Fyi I represent the purple line.
Printable View
Don't worry, those in the TeslaGod's camp will never allude others to believe any different. He's only telling half of the story.
To me that chart tells me (with my basic math of 24.3% + 12.4% = 36.7%) that existing multiple owners who buy cash or mortgage, represents the largest share of house purchases in NZ - regardless of which year. A real sad case.
It depends what you mean by “largest buyers”. It also depends on how you segment the categories of buyers. “First Home Buyers” in that graph not being further segmented, whereas multiple property owners were sub-divided into cash purchasers and those who took out a mortgage. Multi-home owners comprising 36.7% of purchasers.
There is also the Reserve Bank's monthly C31 report. It includes bank lending amounts and actual borrower numbers, both by type of borrower (OO, FHB, investor, business). Not the same data as CoreLogic reports but interesting in part because it goes back years so shows trends.
For example, the % of rental investor borrowers has been dropping, down about 4% this year so far. A trend.
I stand by my statement and the facts.
First home buyers are not struggling it's a myth exaggerated by left wing media.
First home buyers are over paying for property through fear and greed.
That is why the RBNZ is stepping in to reign FHBs in with further restrictions.
From your chart, First home buyers are clearly outnumbered by buyers with multiple homes. SBQ was pointing that out.
As you may have alluded to before, I do think that there is a bit of fear or more specifically, FOMO, with some buyers fearful that they will forever be outpriced and shut out of home ownership. Perhaps that FOMO was stoked by early pandemic forecasts suggesting that house prices were going to drop instead of which they have materially increased! However unlike you I do not think that fear is out of greed, but rather, out of the fear that the natural desire to provide for a home with security of tenure, and not subject to a Landlord’s agenda, will be frustrated.
From my point of view I'm in the minority and most disadvantaged with most of the market over paying for property that just doesn't make sense.
Have you ever been to an auction and some selfish greedy millennial FHB out bids you, pays far too much for the property and neighborhood then drive's up the prices of the whole street?
Then to rub it in do a tik tok celebration dance??
FHB lack dignity and class.
They have ruined a stable market and deserved to be reigned in by the RBNZ.
One thing I should highlight and forgot to mention is the data from Corelogic shows FHBs 2021 share of purchases(>26.3%) on a quarterly basis is actually the highest its been 15 years(2006)..hmmm go figure, it's amazing what you can find through the lies of mainstream media and there blind followers Attachment 13042
And this thread was started in 2007 so to respond Crypto Crudes original statement "NZ first home buyers screwed "
No.
15 years of data proves that.
After all these years I think the moderators need to finally close this thread
During the same period FHB’s as a % of Buyers has been materially higher than NZ’s every year in the USA - varying from 31% to 50%pa. It just indicates how effectively NZ FHBs have been squeezed over the years.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...me-buyers-usa/
Is it even worth buying into Auckland or should I just move to Aus already (asking as a FHB who will be bent over by LVR changes)
Real estate in both countries is always a wise investment, more long-term than short.
As in New Zealand, be wary of buying in the regions of Australia.
Both countries regional real estate can stay flat for up to15 years after a boom, and we are in the middle of a big one.
Yes ,Auckland is still a good buy long-term.
That would depend on priorities. If one of them is to be able to buy a suitable home, the it sounds that Auckland will be priced out for the poster.
The poster would not be the first. Over the years I wonder how many potential Auckland FHBs have moved overseas with one of the main reasons being unaffordable home ownership.
Attachment 13073
This survey shows investors are being over regulated out of the market most likely since New tax rules, LVRs,loss of individual property rights and genuine hate towards property investors.
What are you waiting for FHBs?
It's your time to shine, or are you waiting for investors to return to the market.
The Survey was about whether property investors planned to spend more on investment property - i.e whether they were going to add to their portfolio. So I am not sure how you can conclude from this that they are moving out of the market.
How have "individual property rights" been affected?Quote:
LVRs,loss of individual property rights and genuine hate towards property investors.
"Genuine" hate towards investors? What differentiates "hate" from "genuine hate"?
Sure there will be some conflict of interests when one family's home is another person's investment. Realignment of the tax environment will cause resentment too amongst those who may have more tax to pay. Using this terminology, NZ must really hate income earners and really love those who earn untaxed capital gains - if the tax system is anything to go by...
The expensive, dogs dinner of a property market is a scary place?Quote:
What are you waiting for FHBs?
It's your time to shine, or are you waiting for investors to return to the market.
Advising young FHBs against one of the safest investment classes in the world, the NZ property market show's your lack of understanding of our financial markets.
Your not taking into account rents that are going to o start spiking, even further if National gets in 2023.
It shows you invest on emotions not fact
Or perhaps you will just like complaining when the average house price reaches 2m at the end of the decade.
Remind me not to take any stock tips from you.
None of my posts is advice. Moreover, Sharetrader is a forum for the exchange of opinions and not a place to dispense advice.
I wouldn't be surprised. Various factors may make it even more expensive - Undersupply, building costs, tradie shortages, tax reform, depreciation deductions no longer allowed etc.Quote:
Your not taking into account rents that are going to o start spiking, even further if National gets in 2023..
I do not invest in rental real estate.Quote:
It shows you invest on emotions not fact .
Allthough I have bought a house to provide my family with a home. So that involved some emotion as the home is the focus of family life. As a general rule there is no emotional attachment to my share investments. Although there are some exceptions!
I am not sure if I would like it as I think it would be an indictment on NZ's investment, banking and fiscal environment. I probably would pass comment should it occur.Quote:
Or perhaps you will just like complaining when the average house price reaches 2m at the end of the decade..
I have not given any, and I am not giving any. I am not qualified to give any and this is not the right place to give any.Quote:
Remind me not to take any stock tips from you.
There are other factors encouraging increasing rents, and they are mostly the effect of government policies. Including increased risk from less than optimal tenants, convoluted and complex new rules on a number of fronts, tax changes, more compliance costs, including some rules acknowledged by the government as unfit for purpose but no urgency to do anything about them, big new fines.
Some are saying sod this for a game of soldiers and making decisions some of which will increase costs/rents or remove properties from the rental pool contributing to shortages (and increased rents).
ECON101.
As I said previously I think the residential property market is expensive and a dog’s dinner! That is not too say it could yet become even more expensive. It depends on how much credit continues to be made available, the alternatives for investors and suitable alternatives for those wanting a home…
Interesting article, Australia has the same issue. Home ownership is becoming hereditary.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-...awed/100532574
Great news for those who own homes.
I prefer the greater picture. What % of wealth is tied up in houses? I see NZ having similar parallels as China where 2/3rd of the wealth is tied up in real estate. Over in N. America, this is a very different mixed as I discussed before in other threads. Even the small guy in N. America can diversify and attain some level of wealth through investments in equities which attract preferential tax treatments. In NZ, the small guys gets a lousy Kiwi Saver that has well... no tax benefits when compared to the wealthier that can mortgage / leverage / and experience tax free capital gains.
I would believe with the size of Australia's many pension schemes, people there have less invested in houses than NZ does.
If you want to start the hoi-poloi moaning their guts out, tell them you are going to tax them on the nominal increase in their house's value. The vast majority will tell you they only want it for those who have more than the property they occupy. IOW everyone but them. I've yet to hear one of these envy driven woofters agree that even owner occupied property that is bigger (therefore more expensive) than they need should be taxed.
What do you mean by woofter? Why are the vast majority "woofters" for wanting homes to be exempt?
Some see the difference between a home and an investment.
Also, given the inflation in values in recent years, I would think that being a NZ home owner these days is a sign of being privileged rather than one of the hoipoloi..
Just because someone has
- Made wise decisions
- Inherited
- Married into
Or a number of other reasons to acquire realestate doesn't make them privileged.
Standing on a podium everyday giving daily updates on what people can and cannot do with their lives is the pinnacle of "privileged".
Given that over 60% of homes are owner occupied, the hoi-poloi by definition must fit in there somewhere. After all, we all form the hoi-poloi - we can't not be part of it.. The reason so many calling for CGT want their own homes to be exempt is simply self-interest. 'Tax is a great idea - as long as it catches the other fella.'
You have a very different understanding of privilege than I do, if inheriting wealth is not a privilege.
If you are referring to the PM updating Covid restrictions, then Yep she has a privilege: She is privileged with the power the voters via MPs delegated to her, and which they can take away from her next election.
I would have thought that having to make decisions like that that affect people's freedoms, livelihoods and even lives was more a burden than a privilege.
While people here offer their opinion on what should be done that have no accountability - if they are wrong then they are just wrong.
Bjuack
Im a political atheist, I don't vote for any bureaucratic leechers lining there own pocket.
Do you think elected politicians should perform their duties unpaid? Also not all politicians have the intent to corrupt.
It is why there is the full disclosure of MPs pecuniary and property interests - to see where vested interests may lie.
Does that mean you do not vote in elections, accepting without complaint whichever party is elected into office?
I do not vote
I do not accept any political party as my controller
I do not earn an income
I pay very little tax compared to my wealth and appreciation on my assets , I don't sell unless I'm rebalancing portfolio's.
I believe I am as free as I can be from your political master's.
Well in my heart and mind I am, which is as good as real freedom.
Matthew Hooton: Why MMP is our worst mistake
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12478919
Another contributor to the housing issue…MMP. Bit simplistic, but nevertheless.
As a pure capitalist I believe National has lost its way since changing it's original founding principles.
“To promote good citizenship and self-reliance; to combat communism and socialism; to maintain freedom of contract; to encourage private enterprise; to safeguard individual rights and the privilege of ownership; to oppose interference by the State in business, and State control of industry”.
If you never vote as a matter of principle, then surely it is irrelevant what any political party stands for or its policies, whether any of them try to safeguard your privilege of ownership?
Perhaps though you like big state involvement when it comes to the legal framework, judicial system and the enforcement and protection of your asset ownership? Do you like to rely on the socio-political system of private property rights and legal protection and enforcement without taking any responsibility for maintaining that system?
No. I am not sure how you can label it “small” government, when it can fine and incarcerate you. The state looms large in protecting property rights, so why only call it big when it introduces product and safety standards and introduces taxes you may not like.
Many successful people earn capital gains which, recent amendments notwithstanding, remain untaxed. NZ has a regressive tax system.
Miss-read your post it seems, my bad.
I do however think that the state should be a small entity, enforcing property rights, sure, but not infiltrating every facet of life.
For tax, I think you are right, it should be far simpler, with a flat tax, no exception, and some form of income exemption to a limit.
I thought of this thread when I say this
Attachment 13116
From this article
https://www.interest.co.nz/news/1127...xes-or-cutting
I support a flat tax too. A flat tax on all gains, whether income or capital gains, with an annual tax free allowance.
I also think that NZ should have a pension scheme, which is tax deductible (up to a certain amount of contribution each year) and does not incur annual tax until distributions are made from it after retirement.
With respect to the state. It should enforce property rights, but it should also ensure that the property which has been afforded protection by the state (or society)be accumulated fairly or in a manner acceptable to society or“the state”. So product and environmental regulation is needed, along with marketing and employment standards.
It is interesting how in 2018 wealth continues to increase until the age of about 75. Whereas in 2001 it started to decrease from the age of about 58 onwards.
So there will be more wealthier deceased estates or family trusts.
I guess back in the day earning income was relatively more important so that when someone retired, and had less income, their wealth would drop too. Whereas today wealth creation (and wealth maintenance in retirement) is much more reliant on the capital gains from exisiting assets (which to a great extent means residential property ownership in NZ).
No, every amount over the threshold would be taxed at a flat rate.
Especially important if you have no tax free threshold with respect to income/gains, we would need to look at GST as well. A continued flat tax regime on outgoings would need to be extended. So GST should be extended to asset purchases such as real estate and share purchases ( a stamp duty). To determine if you have an assessable capital gain, you could deduct the flat rate Stamp duty on the outlay in determining any gain.
Yes, but that produces a progressive tax. Compare someone on 200k a year with the first 10k exempt with someone on 15k a year with the first 10k exempt - you work it out, but you will find they pay vastly different percentages. IOW progressive - not flat, but you knew that. You just forgot.
I think a tax free threshold is possibly the best solution for the problems that any tax proposal has. I'm not necessarily against it. I am simply against using the misnomer 'flat-tax' when it is no-such-thing.
Flat tax with a starting threshold is known as 'marginal flat tax'.
Scroll down a bit on this page. (or see 1.2 in index)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax
if you look at the threshold as the minimum current non-discretionary cost for a human to exist in current acceptable conditions, then if you tax that you are in effect taxing an expense (certainly with respect to income from personal effort). So it becomes regressive…or regressive double taxing when you take into account GST as well.
Precisely why it shouldn't be called a flat tax. However the 'marginal flat tax' is a fair description. GST is a consumption tax, unaffected by income tax so doesn't come into it. Fair enough to have two separate tax names and the two separate taxes. If you want to take a slice of your income and call it an expense, you're more than welcome - be my guest.
Yes but the problem with your socialist paradise of taxing everything that moves you invision, a straight forward answer, and it's happening in California and New York.
Those with the wealth and means myself included would simply move to Australia, Texas, Florida.
Leaving behind those to clean up the mess they wished for.
It's nothing for me to sell everything and park it in Australia's economy.
Yes Oz has taxes but like here there are ways around it.
Attached is an excellent scientific analysis of targeted tax group's and it's social outcomes.
Attachment 13122
Since this is 1st homebuyers, do people in the know here think that house prices will keep rising?
I read somewhere that one prediction is 2million for the average home in the coming years Auckland/Wellington. Is this even possible?
I will go look for the link
Of course it's possible. Whether it's likely in our life times is a more interesting question.
i'd say it depends on what you mean by 'the coming years'. Given long enough it's all but guaranteed, but getting there will be a roller coaster ride.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUldGc06S3U
Supply and Demand. A bit simplistic but true. A bit less simplistic would mean taking into account population changes, income changes, cost of supplies and money (interest), government intervention, fudge factors - and the interactions between them - for starters. The net of which is - it depends!
For fun, take a million dollars and add say 8% / year. Doesn't take long to double it.
I Although I understand the housing market and stock have effects on each other I have never looked at the property market before, until now.
I planned to rent and keep investing the majority of my wage to build a good stocks portfolio, now my situation has changed and I have come into an opportunity to buy & build on a piece of land, so now I want to know about the property market and the kind of future my investment in a new build would have, I have just watched a very good video on the housing market situation currently and it's expected to cool off but in the future continue a slowth growth, whereas they believe there is no lack of housing in NZ only a lack of suitable housing which makes sense to me, also bringing in to consideration of the growing population and only 44'000 new build each year, I believe its a good idea to go ahead with this opportunity, but I will do more research from here
I guess to summarise what I'm saying, I'm worried like many that this current housing market will pop and I don't want to be left paying a huge sum on something that could have cost me less in the future, from what I'm reading and watching this is unlikely to happen in NZ and time soon?
The heavily indebted are screwed. Good job. No such thing as a free lunch. The Piper wants paying.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/126...-hard-and-soon
Inflation shock may hit mortgage holders hard and soon
Tom Pullar-Strecker
16:21, Oct 19 2021
Home-owners may start paying a price for higher inflation sooner rather than later, the country’s biggest bank believes.
ANZ is tipping inflation will reach 5.8 per cent early next year and the official cash rate 2 per cent in August.
But the bank also warned a “dramatic increase in wholesale swap rates” on Monday meant there was now “real pressure” for mortgage rates to rise further “before long”.
The annual yield on 10-year government bonds has jumped about 30 basis points over the past week, soaring above 2.3 per cent.
The movement in financial markets increased the chance that housing market momentum could turn more sharply than forecast and flip more abruptly than expected, the bank said.
Your over analyzing, buy a good home with safe capital growth near public transport, shopping malls,cafés and were people work. If you're going to buy an apartment or town house, don't buy were There's 300 of them next door that look exactly the same.
There's a reason the more central to the cbd you buy the more expensive it is.
Try and buy something with a bit of dirt, the Nats and Reds announced forcing councils are allowed to build more properties on single sections without consent costs around the main centers
This is going to send land prices in the big cities as they say..to the moon!
Doesn't take long to learn "the rule of 72' either. https://www.google.com/search?q=the+...obile&ie=UTF-8
I own a multiple properties down there,they have experienced massive growth already which should be slowing, land is in short supply but these new government laws allowing for higher density will help.
A new build down there will always have buyers ,obviously not as much as the last 12 months boom, but highly overpaid government bureaucrats usually push house prices up over a longer period than Auckland, depending on who's in power.
If national gets in for a long period, Wellington house prices can stagnant, and you have seen what a communist government can do when all taxes and revenue are filtered through a government central location affecting house prices in the region
Wellington
Beijing
Moscow etc
It will still double over 10 years.
I laugh when I see property investors seeing themselves as heroes or providing essential services. Really? You are kidding. If you left and went to Australia the properties would remain and be bought by someone one else who would live in the house or rent them out. It sounds very heroic to provide homes for those disadvantaged people. But surely the reason you have property is to benefit from the capital gain. First and foremost it is an investment which gives a lucrative return. Would you invest if there was no capital gain? Providing homes is just a by-product of your investment.
I agree with Peter Buffet (son of Warren Buffett) when called the whole business of philanthropy ‘conscience laundering’ which he defined as ‘feeling better about accumulating more than any one person could possibly need to live on by sprinkling a little around as an act of charity’
Buffet wrote in his opinion piece: ‘All are searching for answers with their right hand to problems that others in the room have created with their left’.
Engaging in charity and developing the image of the ‘nice guy’ always comes in handy one way or the other.
At the end of the day, the private sector’s interest is to make money. And the reputation companies gain when attempting to improve the lives of the poor through philanthropic initiatives serves them for exactly that purpose.
https://kathmandupost.com/16/2019/11...nce-laundering
Philanthropy and conscience laundering
I pretty much agree with everything you posted.
I never said I'm trying to be a saint, how I invest and donate to my favourite charities is for tax purposes.
Yes I'm trying to make a profit
The only part I disagree with is are you going to house the people if I sell up? Perhaps your government can squeeze them in motels?
So yes I will be missed.
Get educated you broke dumb arse.
As for buffet, yeah tell yourself he's great.
He invests in companies an idiot like yourself that could be a CEO and run .. with other people's money.
MuskRat makes everything about himself. This entire forum is one giant showcase for him to rave on about his wealth and try to rub other people’s noses in it. Money definitely can’t buy class - some of the richest people are also some of the ugliest. But if you were obscenely rich why on earth would you spend all day every day telling people about how rich you are - life must be very boring despite the money, and the individual would also have to be desperately insecure. The story so far: MuskRat knows it all, and will apparently only get vastly richer no matter what the future holds. And we have no way of knowing if any of it is true: the bloke may not even have $5 to his name.
Logan sticky Ninefingers.
Elon Musk is the richest man on the planet.
He still has time to make fun of people on Twitter.
Lighten up grumpy.
Smart men never show their cards...
@ TeslaGod - you don't have to believe me if i'm as wealthy as you. I'm indifferent. However what differentiates between you and me is I have a charitable focus in the long term future. I have an awareness to contributing back to society, and helping those who are disadvantaged. Picking at people by telling them they are poor is very unclassy and you will get no love out of that. What is critical is NZ needs more houses.. but it's a very unfortunately situation when people like yourself only see yourself as 'providing a service', which exasperates the housing problem.
As I posted before, Warren Buffet has said it doesn't matter how rich you are, what matters is what people remember you for and how they regard you when you're on the death bed. You're a complete failure.. actually let me find the quote:
Quote:
But the truth is that nobody in the world loves them,” said Buffett. “If you get to my age in life and nobody thinks well of you, I don’t care how big your bank account is, your life is a disaster.”
I'm giving love away and I expect my children to do the same with my estate.Quote:
“The problem with love is that it’s not for sale,” Buffett told the students. “The only way to get love is to be lovable. It’s very irritating if you have a lot of money. You’d like to think you could write a check: I’ll buy a million dollars’ worth of love. But it doesn’t work that way. The more you give love away, the more you get.”
Yes, you seem like a good person SBQ and no doubt you have a good heart which I respect and admire.
However you say your like Warren Buffet
My heart is more like the vampire Edward Cullen
Black, cold, Lifeless
I am dead inside...
Have a great night SBQ!
Elon Musk teased Warren Buffett for being so much poorer than him — and suggested the investor buy Tesla stock to catch up
https://markets.businessinsider.com/...naires-2021-10
The irony and timing of my post is uncanny!
Read my posts carefully
I don't insult anyone but myself unless being insulted
(Yes 2 wrongs don't make a right)
Study the absurdity of the arrogance I show towards myself, my financial situation and others in my position.
The psychology of making a mockery of oneself seems to upset others.
Yet balanced out by having a high understanding of my 2 largest positions in Real estate and a distant 2nd TSLA.
Troll? Possibly
I prefer to see it as an observation of the human animal.
We know how much Kiwi's love splurging on property during a pandemic, so the endless lockdown in Auckland must be delivering another huge windfall to sellers as the lemmings pile in - gimme some more of that mountainous debt and 'propertee' they cry, desperately trying to outbid each other.