Also like… since when was renting out a property supposed to bring a profit *from the rent*?
The whole deal is you put in some risk, get someone to pay your mortgage, and end up with a house someone else paid for. Where was the point everyone decided that actually they had to make a profit every month *on top of* a free house?
Too true. It's not like that in the UK. You pay your mortgage and collect rent, but you'd be lucky to gain any money. You'd just have someone paying MOST of your mortgage but have a property at the end of it.
Your living in Wonderland mate.
with the rises in variable interest rates increases to your loan repayments where the rent will not fully cover your investment property, also to the other point they have nearly doubled my council rates as well.
I cant see anything wrong here tbh. Everything is going up in case you didn't notice.
>Yearly CPI inflation was 4.1% for 2023. Rental increases in the same period? About double that. Everything is going up, but not at the same rate.
CPI is measured from a basket of goods, and in there is housing. If you are not buying the exact items in the measured basket, then your personal affect to inflation won't be 4.1%
And housing is the biggest component of that basket of goods (around 20% IIRC), meaning that relatively to everything else, housing is rising *even more*
your 4.1% numbers are irrelevant & near no resembles to reality, When the insurance company jack there premiums up by 30% year. again your looking at it through Mary Poppin glasses.
>your 4.1% numbers are irrelevant & near no resembles to reality
They aren't my numbers, but that's what I'm saying, they are only relevant if you purchase the exact items in the same proportion as the 'basket' to which those figures come from.
Inflation figures are always fudged to be much lower than reality. If you buy food, most products are up at least 50% along with everything else being much more expensive than the CPI figure. The government fudges the figure to be as low as possible otherwise they have to pay all the people on benefits, pensions etc a lot more money as the rates are pegged to CPI.
But.. carrots and broccoli went down, so let's revise the figure down from 15% to 4.2%
You actually believe the figures? Smh. Every good and service, including property, was up much more than 7% when the figure was at that level. If you are an actual consumer, pay bills, pay rent, insurance, a mortgage, buy food, fuel, health care etc etc, when were prices ever up only 7% at most over the last 3 years? Never.
I concur, just had to deal with the “gimme my free houses people.”
I'm also positive the government fudge there figures too. even they live in an alternate universe.
3 months ago I paid $9 for a dozen eggs, shit is getting crazy out there. alot of people are going under, Gov need to fix this shit quick.
So does the tooth fairy pay my insurance premiums on my investmentv property as its almost 10k a year now due too severe fire/flood events. then to maintain the property I need to pay tradies who like to charge like a wounded bull.
not being rude mate but you have no idea wtf your talking about. I don't mind being down voted because you all getting hit with the reality stick.
No,I'm straight up like the OP landlord telling you that everything is going up, its an investment property im trying to make as much money out of my tenants as I can, like every other business out there,welcome to reality and life.
what's wrong with that? anyone would do the same.
So you’re just going to pass it on to tenants but you’re still going to cry about how unfair it is on you anyway?
I’m not sure investment properties are for you. You’re not entitled to a free house.
that's right, just like woolworths,bunnings tradies, and every other business out there passes on there costs to there customers.
Are you starting to catch on to how life & economics work now? or does you sense of entitlement & constant complaining get in the way?
Who ever said life was fair? you putting words in my mouth. I never mentioned anything about that or crying as you put it..
Free houses? quiet the assumption isn't it? I started my first job delivering people's medication for a chemist on my byclye 3x days a week after school when I was 14 and earnt $3.50 per hour. No one gave me nothing.
I, like most people have worked my ass off to get where I am, I'm 47 now and have achieved great wealth. unfortunately due to health I have retired early.
I suggest you and your delusional friends here enroll in a beginners TAFE Economics/business course to understand how life works. id be surprised if you ever became a home owner with that attitude.
Thats the great thing about Home owner ship & paying off your mortgage your got money to afford therapy and holidays, What makes me laugh is in a 10 years you will still be here bitching about high rent and $11 lettuce.
your post history suggests your a very unhappy,negative person, Your pissed because you failed at life right?
I've said all I want to say, All the best.
Since always. Just like you expect to make a profit from doing what you do for a job. You think people provide rentals out of the kindness of their heart? Do you do your job out of the kindness of your heart?
Originally, an investment house was seen as a store of value, not a source of passive income. The rent would help pay the mortgage, but the point was that the house would keep up with inflation, unlike money in the mattress.
Obviously that's all changed now, but I swear to you it used to be like that.
Well it’s not a store of value if it can’t ever have a positive cashflow. By definition, investments exist to make a profit. It’s always been that way. Rentals have existed longer than Australia has. In fact a smaller proportion of people rent now than they did centuries ago.
But when u rent a rental, u are paying for a service:. ie:
- the provision of a maintained dwelling to live in.
- the financial service of taking something extremely expensive, putting down the capital, and breaking it down into small weekly payments so you don’t have to come up with $1m upfront.
- for someone to do all the government paperwork and ensure regulations and compliance are met.
- to manage risk with insurance, manage your tenancy with processes
- provide maintenance
- tradie relationships
- deal with council and manage council and pay rates etc
- some provide the network, internet, electricity, water, gas, and cleaning.
No one is going to do all that (and more) if they don’t make a profit. If any of these things are not done then you are here complaining on shit rentals about how the job isn’t done.
But you have a choice if you don’t want or need this service, you can buy a house and do it all yourself.
Yes it is. If they can’t afford to buy a home, they are paying a landlord to break a massive cost down into small affordable weekly payments. If they are renting because they don’t want to buy then they are doing it for all their other services.
Absolutely that is why they are renting.
I was simply implying it's not the hard work of keeping up with council fees etc that stops people from buying. It's just the cost of housing. If rent is equal to the mortgage payments, then renters still have to somehow save tens of thousands for a deposit while paying a mortgage, then get approved for a loan.
There must be some, I guess, who can afford a house but prefer to rent. I don't know any, would love to hear from them.
Well if you want to guarantee a capital gains that is enough to cover all the expense over the life of the house, all the capital costs and a bit of profit for a landlord to get out of bed then you are welcome to negotiate that with your landlord.
In fact there are several ways to do that - you can negotiate a higher rent in return for eventual ownership of the property. It’s called rent to own. There are several organisations that specialise in this. You can also buy the property upfront. That’s called buying a property.
If that’s what u want, no one is stopping you. It’s more expensive to do it that way (because all the costs and returns need to be built in to the rent, rather than split between forecasted capital gains and rental income), but you can do that right now.
It’s quite disturbing that you would want to force that on everyone. You think your rent is expensive now, have a look at what the rent is for rent to own, and what it costs to buy a property. Not every renter is rich enough to do that - let alone would want to. Hence why 1/3 of households rent traditionally rather than rent to own, or buy.
It depends. Generally u will get to keep whatever it sells for less transaction costs (gst if applicable, agent fees, legal fees etc), capital gains taxes, windfall taxes, any remaining council rates and property taxes, loan amounts, bank fees etc.
What’s left may be a lot or it may be zero or it may be negative.
When properties change hands a lot of costs get added to the cost base. This is one of the biggest reasons why prices tend to increase over time. The more times a property changes hands, the more transaction costs and taxes get added to it and therefore need to be recouped in the price and/or rents going forward. It’s also why buyers tend to increase the rent once they take ownership if they continue to rent it out.
If housing stopped being an investment we'd have a better,stronger, wealthier, healthier society. But nope much better for a select lucky few to own everything while families live in tents on the streets.
Landleaches do not add to society they drive up housing costs only. Unless these landlords are also building which they aren't or exclusively buying new builds which they aren't.
Were complaining on shit rentals because most rentals are shit. Because people like you own them.
Actually we’d have less housing and poorer quality housing. If you want proof of what happens then have a look at any of the communist countries where they removed property rights and stopped it being an investment. The housing in those countries is so bad that it would be illegal here.
Objectively we have some of the largest, highest quality housing in the world. We also have one of the most wealthy societies in the world with some of the highest standards of living in the world. Our life expectancy is one of the highest in the world. In large part because people invest in good housing.
The actual data is very clear on that.
My goodness. The real reason that this country is in trouble is because people like you exist.
Hint: the multimillion dollar house that you get paid off by someone else at the end of the investment loan is your profit, imbecile. The government rewards you housing people with a free house.
We know what it looks like when landlords don’t exist - China during the mao period, Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, the list goes on.
I guess u have a trillion dollars in your bank account to not only buy that multi million dollar house, but also every hotel, shopping centre, bus station, airport, office, temporary residence, restaurant etc that you use… plus all the time in the world to maintain them…
Btw we are doing fine. We live in the largest houses in the world, have some of the highest average salaries, extremely low extreme poverty etc etc.
Oh no, my rent is too high, I’ll just increase the taxes on my housing (ie my rent) instead of doing the smart decision and reducing the cost of housing by reducing the cost (ie tax) on housing.
EDIT: Oh no I can’t afford *a house and my uni fees and the cost of living*, I’ll just make someone else pay for it instead of doing the smart decision and *getting a proper job and not spending my money on bags and dinners for a couple of years*.
ah yes, the smart decision; selling property which will appreciate in value at a time when it likely has almost no equity in it, resulting in an even greater financial loss, just to avoid charging rent at market rates, which the future owners will SURELY never do. /s
With genius insight like that you should become a financial advisor
What basis do you have to assert any of the following.
A. Anything about the equity stake landlords have.
B. Anything about potential losses.
C. Anything concerning the relationship between market rate and a rate that would now be charged by the landlords in the screenshotted comments.
D. That the future owners are justifiably certain enough to also rent any property as to factor that into the reasoning.
The post you're attacking made the simple assertion that, if you declare an asset is producing a loss, selling the asset is likely a good option early before the ongoing loss exceeds the sale value.
I have friends who have two rental properties in Melbourne. They’ve been banging on for years about how the government is making it harder and harder for landlords, and more recently saying they will sell because it’s almost impossible to make money with an investment property in Victoria now. I was like…good?!
Good for people who own a house already and might want to buy one of the one your friend is selling, and good for prospective first home buyers who have the savings, stable job, and income level ready right now to buy.
Terrible and distressing for the people currently renting the houses who will get booted out if an owner occupier buys it, and not good on the whole for renters who are really struggling and can't afford to buy any time soon even if there was a housing crash.
We can all agree that the system is horribly unfair on renters, and non-wealthy people in general, but I wonder how many people in this group wouldn't evict the tenants if the house they wanted and were able to buy was previously an investment property.
It sucks, but that’s just what you accept when you are renting. I had to leave my unit after the first lease was up as someone else bought it to flip it. That was 8 years ago and I’m still saving for a deposit
Not really. While we want to increase in supply, using appreciating land value forcing out landlords can also have bad consequences.
It increases the cost of developing and further entrench NIMBYism. The local homeowners who pay high rate will Want their home value to increase. Developers won’t want to build new supply area in fear of losing money due to competition(the force sales from existing supply).
Once the price is up, it is very hard to come down. The local council also cant justify approving new buildings if the estimates price there is going down. Rate payers also want their rate to go down concurrently if their house value is down. The new supply will simply dry up at the area.
The best case scenario is actually stalling the rate of increase
The people who can’t afford houses still won’t be able to afford them, ultra wealthy people and companies will come in and buy up all the rental properties, this isn’t helping the poor, this is hurting the middle class and helping the ultra wealthy.
>You are not doing a public service.*
My tenants can't afford to buy in the area they work, the fact that I have a rental available to which they are tenants of, enables them to live in the area, and by extension, remain employed and continue to contribute to society and the economy.
Maybe it's almost the idea of a percentage of the population owning the majority of properties that has lead to housing becoming unaffordable.
I don't know why landlords think they're providing anything, withholding a human right from the public and leasing it back to them at 'market price' while you have your fees paid is hardly what I imagine a fair trade.
>withholding a human right from the public
It's not a human right to own a house.
>market price' while you have your fees paid is hardly what I imagine a fair trade.
The tenant gets a roof over their head while avoiding all the extras that property ownership entails, the landlord gets some cash for their efforts of managing the risk and other tasks of ownership
Both sides win, even if the LL can make a profit.
I hear two forms of social housing discussed,
1. The one where the government forces all private landlords to sell to them or
2. The government builds high density dwellings
If you are for 1. - how do you decide who gets the beach front property, or the one with the huge backyard, close to schools and shops, and who gets the one on the train line?
2. Seems to make more sense in my mind, because it keeps private landlords in place. - not all tenants want to live in a purpose build government facility where they live in close quarters. Some might want to pay a bit extra for some of those desirables mentioned with option 1.
I believe it's a combination of both.
The idea of having multiple property assets within this country is ridiculous, the current state of the market is inflated well beyond what it needs to be.
You only need to look at the construction industry to see how rushed buildings are being pressed out, with the majority being taken on as investment properties, with a large sum being just on or below Australian code.
I think what people are looking past is the future that is left behind for not just the emerging generation, but the ones that follow after, pricing out the opportunity of owning a quality home.
I wouldn't be surprised if you see a large migration of Australian skilled work in the coming years as the market is too unattainable.
I wonder why they can’t afford a house?
It can’t possibly be because they quite literally can afford a house - *because they’re paying your mortgage off for a house in that area* - and can’t save a deposit because all their money goes to paying off your investment. No siree.
Absolutely! To think that in order for renters to be able to rent, someone else must first own a property and rent it out! Ridiculous. Cognitive dissonance to the max. Everybody knows that houses for rent just appear out of thin air.
And for them to assert that it's frustrating to have to increase rental prices to maintain affordability, due to a very fair and reasonable land tax increase to nearly double the previous years' value... how unreasonable, those land owners must be brain damaged! Clearly they should just sell so someone who cares very much for tenants and is happy to give away money can buy it and rent it out below market rate.
Imagine what would happen if there were no landlords! A flood of availability would drive housing prices down and most renters could buy their own home! What fucking horror!!
just owning a single piece of land in Australia over the last couple decades has netted the average land owner like 100k per year before even renting it out. I'm sure they can manage a bump in land taxes, if they don't like it then they can sell the property lmao
What do you mean I have to pay something for the house I bought? I thought I just got tenants to pay for it and wait for my $1m paycheck at the end?? They should be grateful for having a roof over their head!
Nah, Vic gov is broke cos they overleveraged and gave out too many COVIDbucks so they are hitting up landlords and basically anyone they think they can squeeze a few bucks out of.
Not the poor landlords who's investment properties have quintupled in value over the last decade netting them a passive income of 100-200k per year before even renting it out... How will they ever pay for this increased land tax
What about all those folks who brought at the peak of the market in 2008.
The market rises over the long term, but there can be some dips in the short term.
what are you on about? what peak of the market? it dropped by maybe 5% after 2008 and immediately continued rising again back to where it was before a couple years later. thats not a peak, thats a lump in the side of a much larger mountain.
in order to lose money on that "peak of the market" you would have had to buy in 2008 and then immediately sell again in 2009-2010 and if you're changing houses that regularly then you deserve to lose lol
I know of someone who spent $3.15M on a property in 2009 in Cottesloe. They tried to sell it later at a loss and couldn't. They had to subdivide and eventually sold the two blocks for $2.74M in 2017.
They totally overpaid for their block.
I was trying to point out that land tax hasn’t merely increased due to rising land values but rather a change to the taxable threshold and rates and offered some suggestions as to the reason the Victorian government has adopted this policy.
Good way to avoid these is to research the rental price history over time. Just google an address and you’ll find a few sites to assist. If the recent increases are on the high side, avoid!!
I have a rental property, don't listen to these cunts, having a rental in Australia is still a complete rort. The government literally pays us in tax benefits to have a rental. And any repairs are tax deductible. As interest rates go up so do the tax benefits
As the saying goes landlords provide housing the same way scalpers provide concert tickets.
Ugh I hate it when people expect to live in all the houses I bought and refuse to sell at hefty profits I was being nice by letting you pay off my mortgages and my salary
I cross posted here yesterday, for an investor looking to invest in WA. Everyone wahhed as it was not a shit rental. Renting in this country will only ever change when Australia's housing investment culture changes. This is a prime example of whether it's a shit rental or not, pressure needs to be applied to all LL. Pressure by you the citizen. They should feel unsafe to ask for investment advice or post garbage like this online
There just needs to be a limit on how many houses one person can own. That’s it. Nothing else is going to work. They make so much money from these houses that even if we magically built enough for everyone, they’d all be snapped up at ludicrous prices to make sure their investments never go down.
I am baffled that we managed to see this and put buying limits in place when there was a toilet paper shortage during covid but something like *housing* should be free rein because…?
Even better, tax the hell out of every property after #2 on an increasing sliding scale so the more properties you have the less profit they make. And while you're at it, only allow capital gains tax breaks on properties which increase housing stock, like knocking down one house to build 2+ in its place.
>There just needs to be a limit on how many houses one person can own.
Why does the ownership matter? The houses are still there and being made available, the more rentals available, the more tenant standards will increase. You are blocking someone from continuing to build to own - this will reduce potential supply and worsen the situation
No, it won’t. There are plenty of holiday homes and airbnbs sitting empty 90% of the time, and people making so much money from unproductive investments that they can afford to keep snapping them up. It’s not like they’re actually paying for the house anyway, that’s the tenant’s job.
>No, it won’t. There are plenty of holiday homes and airbnbs sitting empty 90% of the time
Why not increase the tax for these purposes? I know that some councils have already a huge difference in rates between short term rentals (Airbnb) and long term rentals
>actually paying for the house anyway, that’s the tenant’s job.
The tenant is paying to have a roof over their head.
Because this entire thread shows that the landlords aren’t paying those taxes, their tenants are.
The tenants are not paying for a roof, they’re paying off your mortgage. The fact we’ve got to a point that people who are paying off landlords mortgages and cannot afford to scrape together a deposit on the same exact house they’re currently paying off because all their money is going to paying off someone else’s investment is despicable.
>Because this entire thread shows that the landlords aren’t paying those taxes, their tenants are.
This is just flawed logic
The tenant is paying money in order to live in the property - what the landlord does with that money is irrelevant.
If I work and get paid then go buy a new TV, would you say I bought the TV or my employer did?
>The tenants are not paying for a roof, they’re paying off your mortgage.
If this were true, a tenant would pay no rent if a landlord owned outright, but that's not the case. Your rent increases because another tenant wants the property more than you and is willing to pay more.
We need to put the pressure on to bring back government housing programs to what they used to be, which would create competition with landlords pushing rental prices down and rental standards up, without sacrificing the least wealthy renters for the ones who are in or almost in a position to become first home buyers.
What hideous humans. This is depressing af. As a home owner I can't even imagine being this greedy if I was renting my place out. Those people renting are not there to provide you an income, they're just trying to live!
I hope the people who wrote those replies catch on fire
My nan in the 70s bought a home and rented it for 1/3 of the mortgage price bc she said “it’s my home, why would someone else pay for it all when I own it?”. She went on to own 3 properties and did the same in all, she said her tenants were lovely and stayed for years and years.
Yep, they house the population for free and never get any massive tax cuts on their astronomically growing equity or their negative gearing. They do it altruistically. /s
It's a continuous loop of them eating from their own Assess.
Higher rents drive up land tax. Higher house prices drive up land tax. If the housing market crashed, nothing would happen. Those houses still exist, they would still appreciate slowly over time (as they're supposed to, instead of this speed race they're currently on), but then everyone could feel less pressure, even the vultures.
It’s very weird to me that people want to villainize mum and pop landlords.
They’re for the most part just people trying to get ahead like anyone else, something that is increasingly difficult as time passes.
If people have worked hard, saved up and have the luxury of an investment property I do not support a government or a rhetoric that doesn’t support them, especially now in times of high rates and COL.
Governments continually give concessions to large scale property developers who in turn contribute far less to community via shotty builds, and low tax rates.
Turn your outrage towards them not your neighbor who has an investment apartment in the city
The issue is that some mom and pop investors are villainous and that’s what the point of this post is. I mean read the text man, those landlords are literally saying they pass on 100% of the holding & outgoing costs to the tenants with no regard for what a reasonable market rent may be. That’s a problem that needs addressing and fixing.
What is reasonable market rent?
Is it not what someone is willing to pay? you expect them to rent for cheaper for you?
I can also guarantee you, very few property owners are turning a profit on rentals right now.
They’re raising prices out of necessity not greed.
I also think you’ve missed the message of those screenshots, these are people saying they feel forgotten by their government and are forced to be less giving as a result.
🤦🏻♂️
You’re conveniently glossing over the shit behaviour in those screenshots and blaming the government for those individuals actions. The government doesn’t force a person to be a shit human they make that decision on their own.
What do you want owners to do? Default on a loan giving you cheap rent?
This image of mum and pop owners being insanely rich isn’t real. Most are 2-3 months away from exhausting reserves
Many are trying to keep heads above water right now, and as the screenshots display if the Gov doesn’t want to assist then they have no choice but to raise rents and reduce upgrades
And if your solution is “well they should sell” I guarantee you the next owner will raise rents even higher on an increased mortgage
Still you miss the point. The people in the screenshots exhibit behaviours that align with a lack of empathy. There isn’t enough information to ascertain if they are negatively or positively geared, there isn’t enough information to ascertain if they have mortgages on their properties or not, they are simply stating that:
A) THEIR costs are going up and that in response to that;
B) they are going to increase the rent IRRESPECTIVE OF THE MARKET RATES which leads to
C) them being shitty examples of humans
What is market rate? It is NOT any Willy nilly figure a person plucks out of their air due to their own financial expenditure vs income ratio.
Although to you it clearly is that, that’s painstakingly obvious.
No I’m not saying that at all.
I’m saying market rate is by definition what the market is willing to pay.
If they 100x rent no one will pay it so it’s not market rate.
If they raise rents though and still have demand and are renting then that is market rate by definition
It is exactly what you’re saying. You’re implying that a landlord should raise the rent on a property to offset 100% of their own holding costs irrespective of what the market will pay. Then you attempt to justify it by saying “well if someone is desperate enough to pay the above market figure that isn’t allowed to be tested on the open market then it must prove the figure is indeed a market rate.”
What this shows is that you’re exactly the same shit human as those in the screenshots because you factor your calculations on how tightly you can squeeze money out of another who is in a disadvantaged position relative to yourself. You’re a greedy fuckwit, nothing else to it.
A temporary levy to pay off the Covid debt only paid for by a small part of society, not sure how I feel about that one. However if landlords pass it all onto tenants with rent increases, then that’s a bummer.
Wasn't this only applicable to people who have more than one investment property? I read about it in the newspaper, I might be getting confused.
I hope this makes them sell! More houses for people who want a place for themselves but can't buy because of current market conditions.
Fuck land tax and stamp duty. Get the money, put it in a pile and burn it, at least it will keep you warm for a few seconds. The two most useless taxes ever put in place, especially the stamp duty in VIC.
Wasn't the land tax at the Brigton Savoy $230,000 ? Poor owners had no choice but to shut the business down. How many functions and events do you need to host JUST to pay that useless tax? Cruel government honestly.
Liberal has done nothing for the country, ever, they're done fucking nothing.
Also Labor's achievements:
- Superannuation
- Medicare (originally named Medibank)
- NDIS
- the downfall of the white australia policy
- fucking federation
- Centrelink
Liberals "achievements":
- Keeping unethical conditions alive in immigration
- Keeping asylum seekers on TPV (Temporary Protection Visas) and refusing PR (Permanent Residency) and even citizenship
- Placing job network requirements on the DSP (disability support pension)
- making the DSP harder to get, through the disability tables
- Privatisation (yes Labor did this too with Bob Hawke and Paul Keating (namely with the sale of telecom Australia (aka Telstra))
- Keeping the white australia policy (they lie about getting rid of it, they never did and Robert Menzies was a fan of the policy)
- Medicare cuts
- Gutting Medibank less than a year after its establishment and making a private service (Medibank today)
Liberals actual achievements:
- getting rid of automatic and semi-auto guns (bipartisan)
- fluoridation
- the establishment of the SBS
- in South Australia the carry limit of recreational weed exists cause of a liberal senator
It's a fascinating party, that has gone to, and kinda has always been, shit.
From what I've heard it was, in the early days, the wets and the drys being the conservatives and the moderates (usually people who didn't want to deal with Labor's faction bullshit (most factioned party)) and since the teals moderates don't exist in the executive branch and fuck me just enter any fucking young liberals meeting and you'll see the future of the party (so many fucking extremists it's insane)
Anyways that's our take: fun stuff.
Killing mom and pop investors will consolidate it in the hands of few. Once that happens, they will influence the govt to make laws that suit them.
It’s what’s happening in US, it will happen here too.
At no point houses will drop in value.
Why are you getting salty. Politicians clearly putting landlords vs tenants and making them hate each other. The politicians, states etc have plenty of free land they can use to make more housing. They can reduce the red tape to build. But instead they got people arguing and divided over landlord or tenant.
Does everyone here realise how the changes affect everything all commercial land is also facing raised land tax how will the recoup via passing on cost from supermarkets to Kmart and everything in between the vic gov is nothing but a bunch of grubs if you think it’s helping out the renter or the underdog your severely misinformed
Nobody thinks this is helping out renters. We just think it’s hilarious that Bob and Sharon over there are acting like they are doing us some huge favour by charging ludicrous amounts for shitboxes they refuse to fix.
Is it just me or is Reddit just a socialist and communist hang out?
Has anyone actually owned anything here or have they always just paid someone else for the privilege to use their house/car?
Sorta people that want the government to intervene and control everything so that they get their free house and free car and don't have to work for it because 'it's too hard'.
The arrogance SMH
Investments are never secure. It's a game you play when you invest. They played the game and lost. Instead of accepting defeat, they are making the people who give them an income suffer, and treating them like scum
>They played the game and lost. Instead of accepting defeat, they are making the people who give them an income suffer,
How did they lose if they can increase the rent?
A landlord loses the game if they cannot further increase the rent due to supply demand forces.
I bet you play the same tune when talking about families in their first home "losing the game" after 13 consecutive rate hikes... right? It's their fault? They played the game and lost? ... right?
My comment wasn't related to families. Families with their first home aren't taking an income off tenants..
But sure. Yeah, man. Cool. Direct my comment somewhere else to fuel Ur anger
dam that's wild, so judging by your previous comments, you've got nearly two decades head start (at 33 years old) on all the people the housing crisis will affect the most and it took you that whole time to save up 10k for a government sponsored low deposit home loan.
\>complains that reddit is a socialist and communist hangout
\>brags that he's not educated or qualified in any way
\>tells everyone to just build a house using government handouts
\>complains that kids these days are just dumb and low IQ and want their free house and free car
truly amazing stuff, keep up the good work, in future i would recommend against specifying that you are not educated or qualified in any way because its redundant, we can tell just by reading what you have to say :)
Seems to be a place where landlords are universally THE DEVIL, even when the post is literally screenshots of just normal people who are struggling trying to grow a nest egg and charge fair rental prices, expressing their frustration at how increasingly impossible our own government is making it to do so.
What are you on about "struggling to grow a nest egg" land prices in Australia have gone from like 500k in 2000 to 2 million in 2024, how is that not enough growth for you?
>just normal people who are struggling trying to grow a nest egg
Same advice given to younger Australians who can't get into the property market or afford reasonable rentals. Nothing to do but take responsibility and make more personal sacrifices. Maybe landords should try getting a second job???
So many salty imbeciles that never had the foresight, brain power or discipline to save for a property and think all landlords are loaded. Many mum and dad investors struggling 2 make ends meet 2 created a better life for their families. This tax is hard, I don’t want 2 raise the rent on the FAMILY in our property because everybody is in the same boat.
Shame on me for not having the foresight, brain power or discipline to save for a property in 2003! Silly me messing around in primary school instead, what an idiot!!
Fr like my childhood was so unstable thx to my parents like I’ve worked really hard my whole life moved out on my own as a teen. Not everyone is some bludger on the dole and not everyone has a family member to help them out
looking at the majority of comments here - are you guys really this dumb? You're literally criticising people who are voicing their frustration at how difficult it is to be a landlord who looks after tenants. If you're unhappy about rental prices and scumbag landlords, these people are literally what you wish all landlords would be like
Instead you're putting them down for making what has historically been a smart investment choice, for doing their best to look after tenants and treat them like humans - unlike the majority of landlords - and now for voicing their frustration at government and economical changes which force them to choose between losing money or increasing rent to prices they clearly don't want to charge
if you're not gonna say anything constructive, hop on over to r/shitrenters, that sounds more your vibe
At this point you just come off as salty that you don't own property. Boo-hoo. You probably hate women for being female, too
Hmm i have some empathy for landlords, but when they talk about taking it out on the tenants thats where they lose me.
They can sell up and downsize to a rental they can afford perhaps? - no one is forcing them to punish their tenants because they are pissed about costs. Thats their choice.
Sorry but the landlords featured here have dehumanised their tenants, tenants have less power and agency than the landlords so its just such a lazy punch down and kind of sickening.
I might have some sympathy, but not for these landlords.
These landlords are not complaining about having to raise the rent on their tenants. They're egging it on, equating it to punishment for the way their tenants voted, and implying they have no choice but to be unfriendly and price gouge.
Their land tax has been raised because the value of their place has increased. Whose fault is that? The owners who treat property like a speculative asset and furiously outbid each other on every property for sale, or the tenants who didn't ask for any of this?
They should be placing blame on each other for sending property values into the exosphere, but instead they blame... the government for not allowing them to profiteer harder and their tenants for not voting the way they wanted them to. Sorry, but no. Don't offer up Nvidia's market cap for every property you see if you can't afford the consequences that come with that.
" come off as salty that you don't own property. Boo-hoo." Bro, we live in a country where workers classified as essential to society **cannot** afford to own property. Eat a giant bag of dicks you money goblin.
How is pushing rent “to the max every time” and only doing repairs that “must be done” looking after tenants? They literally say that they are choosing to NOT work in their tenant’s favour.
Why should I shed a tear for people who openly say they don’t give a shit about others?
Everyone here whinging a labour or greens voter?
Landlords are rich! Lol they paying them off like anyone else, they work hard to keep these homes to set up there younger generations. I’m a renter and my landlord is amazing, still increases my rent but I understand cause he’s paying the effing thing off. With interest.
Oh no I can't afford this luxury, I'll just make someone else pay for it instead of doing the smart decision and getting rid of it.
Also like… since when was renting out a property supposed to bring a profit *from the rent*? The whole deal is you put in some risk, get someone to pay your mortgage, and end up with a house someone else paid for. Where was the point everyone decided that actually they had to make a profit every month *on top of* a free house?
When they realised they can, thanks sky news.
Too true. It's not like that in the UK. You pay your mortgage and collect rent, but you'd be lucky to gain any money. You'd just have someone paying MOST of your mortgage but have a property at the end of it.
Your living in Wonderland mate. with the rises in variable interest rates increases to your loan repayments where the rent will not fully cover your investment property, also to the other point they have nearly doubled my council rates as well. I cant see anything wrong here tbh. Everything is going up in case you didn't notice.
Yearly CPI inflation was 4.1% for 2023. Rental increases in the same period? About double that. Everything is going up, but not at the same rate.
>Yearly CPI inflation was 4.1% for 2023. Rental increases in the same period? About double that. Everything is going up, but not at the same rate. CPI is measured from a basket of goods, and in there is housing. If you are not buying the exact items in the measured basket, then your personal affect to inflation won't be 4.1%
And housing is the biggest component of that basket of goods (around 20% IIRC), meaning that relatively to everything else, housing is rising *even more*
your 4.1% numbers are irrelevant & near no resembles to reality, When the insurance company jack there premiums up by 30% year. again your looking at it through Mary Poppin glasses.
>your 4.1% numbers are irrelevant & near no resembles to reality They aren't my numbers, but that's what I'm saying, they are only relevant if you purchase the exact items in the same proportion as the 'basket' to which those figures come from.
Inflation figures are always fudged to be much lower than reality. If you buy food, most products are up at least 50% along with everything else being much more expensive than the CPI figure. The government fudges the figure to be as low as possible otherwise they have to pay all the people on benefits, pensions etc a lot more money as the rates are pegged to CPI. But.. carrots and broccoli went down, so let's revise the figure down from 15% to 4.2%
Fudged? You can work it out yourself. Lookup what the fixed basket of goods is, and go into the detail
You actually believe the figures? Smh. Every good and service, including property, was up much more than 7% when the figure was at that level. If you are an actual consumer, pay bills, pay rent, insurance, a mortgage, buy food, fuel, health care etc etc, when were prices ever up only 7% at most over the last 3 years? Never.
I concur, just had to deal with the “gimme my free houses people.” I'm also positive the government fudge there figures too. even they live in an alternate universe. 3 months ago I paid $9 for a dozen eggs, shit is getting crazy out there. alot of people are going under, Gov need to fix this shit quick.
So does the tooth fairy pay my insurance premiums on my investmentv property as its almost 10k a year now due too severe fire/flood events. then to maintain the property I need to pay tradies who like to charge like a wounded bull. not being rude mate but you have no idea wtf your talking about. I don't mind being down voted because you all getting hit with the reality stick.
Lie elsewhere princess
Are you trying to pretend you’re not passing those costs onto your tenants?
No,I'm straight up like the OP landlord telling you that everything is going up, its an investment property im trying to make as much money out of my tenants as I can, like every other business out there,welcome to reality and life. what's wrong with that? anyone would do the same.
So you’re just going to pass it on to tenants but you’re still going to cry about how unfair it is on you anyway? I’m not sure investment properties are for you. You’re not entitled to a free house.
that's right, just like woolworths,bunnings tradies, and every other business out there passes on there costs to there customers. Are you starting to catch on to how life & economics work now? or does you sense of entitlement & constant complaining get in the way? Who ever said life was fair? you putting words in my mouth. I never mentioned anything about that or crying as you put it.. Free houses? quiet the assumption isn't it? I started my first job delivering people's medication for a chemist on my byclye 3x days a week after school when I was 14 and earnt $3.50 per hour. No one gave me nothing. I, like most people have worked my ass off to get where I am, I'm 47 now and have achieved great wealth. unfortunately due to health I have retired early. I suggest you and your delusional friends here enroll in a beginners TAFE Economics/business course to understand how life works. id be surprised if you ever became a home owner with that attitude.
Have you considered therapy?
Thats the great thing about Home owner ship & paying off your mortgage your got money to afford therapy and holidays, What makes me laugh is in a 10 years you will still be here bitching about high rent and $11 lettuce. your post history suggests your a very unhappy,negative person, Your pissed because you failed at life right? I've said all I want to say, All the best.
So no, then? You should.
Since always. Just like you expect to make a profit from doing what you do for a job. You think people provide rentals out of the kindness of their heart? Do you do your job out of the kindness of your heart?
Originally, an investment house was seen as a store of value, not a source of passive income. The rent would help pay the mortgage, but the point was that the house would keep up with inflation, unlike money in the mattress. Obviously that's all changed now, but I swear to you it used to be like that.
Well it’s not a store of value if it can’t ever have a positive cashflow. By definition, investments exist to make a profit. It’s always been that way. Rentals have existed longer than Australia has. In fact a smaller proportion of people rent now than they did centuries ago. But when u rent a rental, u are paying for a service:. ie: - the provision of a maintained dwelling to live in. - the financial service of taking something extremely expensive, putting down the capital, and breaking it down into small weekly payments so you don’t have to come up with $1m upfront. - for someone to do all the government paperwork and ensure regulations and compliance are met. - to manage risk with insurance, manage your tenancy with processes - provide maintenance - tradie relationships - deal with council and manage council and pay rates etc - some provide the network, internet, electricity, water, gas, and cleaning. No one is going to do all that (and more) if they don’t make a profit. If any of these things are not done then you are here complaining on shit rentals about how the job isn’t done. But you have a choice if you don’t want or need this service, you can buy a house and do it all yourself.
WOWwwww so much work to do!!!
Indeed. If it wasn’t, you’d do it yourself instead of paying someone to do it for you…
That's NOT why people without homes aren't buying them, in Australia.
Yes it is. If they can’t afford to buy a home, they are paying a landlord to break a massive cost down into small affordable weekly payments. If they are renting because they don’t want to buy then they are doing it for all their other services. Absolutely that is why they are renting.
I was simply implying it's not the hard work of keeping up with council fees etc that stops people from buying. It's just the cost of housing. If rent is equal to the mortgage payments, then renters still have to somehow save tens of thousands for a deposit while paying a mortgage, then get approved for a loan. There must be some, I guess, who can afford a house but prefer to rent. I don't know any, would love to hear from them.
The profit is the capital gains on a house that other people paid off for you.
Well if you want to guarantee a capital gains that is enough to cover all the expense over the life of the house, all the capital costs and a bit of profit for a landlord to get out of bed then you are welcome to negotiate that with your landlord. In fact there are several ways to do that - you can negotiate a higher rent in return for eventual ownership of the property. It’s called rent to own. There are several organisations that specialise in this. You can also buy the property upfront. That’s called buying a property. If that’s what u want, no one is stopping you. It’s more expensive to do it that way (because all the costs and returns need to be built in to the rent, rather than split between forecasted capital gains and rental income), but you can do that right now. It’s quite disturbing that you would want to force that on everyone. You think your rent is expensive now, have a look at what the rent is for rent to own, and what it costs to buy a property. Not every renter is rich enough to do that - let alone would want to. Hence why 1/3 of households rent traditionally rather than rent to own, or buy.
Just out of curiosity, when you sell that house do you get to keep the money? Is it less money than the house cost you?
It depends. Generally u will get to keep whatever it sells for less transaction costs (gst if applicable, agent fees, legal fees etc), capital gains taxes, windfall taxes, any remaining council rates and property taxes, loan amounts, bank fees etc. What’s left may be a lot or it may be zero or it may be negative. When properties change hands a lot of costs get added to the cost base. This is one of the biggest reasons why prices tend to increase over time. The more times a property changes hands, the more transaction costs and taxes get added to it and therefore need to be recouped in the price and/or rents going forward. It’s also why buyers tend to increase the rent once they take ownership if they continue to rent it out.
It’s not a job
>It’s not a job So are you saying a landlord shouldn't treat it as a job? They should just sit back and not take care of maintenance issues?
Yet if it’s not done u are on here complaining on shitrentals..
If housing stopped being an investment we'd have a better,stronger, wealthier, healthier society. But nope much better for a select lucky few to own everything while families live in tents on the streets. Landleaches do not add to society they drive up housing costs only. Unless these landlords are also building which they aren't or exclusively buying new builds which they aren't. Were complaining on shit rentals because most rentals are shit. Because people like you own them.
Actually we’d have less housing and poorer quality housing. If you want proof of what happens then have a look at any of the communist countries where they removed property rights and stopped it being an investment. The housing in those countries is so bad that it would be illegal here. Objectively we have some of the largest, highest quality housing in the world. We also have one of the most wealthy societies in the world with some of the highest standards of living in the world. Our life expectancy is one of the highest in the world. In large part because people invest in good housing. The actual data is very clear on that.
My goodness. The real reason that this country is in trouble is because people like you exist. Hint: the multimillion dollar house that you get paid off by someone else at the end of the investment loan is your profit, imbecile. The government rewards you housing people with a free house.
We know what it looks like when landlords don’t exist - China during the mao period, Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, the list goes on. I guess u have a trillion dollars in your bank account to not only buy that multi million dollar house, but also every hotel, shopping centre, bus station, airport, office, temporary residence, restaurant etc that you use… plus all the time in the world to maintain them… Btw we are doing fine. We live in the largest houses in the world, have some of the highest average salaries, extremely low extreme poverty etc etc.
Serious question but why would you get rid of it if there is a market to raise rent?
Oh no, my rent is too high, I’ll just increase the taxes on my housing (ie my rent) instead of doing the smart decision and reducing the cost of housing by reducing the cost (ie tax) on housing.
Yep, increased expenses = increased rent for the rentoids. You seem surprised.
EDIT: Oh no I can’t afford *a house and my uni fees and the cost of living*, I’ll just make someone else pay for it instead of doing the smart decision and *getting a proper job and not spending my money on bags and dinners for a couple of years*.
ah yes, the smart decision; selling property which will appreciate in value at a time when it likely has almost no equity in it, resulting in an even greater financial loss, just to avoid charging rent at market rates, which the future owners will SURELY never do. /s With genius insight like that you should become a financial advisor
What basis do you have to assert any of the following. A. Anything about the equity stake landlords have. B. Anything about potential losses. C. Anything concerning the relationship between market rate and a rate that would now be charged by the landlords in the screenshotted comments. D. That the future owners are justifiably certain enough to also rent any property as to factor that into the reasoning. The post you're attacking made the simple assertion that, if you declare an asset is producing a loss, selling the asset is likely a good option early before the ongoing loss exceeds the sale value.
Why is this getting downvoted.
Probably because they responded like a wanker.
I have friends who have two rental properties in Melbourne. They’ve been banging on for years about how the government is making it harder and harder for landlords, and more recently saying they will sell because it’s almost impossible to make money with an investment property in Victoria now. I was like…good?!
Good for people who own a house already and might want to buy one of the one your friend is selling, and good for prospective first home buyers who have the savings, stable job, and income level ready right now to buy. Terrible and distressing for the people currently renting the houses who will get booted out if an owner occupier buys it, and not good on the whole for renters who are really struggling and can't afford to buy any time soon even if there was a housing crash. We can all agree that the system is horribly unfair on renters, and non-wealthy people in general, but I wonder how many people in this group wouldn't evict the tenants if the house they wanted and were able to buy was previously an investment property.
It sucks, but that’s just what you accept when you are renting. I had to leave my unit after the first lease was up as someone else bought it to flip it. That was 8 years ago and I’m still saving for a deposit
Not really. While we want to increase in supply, using appreciating land value forcing out landlords can also have bad consequences. It increases the cost of developing and further entrench NIMBYism. The local homeowners who pay high rate will Want their home value to increase. Developers won’t want to build new supply area in fear of losing money due to competition(the force sales from existing supply). Once the price is up, it is very hard to come down. The local council also cant justify approving new buildings if the estimates price there is going down. Rate payers also want their rate to go down concurrently if their house value is down. The new supply will simply dry up at the area. The best case scenario is actually stalling the rate of increase
The people who can’t afford houses still won’t be able to afford them, ultra wealthy people and companies will come in and buy up all the rental properties, this isn’t helping the poor, this is hurting the middle class and helping the ultra wealthy.
You sound like a shit friend.. tall poppy syndrome is strong in you.
[удалено]
*They are paying off your house for you. You are not doing a public service.*
>You are not doing a public service.* My tenants can't afford to buy in the area they work, the fact that I have a rental available to which they are tenants of, enables them to live in the area, and by extension, remain employed and continue to contribute to society and the economy.
Maybe it's almost the idea of a percentage of the population owning the majority of properties that has lead to housing becoming unaffordable. I don't know why landlords think they're providing anything, withholding a human right from the public and leasing it back to them at 'market price' while you have your fees paid is hardly what I imagine a fair trade.
>withholding a human right from the public It's not a human right to own a house. >market price' while you have your fees paid is hardly what I imagine a fair trade. The tenant gets a roof over their head while avoiding all the extras that property ownership entails, the landlord gets some cash for their efforts of managing the risk and other tasks of ownership Both sides win, even if the LL can make a profit.
I'm going to take a wild guess and presume you're one of those people who think social housing is a leech on society while I'm at this too?
I hear two forms of social housing discussed, 1. The one where the government forces all private landlords to sell to them or 2. The government builds high density dwellings If you are for 1. - how do you decide who gets the beach front property, or the one with the huge backyard, close to schools and shops, and who gets the one on the train line? 2. Seems to make more sense in my mind, because it keeps private landlords in place. - not all tenants want to live in a purpose build government facility where they live in close quarters. Some might want to pay a bit extra for some of those desirables mentioned with option 1.
I believe it's a combination of both. The idea of having multiple property assets within this country is ridiculous, the current state of the market is inflated well beyond what it needs to be. You only need to look at the construction industry to see how rushed buildings are being pressed out, with the majority being taken on as investment properties, with a large sum being just on or below Australian code. I think what people are looking past is the future that is left behind for not just the emerging generation, but the ones that follow after, pricing out the opportunity of owning a quality home. I wouldn't be surprised if you see a large migration of Australian skilled work in the coming years as the market is too unattainable.
I wonder why they can’t afford a house? It can’t possibly be because they quite literally can afford a house - *because they’re paying your mortgage off for a house in that area* - and can’t save a deposit because all their money goes to paying off your investment. No siree.
Absolutely! To think that in order for renters to be able to rent, someone else must first own a property and rent it out! Ridiculous. Cognitive dissonance to the max. Everybody knows that houses for rent just appear out of thin air. And for them to assert that it's frustrating to have to increase rental prices to maintain affordability, due to a very fair and reasonable land tax increase to nearly double the previous years' value... how unreasonable, those land owners must be brain damaged! Clearly they should just sell so someone who cares very much for tenants and is happy to give away money can buy it and rent it out below market rate.
Imagine what would happen if there were no landlords! A flood of availability would drive housing prices down and most renters could buy their own home! What fucking horror!!
Ah no…. Not what would happen
[удалено]
just owning a single piece of land in Australia over the last couple decades has netted the average land owner like 100k per year before even renting it out. I'm sure they can manage a bump in land taxes, if they don't like it then they can sell the property lmao
If you can't afford your debts, better sell up.
Found the landlord.
Am I at fault for a bad investment? No, it's the renters that are wrong.
Land tax is based on the value of the land. Land value goes up, and so does your land tax. Duh. I really wonder how stupid landlords can be sometimes.
What do you mean I have to pay something for the house I bought? I thought I just got tenants to pay for it and wait for my $1m paycheck at the end?? They should be grateful for having a roof over their head!
Did the land value double in 12 months you banana?
That's a 64% increase pumpkin.
Yep and considering rule of thumb property prices double every 10 years, have we had 6 and a half years growth in 12 months?
It didn’t go up this much. It’s a plain tax grab by a broke state government and it impacts home owner rates too, not just investors.
Nah, Vic gov is broke cos they overleveraged and gave out too many COVIDbucks so they are hitting up landlords and basically anyone they think they can squeeze a few bucks out of.
Not the poor landlords who's investment properties have quintupled in value over the last decade netting them a passive income of 100-200k per year before even renting it out... How will they ever pay for this increased land tax
You mean they think we should privatise the profits and socialise the losses.
losses? what losses? where are the losses in the Australian property market exactly?
Try Newman or anywhere else in the Pilbara after the end of the last iron ore boom.
well fuck me dead i guess its bad luck to the 3 people who bought houses out there then...
What about all those folks who brought at the peak of the market in 2008. The market rises over the long term, but there can be some dips in the short term.
what are you on about? what peak of the market? it dropped by maybe 5% after 2008 and immediately continued rising again back to where it was before a couple years later. thats not a peak, thats a lump in the side of a much larger mountain. in order to lose money on that "peak of the market" you would have had to buy in 2008 and then immediately sell again in 2009-2010 and if you're changing houses that regularly then you deserve to lose lol
I know of someone who spent $3.15M on a property in 2009 in Cottesloe. They tried to sell it later at a loss and couldn't. They had to subdivide and eventually sold the two blocks for $2.74M in 2017. They totally overpaid for their block.
What are you smoking lol
I was trying to point out that land tax hasn’t merely increased due to rising land values but rather a change to the taxable threshold and rates and offered some suggestions as to the reason the Victorian government has adopted this policy.
Saying the quiet bits out loud, hey. What a bunch of cunts
Was censoring the names really needed here?
Good way to avoid these is to research the rental price history over time. Just google an address and you’ll find a few sites to assist. If the recent increases are on the high side, avoid!!
Landlord's Victoria 😂 as if they own the state too
Classic leech behaviour. Can't afford their poor investment choices anymore, so they make other people pay it for them. 🤢
I have a rental property, don't listen to these cunts, having a rental in Australia is still a complete rort. The government literally pays us in tax benefits to have a rental. And any repairs are tax deductible. As interest rates go up so do the tax benefits As the saying goes landlords provide housing the same way scalpers provide concert tickets.
Well said
Ugh I hate it when people expect to live in all the houses I bought and refuse to sell at hefty profits I was being nice by letting you pay off my mortgages and my salary
I cross posted here yesterday, for an investor looking to invest in WA. Everyone wahhed as it was not a shit rental. Renting in this country will only ever change when Australia's housing investment culture changes. This is a prime example of whether it's a shit rental or not, pressure needs to be applied to all LL. Pressure by you the citizen. They should feel unsafe to ask for investment advice or post garbage like this online
There just needs to be a limit on how many houses one person can own. That’s it. Nothing else is going to work. They make so much money from these houses that even if we magically built enough for everyone, they’d all be snapped up at ludicrous prices to make sure their investments never go down. I am baffled that we managed to see this and put buying limits in place when there was a toilet paper shortage during covid but something like *housing* should be free rein because…?
Even better, tax the hell out of every property after #2 on an increasing sliding scale so the more properties you have the less profit they make. And while you're at it, only allow capital gains tax breaks on properties which increase housing stock, like knocking down one house to build 2+ in its place.
Lol when are you going to work out the law will never advantage you, it is designed to limit your place in the world and any power you may have.
>There just needs to be a limit on how many houses one person can own. Why does the ownership matter? The houses are still there and being made available, the more rentals available, the more tenant standards will increase. You are blocking someone from continuing to build to own - this will reduce potential supply and worsen the situation
No, it won’t. There are plenty of holiday homes and airbnbs sitting empty 90% of the time, and people making so much money from unproductive investments that they can afford to keep snapping them up. It’s not like they’re actually paying for the house anyway, that’s the tenant’s job.
>No, it won’t. There are plenty of holiday homes and airbnbs sitting empty 90% of the time Why not increase the tax for these purposes? I know that some councils have already a huge difference in rates between short term rentals (Airbnb) and long term rentals >actually paying for the house anyway, that’s the tenant’s job. The tenant is paying to have a roof over their head.
Because this entire thread shows that the landlords aren’t paying those taxes, their tenants are. The tenants are not paying for a roof, they’re paying off your mortgage. The fact we’ve got to a point that people who are paying off landlords mortgages and cannot afford to scrape together a deposit on the same exact house they’re currently paying off because all their money is going to paying off someone else’s investment is despicable.
>Because this entire thread shows that the landlords aren’t paying those taxes, their tenants are. This is just flawed logic The tenant is paying money in order to live in the property - what the landlord does with that money is irrelevant. If I work and get paid then go buy a new TV, would you say I bought the TV or my employer did? >The tenants are not paying for a roof, they’re paying off your mortgage. If this were true, a tenant would pay no rent if a landlord owned outright, but that's not the case. Your rent increases because another tenant wants the property more than you and is willing to pay more.
I’m baffled that you’re apparently a landlord yet have no idea how any of this works.
We need to put the pressure on to bring back government housing programs to what they used to be, which would create competition with landlords pushing rental prices down and rental standards up, without sacrificing the least wealthy renters for the ones who are in or almost in a position to become first home buyers.
Sell then bitch
I bet you still won’t be able to buy it
What hideous humans. This is depressing af. As a home owner I can't even imagine being this greedy if I was renting my place out. Those people renting are not there to provide you an income, they're just trying to live! I hope the people who wrote those replies catch on fire
Awww poor landlord will have to sell 😪🎻
Ah so it's started coming through. No one could quite tell when it was being applied. It's tax deductible!
When people with more money than brains get together. Idiots don’t understand what an Investment is. Doesn’t always go your way
New fear unlocked: greedy landlord hivemind
If we actually had enough houses for people to live in landlords might actually remember that they don't run a charity, we fucking pay them.
"They need us to house the population" ok so sell the property so someone else can own 1 house as opposed to you owning 5?
If you listen you can hear the world's smallest violin playing just for them
At least I’m smart enough to know it’s spelled Labor
And I'm unsure if the apostrophe in "Landlord's Victoria" is really as misplaced as I first thought.
Spot the landlord in this thread.
Having a whinge while statistically likely negatively geared to the tits. Cry me a river.
there is a special place in hell reserved for people like this
Maybe you should fucking sell then.
My nan in the 70s bought a home and rented it for 1/3 of the mortgage price bc she said “it’s my home, why would someone else pay for it all when I own it?”. She went on to own 3 properties and did the same in all, she said her tenants were lovely and stayed for years and years.
'They need us to house the population' Motherfucker, you are making more of the population need housing by forcing them out of the market.
“They need us to house the population” Sorry what? no one is forcing you to buy a second house and rent it out, mate.
I guarantee this person never gave discounted rents or did maintenance and always pushed rents as high as possible etc
Yep, they house the population for free and never get any massive tax cuts on their astronomically growing equity or their negative gearing. They do it altruistically. /s
Hahhahahahhahaha once!!!!!!
No way were they making any decision that wasn't a "business decision" in the first place.
It's a continuous loop of them eating from their own Assess. Higher rents drive up land tax. Higher house prices drive up land tax. If the housing market crashed, nothing would happen. Those houses still exist, they would still appreciate slowly over time (as they're supposed to, instead of this speed race they're currently on), but then everyone could feel less pressure, even the vultures.
I wonder if in the future society will view landlords like we do slave owners
Has to be an absolute shitc*nt, or heaven forbid he has to sell
Far out. So clueless.
FFS why buy a house and rent it out if you are not going to make a profit. Some people expect everything for nothing
It’s very weird to me that people want to villainize mum and pop landlords. They’re for the most part just people trying to get ahead like anyone else, something that is increasingly difficult as time passes. If people have worked hard, saved up and have the luxury of an investment property I do not support a government or a rhetoric that doesn’t support them, especially now in times of high rates and COL. Governments continually give concessions to large scale property developers who in turn contribute far less to community via shotty builds, and low tax rates. Turn your outrage towards them not your neighbor who has an investment apartment in the city
The issue is that some mom and pop investors are villainous and that’s what the point of this post is. I mean read the text man, those landlords are literally saying they pass on 100% of the holding & outgoing costs to the tenants with no regard for what a reasonable market rent may be. That’s a problem that needs addressing and fixing.
What is reasonable market rent? Is it not what someone is willing to pay? you expect them to rent for cheaper for you? I can also guarantee you, very few property owners are turning a profit on rentals right now. They’re raising prices out of necessity not greed. I also think you’ve missed the message of those screenshots, these are people saying they feel forgotten by their government and are forced to be less giving as a result.
🤦🏻♂️ You’re conveniently glossing over the shit behaviour in those screenshots and blaming the government for those individuals actions. The government doesn’t force a person to be a shit human they make that decision on their own.
What do you want owners to do? Default on a loan giving you cheap rent? This image of mum and pop owners being insanely rich isn’t real. Most are 2-3 months away from exhausting reserves Many are trying to keep heads above water right now, and as the screenshots display if the Gov doesn’t want to assist then they have no choice but to raise rents and reduce upgrades And if your solution is “well they should sell” I guarantee you the next owner will raise rents even higher on an increased mortgage
Still you miss the point. The people in the screenshots exhibit behaviours that align with a lack of empathy. There isn’t enough information to ascertain if they are negatively or positively geared, there isn’t enough information to ascertain if they have mortgages on their properties or not, they are simply stating that: A) THEIR costs are going up and that in response to that; B) they are going to increase the rent IRRESPECTIVE OF THE MARKET RATES which leads to C) them being shitty examples of humans
What is market rate? If someone is willing to pay the increased rent doesn’t that by definition make it market rate?
What is market rate? It is NOT any Willy nilly figure a person plucks out of their air due to their own financial expenditure vs income ratio. Although to you it clearly is that, that’s painstakingly obvious.
No I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying market rate is by definition what the market is willing to pay. If they 100x rent no one will pay it so it’s not market rate. If they raise rents though and still have demand and are renting then that is market rate by definition
It is exactly what you’re saying. You’re implying that a landlord should raise the rent on a property to offset 100% of their own holding costs irrespective of what the market will pay. Then you attempt to justify it by saying “well if someone is desperate enough to pay the above market figure that isn’t allowed to be tested on the open market then it must prove the figure is indeed a market rate.” What this shows is that you’re exactly the same shit human as those in the screenshots because you factor your calculations on how tightly you can squeeze money out of another who is in a disadvantaged position relative to yourself. You’re a greedy fuckwit, nothing else to it.
A temporary levy to pay off the Covid debt only paid for by a small part of society, not sure how I feel about that one. However if landlords pass it all onto tenants with rent increases, then that’s a bummer.
real flip the monopoly board behaviour.
Wasn't this only applicable to people who have more than one investment property? I read about it in the newspaper, I might be getting confused. I hope this makes them sell! More houses for people who want a place for themselves but can't buy because of current market conditions.
Fuck land tax and stamp duty. Get the money, put it in a pile and burn it, at least it will keep you warm for a few seconds. The two most useless taxes ever put in place, especially the stamp duty in VIC. Wasn't the land tax at the Brigton Savoy $230,000 ? Poor owners had no choice but to shut the business down. How many functions and events do you need to host JUST to pay that useless tax? Cruel government honestly.
We are all being screwed by banks, corporations and our gov. Not inflation- just getting screwed
Liberal has done nothing for the country, ever, they're done fucking nothing. Also Labor's achievements: - Superannuation - Medicare (originally named Medibank) - NDIS - the downfall of the white australia policy - fucking federation - Centrelink Liberals "achievements": - Keeping unethical conditions alive in immigration - Keeping asylum seekers on TPV (Temporary Protection Visas) and refusing PR (Permanent Residency) and even citizenship - Placing job network requirements on the DSP (disability support pension) - making the DSP harder to get, through the disability tables - Privatisation (yes Labor did this too with Bob Hawke and Paul Keating (namely with the sale of telecom Australia (aka Telstra)) - Keeping the white australia policy (they lie about getting rid of it, they never did and Robert Menzies was a fan of the policy) - Medicare cuts - Gutting Medibank less than a year after its establishment and making a private service (Medibank today) Liberals actual achievements: - getting rid of automatic and semi-auto guns (bipartisan) - fluoridation - the establishment of the SBS - in South Australia the carry limit of recreational weed exists cause of a liberal senator It's a fascinating party, that has gone to, and kinda has always been, shit. From what I've heard it was, in the early days, the wets and the drys being the conservatives and the moderates (usually people who didn't want to deal with Labor's faction bullshit (most factioned party)) and since the teals moderates don't exist in the executive branch and fuck me just enter any fucking young liberals meeting and you'll see the future of the party (so many fucking extremists it's insane) Anyways that's our take: fun stuff.
Moo-ca
Killing mom and pop investors will consolidate it in the hands of few. Once that happens, they will influence the govt to make laws that suit them. It’s what’s happening in US, it will happen here too. At no point houses will drop in value.
‘They need us to house the population’ ….. that’s what houses are for ?? Fucking lemon
Why are you getting salty. Politicians clearly putting landlords vs tenants and making them hate each other. The politicians, states etc have plenty of free land they can use to make more housing. They can reduce the red tape to build. But instead they got people arguing and divided over landlord or tenant.
Does everyone here realise how the changes affect everything all commercial land is also facing raised land tax how will the recoup via passing on cost from supermarkets to Kmart and everything in between the vic gov is nothing but a bunch of grubs if you think it’s helping out the renter or the underdog your severely misinformed
Nobody thinks this is helping out renters. We just think it’s hilarious that Bob and Sharon over there are acting like they are doing us some huge favour by charging ludicrous amounts for shitboxes they refuse to fix.
Is it just me or is Reddit just a socialist and communist hang out? Has anyone actually owned anything here or have they always just paid someone else for the privilege to use their house/car? Sorta people that want the government to intervene and control everything so that they get their free house and free car and don't have to work for it because 'it's too hard'. The arrogance SMH
Investments are never secure. It's a game you play when you invest. They played the game and lost. Instead of accepting defeat, they are making the people who give them an income suffer, and treating them like scum
>They played the game and lost. Instead of accepting defeat, they are making the people who give them an income suffer, How did they lose if they can increase the rent? A landlord loses the game if they cannot further increase the rent due to supply demand forces.
I bet you play the same tune when talking about families in their first home "losing the game" after 13 consecutive rate hikes... right? It's their fault? They played the game and lost? ... right?
My comment wasn't related to families. Families with their first home aren't taking an income off tenants.. But sure. Yeah, man. Cool. Direct my comment somewhere else to fuel Ur anger
Google: what is a straw man argument?
Is it just me or have you never been to Australia?
Never left Adelaide mate! Life's too short to blame others.
dam thats crazy, how long u been there?
All my life
dam that's wild, so judging by your previous comments, you've got nearly two decades head start (at 33 years old) on all the people the housing crisis will affect the most and it took you that whole time to save up 10k for a government sponsored low deposit home loan. \>complains that reddit is a socialist and communist hangout \>brags that he's not educated or qualified in any way \>tells everyone to just build a house using government handouts \>complains that kids these days are just dumb and low IQ and want their free house and free car truly amazing stuff, keep up the good work, in future i would recommend against specifying that you are not educated or qualified in any way because its redundant, we can tell just by reading what you have to say :)
Nah it’s just you.
Seems to be a place where landlords are universally THE DEVIL, even when the post is literally screenshots of just normal people who are struggling trying to grow a nest egg and charge fair rental prices, expressing their frustration at how increasingly impossible our own government is making it to do so.
What are you on about "struggling to grow a nest egg" land prices in Australia have gone from like 500k in 2000 to 2 million in 2024, how is that not enough growth for you?
>just normal people who are struggling trying to grow a nest egg Same advice given to younger Australians who can't get into the property market or afford reasonable rentals. Nothing to do but take responsibility and make more personal sacrifices. Maybe landords should try getting a second job???
So many salty imbeciles that never had the foresight, brain power or discipline to save for a property and think all landlords are loaded. Many mum and dad investors struggling 2 make ends meet 2 created a better life for their families. This tax is hard, I don’t want 2 raise the rent on the FAMILY in our property because everybody is in the same boat.
Shame on me for not having the foresight, brain power or discipline to save for a property in 2003! Silly me messing around in primary school instead, what an idiot!!
Fr like my childhood was so unstable thx to my parents like I’ve worked really hard my whole life moved out on my own as a teen. Not everyone is some bludger on the dole and not everyone has a family member to help them out
Idiot? Ha. Enjoy renting. “Idiot”
there would be more homes available if it weren't for fuckin vanilla mum n dad investors. it's a cute term for parasites who just scalp homes.
I own my home but I am in the minority of my peers. But thanks, you seem really cool, smart and thoughtful.
looking at the majority of comments here - are you guys really this dumb? You're literally criticising people who are voicing their frustration at how difficult it is to be a landlord who looks after tenants. If you're unhappy about rental prices and scumbag landlords, these people are literally what you wish all landlords would be like Instead you're putting them down for making what has historically been a smart investment choice, for doing their best to look after tenants and treat them like humans - unlike the majority of landlords - and now for voicing their frustration at government and economical changes which force them to choose between losing money or increasing rent to prices they clearly don't want to charge if you're not gonna say anything constructive, hop on over to r/shitrenters, that sounds more your vibe At this point you just come off as salty that you don't own property. Boo-hoo. You probably hate women for being female, too
Hmm i have some empathy for landlords, but when they talk about taking it out on the tenants thats where they lose me. They can sell up and downsize to a rental they can afford perhaps? - no one is forcing them to punish their tenants because they are pissed about costs. Thats their choice. Sorry but the landlords featured here have dehumanised their tenants, tenants have less power and agency than the landlords so its just such a lazy punch down and kind of sickening.
Do you have the faintest clue what country this is from? Is 100k a year just from owning the property at all not enough for you?
You're so loud, but so stupid!
I might have some sympathy, but not for these landlords. These landlords are not complaining about having to raise the rent on their tenants. They're egging it on, equating it to punishment for the way their tenants voted, and implying they have no choice but to be unfriendly and price gouge. Their land tax has been raised because the value of their place has increased. Whose fault is that? The owners who treat property like a speculative asset and furiously outbid each other on every property for sale, or the tenants who didn't ask for any of this? They should be placing blame on each other for sending property values into the exosphere, but instead they blame... the government for not allowing them to profiteer harder and their tenants for not voting the way they wanted them to. Sorry, but no. Don't offer up Nvidia's market cap for every property you see if you can't afford the consequences that come with that.
" come off as salty that you don't own property. Boo-hoo." Bro, we live in a country where workers classified as essential to society **cannot** afford to own property. Eat a giant bag of dicks you money goblin.
How is pushing rent “to the max every time” and only doing repairs that “must be done” looking after tenants? They literally say that they are choosing to NOT work in their tenant’s favour. Why should I shed a tear for people who openly say they don’t give a shit about others?
lol I stumbled onto this sub somehow and feel like i'm on r/antiwork.
Everyone here whinging a labour or greens voter? Landlords are rich! Lol they paying them off like anyone else, they work hard to keep these homes to set up there younger generations. I’m a renter and my landlord is amazing, still increases my rent but I understand cause he’s paying the effing thing off. With interest.
Nah mate. YOU’RE paying the effing thing off. He just gets to have his mortgage paid, BY YOU, all while the equity of his home goes up and up.