bryan francis

I have written for a while that the Labor Party and the Liberal Party in Australia serve the same client. Not the working class. Not small business. But the asset management class. This week's policy announcement is the cleanest proof of that thesis I have ever seen. The Australian government just announced the biggest housing tax reform in 40 years. The press is calling it a win for the working class. It's actually the opposite. The bill will raise house prices, hand the country's housing stock to institutional capital, and lock the under-40 generation out of ownership for good. The devil is in the details. Negative gearing lets you borrow to buy a rental property and write the losses off against your salary. Australia is one of the only countries that allows this. The capital gains tax discount lets you pay tax on only half your profit if you hold for over a year. Combined, these two policies turned investment housing into the default Australian retirement plan for 40 years. From July 1 2027, Labor is changing both. The 50% CGT discount becomes a 30% minimum tax. Negative gearing on existing homes acquired after May 12 2026 can no longer offset salary income. Sounds like a win for first-home buyers. But when you look at the details. The new rules do not apply to: widely held trusts (REITs), superannuation funds, build-to-rent developments, and "private investors supporting government housing programs." Every single vehicle through which institutional capital owns Australian housing is exempt. Permanently. The mum-and-dad investor buying an established unit in 2028 will pay the higher tax. The Canadian pension fund holding the same building through a widely held trust pays nothing extra. Same dollar of gain. Roughly twice the tax depending on who's holding it. This policy raises house prices in three different directions at once. One: existing homes. Every property owner with an investment as of May 12 2026 is grandfathered under the old generous rules. If they sell, they lose that. So they don't sell. Ever. The supply of established homes shrinks permanently. Less stock, same buyers, prices stay frozen at the top. Two: new homes. The only retail-accessible negatively geared asset left is the new build. Every investor who would have bought existing stock now bids on new construction. Developers price the tax break straight into the asking tag. First home buyers, who can't use negative gearing the same way, are bidding against investors whose effective price is subsidised by Treasury. They lose those auctions every time. Three: rents. Small landlords stop entering. Build-to-rent operators, who are exempt, take over rental supply. Their cost structure (corporate debt, asset management fees, returns to overseas pension funds) requires higher rents. Rent goes up. Saving for a deposit takes longer. Property prices keep climbing while the would-be buyer waits. Every variable that matters to a young Australian trying to buy a home moves against her. The policy was sold as the thing that would close the gap to ownership. The design widens it. What happens next is straightforward. The wealthy retail leave. Australia has been losing high-income professionals at an accelerating rate already. This budget gives the ones who can leave another reason. The struggling retail stay and pay. They rent from institutional operators for longer. They enter the housing market later, or never. Australia on a 20-year horizon is being repositioned as an institutional platform. Not a property-owning democracy. A platform.

Engineers make stuff, lawyers do battle

And how do you suppose that they print 7-10 Trillion without an asset crash? And do you not think that an asset crash helps the AIOS grid buildout? Cheap interest rates and mass money printing flooding money into the new sectors. They care about the bond market way more than the stock market. Would be interested to hear you response, thanks

One year since the election, we've been focused every day on helping with the cost of living.