根据默里金融体系调查（Murray FINANCIAL System Inquiry）的说法，资本增值税和负扣税的改革应该成为即将出台的税务白皮书的优先课题。

调查报告还列举了其它一些问题，如储蓄账户征税的区别，免税股息扣税的改动和金融服务征收GST等，这些内容值得被列入白皮书进行讨论。

报告指出，这些做法都歪曲了经济中的融资和风险，或者带来了其它负面的效应。负扣税的完全免税特征，以及对资本增值的税务优惠都鼓励举债经营和投机性的投资，尤其是在房市上的投资。

自从1990年代以来，房屋的高借债比例一直伴随着银行更大的贷款风险敞口。房市已经成为金融系统和经济的一个重要风险来源。

储蓄的税务区别对待是另一个优先课题，由前联邦银行执行长默里（David Murray）领导的调查小组发现，银行存款和固定收益证券都被征收边际税率，而把工资打入养老金却享受优惠税率。“对储蓄产品的不平等税制歪曲了家庭财产平衡表的资产构成和经济的整体资金流向。”

就免税股息而言，调查小组认为当前的公平度不及过去。免税导致国内股市获得投资者的青睐，这可能会影响国内企业债券市场的发展。

报告还表示，白皮书也应该探讨对金融服务征收GST的问题。因为目前金融服务无需缴纳GST，澳洲家庭可能过多消费这些服务，而企业的消费量可能太少。

英文原版：

Negative gearing could be putting the Australian financial system at risk: Murray inquiry

Wednesday, 16 July 2014 1:39

ANDREW SADAUSKAS

The current tax treatment of investment property losses,through a combination of negative gearing and capital gains tax, has come underfire for putting the financial system at risk, according to the federal government’s Financial System Inquiry interim report.

Currently, negative gearing means that interest costs and other property expenses are fully tax deductible, while capital gains tax on properties is applied with a 50% discount.

The Financial System Inquiry, headed up by David Murray,states in its interim report that these arrangements “encourage leveraged and speculative investment — particularly in housing”.

“Because of these tax arrangements, owners of residential property have an incentive to repay their mortgage as slowly as possible to maximise the tax deductions they can accrue,” says the report.

“Loans with interest-only periods help to maximise these tax deductions in the early years of a loan, although these loans also give borrowers more flexibility with repayments. The tax system, therefore,encourages individuals to take on more risk, which does have implications for risks to lenders.”

Aside from negative gearing and the asymmetric taxtreatment, the report identifies additional tax-related factors that are also distorting the housing market.

“In addition to the more favourable tax treatment,individuals have an extra incentive to put more of their wealth into their primary residence because of the means test for the age pension, which excludes the primary home.

This leads to higher allocation of wealth to housing and, forsome, an inefficient level of consumption of housing services,” the interim report states.

Current arrangements also mean family homes are a key savings vehicle for many Australians.

“Returns on owner-occupied housing (including imputed rent and capital gains) are exempt from tax, although this is not unusual by international standards. This makes housing a very attractive vehicle for savings,” the report states.

The favourable tax treatment for property investment has created a situation of increasing mortgage indebtedness, which in turn has created risks for the financial system.

“Since the Wallis Inquiry, the increase in households’mortgage indebtedness has been accompanied by banks allocating a greater proportion of their loan book to mortgages; the share of loans for housing has increased from 47% in 1997 to its current share of 66%,” says the report.

“A large enough disruption to the housing market could have significant implications for household balance sheets, financial stability,economic growth, and the speed of recovery in household spending and broader economic activity following a shock.”

Mark Chapman, head of tax with lobby group Taxpayers Australia, told Smart Company the report is correct in identifying that tax deductions people claim over the life of a property are greater than the losses they claim at the end.

“For high income earners, it’s an astute way to reduce their tax rate. But 70% of those using negative gearing are not high income earners,and are required to buy an asset to get a tax deduction,” Chapman says.

“It needs to be reformed. From a tax policy perspective,[negative gearing in its current form] makes little sense. In most jurisdictions, offsets for losses on property investments can only be claimed against profits on other properties, or be carried forward against future profits.”

Philip Soos, a research Masters candidate at the School of Management at Deakin University specialising in property tax law, told Smart Company that since 2001, most investment property rents have not been highenough to cover interest and expenses.

“Around 60% of investor loans are interest only. It’s a big leverage bet on a capital gain – as long as wages are high enough to sustain the rents,” Soos says.

“While the argument is that it encourages new property development, around 96% of all investment property loans by value are spent onexisting properties.”

“Abolishing negative gearing would be better than reform,but that’s unlikely, so quarantining it or reforming it so it’s limited to new,rather than existing properties, is probably the best option,” says Soos.

Brian Chant, managing director of Property Asset Planning,told Smart Company negative gearing has some important benefits when applied tonew properties.

“I think it’s very effective when used on brand new property. It allows you to turn over the economy, and when you turn over the economy, you employ people. It allows you to build new homes and new affordable housing,” Chant says.

“It needs to be reviewed and discussed further, but whenit’s applied to new homes, it’s brilliant.”

However, Property Tax Specialists' Shukri Barbara told Smart Company reforming negative gearing too quickly could create its own risks.

“One important issue is the banks, who lend up to 90%, are heavily dependent on negative gearing. If you remove it too quickly, the values will drop and create the risk that people will sell their properties for less than they owe on their mortgages,” he says.

-----------------------------------------------

澳洲悉尼地产投资是一个极具投资思维的高端地产咨询顾问平台，致力于通过微信的运营方式颠覆澳洲传统的地产中介行业，团队由一群澳洲悉尼地产行业资深精英组成。

我们践行投资与完美生活理念并帮你买房，提供真正令人惊讶的服务。如果你有任何想法、意见，或者好的文章分享，都请直接留言，我们会因您而变，而更完善。

如果喜欢，欢迎分享本文至朋友圈或直接添加官号（微信ID：sydneyinvestment）与我们的咨询号（微信ID：sydneyinvestment1）。