">You yourself will have to take out cover for the property, too. You might choose to take out landlords insurance if you're planning to rent the property out, which can protect your property from any damage, whether wilful or accidental. If you're constructing a new home, you'll need building insurance, too. </div>
Finally, don't forget the cost of building inspections and, for existing properties, pest inspections, which will give you peace of mind but can run into hundreds of dollars each. You'll also need to factor in any moving costs for furniture, plus council rates. 
With so many expenses, to take care of, it's a wise idea to do all you can to maximise your profit. This can involve a number of tax-reducing strategies:
<ul>
<li>Claim as many tax deductions as you can on the costs involved in running the property, from advertising for tenants to driving over to inspect the home.</li>
<li>Have a professional quantity surveyor carry out a depreciation schedule, so you can claim the depreciation of your investment property and its contents come tax time.</li>
<li>Consider structural factors like whose name the property is under. If your partner is not earning money, for example, they can't reduce their tax - so it's worth putting it mostly in your name.</li>
<li>Complete a tax variation form so you can receive tax off-sets with every pay cheque</li>
</ul>
Remember to speak to professional property experts like DPN to make sure you've got your bases covered. In some cases, we can access occupation specific benefits which may avoid the need for mortgage insurance.
SAM KHALIL is founder and director of <a href="https://www.dpn.com.au/" target="_blank">Direct Property Network</a>.
</body></html>

Get the most out of your investment: DPN's Sam Khalil

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
I am sure you have all read this week how the investment bankers and economists are predicting property will fall dramatically early in 2016. 
The Sydney Morning Herald reported Macquarie was looking at a 7.5% reduction from “peak to trough”. The Australian reports, Macquarie said in a note “Credit growth, auction clearance rates, house prices, settlement volumes and the dollar value of settlements are also showing signs of slowing, albeit from lofty levels”.  Credit Suisse goes a step further warning that property investment in Australia is “riskier than the equity market”, particularly in NSW. 
During Spring in times of property upswings we quite often read such predictions as with greater volume of stock (in Spring) buyers have more choice and as a consequence auction clearance rates dip a little. This is happening at the moment and the pundits mistakenly think this is the start of a property price downturn.
We all are aware the market has been in almost boom conditions for a couple of years and the rate of growth we have experienced during that time is not sustainable in the long-term, but I can see nothing to indicate a fall in prices.  A plateau perhaps….which would be a good thing. Maybe even call it a breather!
An example of what I mean was last night’s auction sale of 103 Paddington Street, Paddington which sold for $2,000,000, considerably above reserve and a price which delighted the owners.  During the final week of the campaign three potential buyers who had shown interest in this terrace bought something else…see what I mean…greater choice from more properties on the market. 
Why do I feel this way?
Experience tells me the key drivers of property are interest rates (affordability) and confidence. The ANZ-Roy Morgan Consumer Confidence Rating indicates confidence is higher in October than it was during Winter...another pointer to a healthy property market. The US Equity Market is on the up and so is Europe.  Building costs in Australia remain high and moving higher…this filters down to replacement cost and the basic value of home improvements.
I am looking forward to the rest of the Spring and with confidence to 2016….so should you!
 
Bob Guth is director and auctioneer, Bradfield Cleary and can be contacted <a href="https://bradfieldcleary.com.au/home" target="_blank">here</a>.
<h1> </h1>
</body></html>

Investment banks get it totally wrong: Bob Guth

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Not being able to pay loan repayments on time is one of the most frightening and common concerns of property investors, and rightly so.
Last year over 50,000 full-time jobs were lost in Australia alone, and with less than half of the country having private health insurance, many investors would be at risk of losing their portfolio if an unforeseen circumstance such as being fired or becoming ill, arose.
Preparing for situations that may result in a loss or diversion of income is essential when it comes to safeguarding your property portfolio. Although preparation is paramount, there are also processes that can be followed once unexpected financial difficulties strike that can offer assistance to avoid an investor having to sell.
To ensure investors are properly prepared prior to any unforeseen circumstances arising, see below:
<ul>
<li>
Make income protection insurance a priority. Often income insurance is considered too expensive or unnecessary; however as an investor it is vital to safeguard your portfolio. Although it will be an additional cost to pay monthly, if an illness or injury occurs, most policies will cover 80 percent of your income, meaning expenses incurred via your portfolio are still covered until you recover.  Also, in most cases income protection premiums are a tax deduction.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
Research and ensure you have the policy which best suits you. Unfortunately there isn’t one specific income protection policy that suits everyone. To ensure you are choosing the most cost-effective and beneficial option for your situation, make sure you compare various options before committing to a policy. </li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
Aim to have a neutral to positive cash flow portfolio. If overall across a property portfolio the rents equal or exceed the costs and repayments, sustaining the portfolio will not be contingent on job income and will give peace of mind in the event you are forced to stop working.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
Create a buffer in your offset account. Once an investor has an offset account set up, you can keep surplus funds there which will give you two primary benefits:</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Offset a portion of the interest being paid on the home loan.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>If the property is negatively geared and you experience an unforeseen circumstance, these funds could be used to cover the weekly shortfall in rent.</li>
</ul>
If unforeseen circumstances arise that investors aren’t prepared for:
<ul>
<li>
Seek immediate expert counsel. If an unforeseen circumstance has caught you off guard and you are fearful for how this will affect your finances, arrange to meet with an accountant or financial planner immediately to implement a plan that ensures the obligatory loan repayment is able to be made.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
Advise the bank of the situation. All lenders have a financial hardship line, so take the time to work with them on a suitable payment arrangement so you keep on top of your repayments.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>
Research what the current market rent is on each of your properties.  The average rent in each market changes constantly. Keeping up to date with the current rate ensures you are able to see where you can increase the rent for better cash flow.</li>
</ul>
Zaki Ameer is founder of Dream Design Property and can be contacted <a href="https://www.ddpproperty.com.au/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Property investment

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Property investment

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News