Page 1642 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 12 May 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
So not only have they stymied industry and those that would buy a commercial or a residential property but they have stymied themselves, because they have cruelled their dividend. It goes on to say:
… a property sector under considerable pressure with financing for projects uncertain and vacancy rates remaining high …
Industry maintains the position that investors do not buy land simply to incur holding costs and pay rates and taxes on an empty site with no revenue.
Some things have changed since this was written in February 2014 but a lot has not. What do they say about the lease variation charge? “The perfect tax,” as the Treasurer described it in some of the estimates committee hearings, where he said it had no effect. “It has no effect; it doesn’t hurt sellers, doesn’t hurt buyers and doesn’t hurt renters.” What does the “Call to action” document say? It states:
There is mounting evidence that the LVC has become a significant disincentive to development and redeveloping Canberra to the detriment of investment confidence …
It goes on to say:
The charge adds significant costs to new development which are ultimately passed on to the purchaser—with negative effects on affordability. Contrary to the Territory’s policy to increase urban density, LVC focuses new development into green field areas or vacant sites in established areas where development is more cost-effective.
The Territory’s forecast revenue from the LVC has plummeted—indicating that the volume of redevelopment has dramatically reduced … in the first year following introduction of LVC the number of development applications processed in the ACT fell by 56 per cent.
This section finishes by saying:
This is already causing projects to be delayed or abandoned putting an end to effective infill redevelopment.
The government say they want 50 per cent of the population living in infill—50 per cent brownfields, 50 per cent greenfields—but then they put this disruptive tax, this higher fee and charge, on to the community. And what do you get? You do not get to achieve your target. You certainly do not get 50 per cent of development in the brownfield sites. In fact you drive it further afield, which puts extra burden on the government to provide infrastructure and, of course, delays the redevelopment of the city.
We only need to look at the last quarter. I note with interest that the Treasurer will be bringing forward the March quarter figures on Thursday. From the December quarter, tabled in this place in February, with respect to the lease variation charge the target for 2013-14 was $14,203,000. The target for 2014-15 was $14,580,000. This was
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video