Bees Nees City Realty
The Buzz

Posts Tagged with first home owners

Posted by Rob Honeycombe on 25 August 2010

The boost to the First Home Owner grant was an important part of the government response to the GFC in 2009 and there’s no doubt it kept that sector of the market moving. The boost finished but the grant remains at $7,000.

During this recent election campaign the Real Estate Institute of Australia was pushing for the grant to be permanently upped to $15,000, noting that a decade’s passed since the amount was set and in that time Australia’s median house prices have jumped from $220,000 to $519,000. So when introduced the grant was 3.2% of a home price and is now 1.5%.

The other idea the Institute has been running is for first home buyers to be able to access their voluntary superannuation (not employer contributed funds) to buy a home.

“The REIA proposes that a scheme be established which would encourage young Australians to contribute to voluntary superannuation by allowing access to these resources for the purposes of raising a deposit for a first home. The scheme would be an adjunct to the First Home Savers Account but would allow flexibility for the saver to decide whether all or part of the voluntary superannuation payments was needed to augment the home purchase.”

We remember visiting pollies in the mid 1990’s as part of an Institute push for policy change for a similar idea back then. Nothing changed and from what we can tell neither of the major parties have had much time for this idea now.

We’re not sure how many buyers would take advantage of it, but to have a great tax vehicle like super as the place to save for your home seems a great idea.

Your thoughts?

Posted by admin on 19 May 2010

It takes more than 3 months to get the final data so it’s only now we can look back at 2009 and make an accurate assessment of what the Woolloongabba real estate market really did. And if it seemed just as slow as 2008 the graph below shows you’re right.

During 2008 and 2009 sales numbers for both houses and apartments have shown a 50% decrease in volume from the previous two years. This possibly shows owners holding onto properties during what everyone thought was going to be a tough time, and waiting for things to improve before putting their property on the market. The median house price for 2009 was $555,000 while for 2008 it was $620,000, though the figure for 2009 was also affected by first home buyers using the government’s $14,000 grant. Early figures for 2010 are optimistic albeit the number of properties for sale is low. When sale volumes are down sellers can see strong price results as there’s less competition.

Posted by admin on 14 August 2009

home removalistsHave you been in your home for more than 7 years? Chances are you haven’t.

Interesting stats out today from property researchers RP Data, charting the average time we own a piece of real estate. Tracking all sales in the year to May their team recorded the average time since the property was bought by that owner. For Queensland apartment owners it was just 5.7 years, our house owners 6.8 years.

As real estate agents we want to compliment all those people who chose to sell!

Our livelihoods aside it’s interesting how short the average tenure really is. We remember hearing stats out of the USA many moons ago that 7 years was their average holding time and we couldn’t imagine Australians would get to that point.

Interestingly the longest stays seem to be in more affordable suburbs. Maybe first home buyers get their piece of Australia and hold on tight. Investors are also more active in these areas and may have longer term plans than owner-residents.

Overall property owners are much happier to move once our dwellings no longer fit our needs, something unheard of a generation or two ago. Whatever the reason Queenslanders sell so regularly we thank you, and encourage you to do it more often!

Posted by Rob Honeycombe on 1 July 2009

sold signBy nature, I’m cynical. I hear the nation’s not officially in recession and I’ve been reading the reports about price growth in Brisbane property. RP Data’s Tim Lawless said yesterday the “latest results herald a national residential market recovery.” But after owning my St Lucia apartment for 22 years I was always going to be slow in making the decision to sell.

I grew up believing, and still do, that you should never sell. Back in 1987 I got a first home grant of $4,000 from the PM (thanks, wherever you are now Bob!) and the capital gain’s been pretty tidy in that time. It’s good real estate. But this unofficial recession’s opened some opportunities to expand the business and I could do with the funds. And now is looking like a great time to sell.

My main reason to sell now? There’s a shortage of property on the market. Not a massive undersupply, and for the dearer price points this probably doesn’t apply. But for my place at sub-$400,000 the sellers I’m competing with are very low in number. Scarce, in fact. So my sale price is likely to be a fair bit higher than if I’d sold this time last year (provided my agent here does their job!)

In recent weeks our agency’s made one sale at full price and another at more than full price. First home buyers are still busy out there and with good reason – interest rates are very cheap and the massive job losses haven’t happened. Sentiment seems to be turning as journos make a running story of good news and confidence is bubbling up.

Properties are selling. Some home owners have worked out that getting a bigger home and upgrading in a slow market can save you money. How? If prices were down 10% your $500,000 home has dropped $50,000, but if you’re buying an $800,000 place it’s down $80,000. You might be $30,000 better off than if you’d traded up during the boom. And right now the lower end’s prices are strong, so for many the trade up equation is even better.

Regardless of economic news the world goes about its business. People are born and people die, couples join and split and the normal demands affecting the real estate market continue. I don’t think the market’s on fire but I do think some home owners are missing a good chance to sell.

This time it won’t be me.

Rob Honeycombe
Managing Director – Bees Nees City Realty

Posted by Rob Honeycombe on 10 September 2008

pizzaBeggars, as most first home buyers consider themselves, can not be choosers. So the September 1st cut in their stamp duty thresholds are definitely welcome. In the Sunshine State there’s now zero duty on a first home of $500,000 or less, up from the previous cut-off of $350k. Despite the recent interest rates cuts it’s still tough to get into the market so governments need to act. All other owner-occupiers got a small reduction too with the 1% flat rate extending to $350k, up from $320k. These are all great news for home buyers in Bundaberg and Cooktown. But in downtown Brisvegas they’re the proverbial drop in the bucket. We don’t have too many $400,000 homes!  The first home buyer concessions stop at $550k, so for example buying a $750k home to occupy will come with a stamps bill of $19,600, down just $150 since the changes.

Now we don’t want to be seen to be ungrateful… but is $150 really going to help inner-Brisbane home buyers? Pizza and beer on move-in night maybe, while the government coffers swell with another twenty grand.

Hidden in the government’s detail is the increase on duty for investment purchases. That same $750,000 property bought as a rental now has a tax grab of $26,775, up $500 since Captain Bligh’s changes! This will flow on to tenants in higher rents of course, possibly reducing their savings and guaranteeing they never take advantage of those lower duties on their own purchase!

Meantime this week’s new ABS construction stats show loans for new houses have dropped to their lowest level since 2002. We’re not building enough and ANZ Bank’s senior economist says the growing housing shortage is setting the scene for “the mother of all housing booms”. They say pent-up housing demand is heading for record levels.

Serious initiatives have to be looked at for improving the supply of new housing, including long overdue reductions in taxes on new land releases. For inner city suburbs what about Morris Iemma’s idea (remember, used to be the NSW Premier!) for home owners to build and rent a “Fonzie Flat” in the backyard. Fonzie starred in TV’s “Happy Days” and his was over the garage. Morris suggested owners could earn rent from the flats but still retain the Capital Gains Tax exemption for their otherwise owner-occupied homes.

In the meantime maybe that $150 stamps reduction could be changed to a free letterbox for every new home built?!

Posted by Rob Honeycombe on 21 November 2007

election policyGreat to see both contenders for this Saturday’s election have released policies aimed at giving first home buyers a ‘leg up’ into the market. Neither party though seems to be proposing any ‘watershed’ solution for the major hurdle to affordability – supply. The Real Estate Institute of Australia estimates our national undersupply this year alone is 20,000 homes. And household numbers are growing much faster than the population (with divorces, later marriages, oldies living longer etc). So in the major growth areas like inner-Brisbane a shortage of properties means buyers and tenants alike are really feeling the pinch.

Each of the Coalition and Labor has announced “home saver account” schemes to give first time buyers a tax-benefited way to save for a deposit. There’s some neat ideas in each of their proposals: under 18’s for example can get $1000 inside their birthday card from Mum or Grandad, and the grown-ups get a tax deduction for the account contribution. And if a parent co-purchases with the first-timer their portion would be Capital Gains free when the home’s finally sold (or the kids buy them out). As agents it all looks good to us!

But as Treasurer Pete says “If people with more money were just chasing the same number of houses, the price of the houses will go up.” The Property Council’s done some great work analysing how to improve the supply of homes (see www.affordablehome.com.au ) and they’ve rightly highlighted the massive infrastructure costs borne by each new home buyer. It might be more politically acceptable to load developers with costs rather than increase general taxes or rates. But the reality is that end purchasers wear these costs, and this drives prices up and supply down. Each new building must cover its own water, sewerage and other direct works. But as a community we need to ask if we expect buyers of new properties in our inner city to fund the upgrading of surrounding footpaths and roads and libraries and parks?

According to the Property Council the infrastructure costs on a new Brisbane apartment have risen 500% over the past 11 years. That’s government putting its hand further out for contributions to local amenity, and more often than not they’re amenities the whole community makes use of every day. Add in the new minimum standards for housing with requirements like water efficiency items, fire safety requirements and increased sound attenuation – all needed but adding to the cost. Then tip on other government fees and charges, and new properties have a whopping built-in cost – even before the buyer pays their stamp duty. As a community we need to ask if we really do want to improve housing affordability, and allow more of our population to own their own home. If so we need our governments at every level to wind back the recent increases in new property costs, and share the burden across all tax payers. Hardly an election winner is it?!

We’d like your view – should indirect infrastructure costs be paid by new property buyers or funded out of general taxes? Tell us what you think!