The Premium Debate: Online subscribers react to Dr Ranjana Gupta’s view on a tax on ‘ghost houses’

Are we getting the most out of how we tax housing – particularly the thousands of “ghost homes” sitting empty across the country, asks Dr Ranjana Gupta. Photo / Getty Images

OPINION

The property market is New Zealand’s largest industry, adding $41.2 billion a year to gross domestic product, writes Auckland University of Technology’s senior taxation lecturer Dr Ranjana Gupta.

But are we getting the most out of how we tax housing — particularly the thousands of “ghost homes” sitting empty across the country?

Housing affordability is an ongoing concern for renters and homeowners.

Last year, one in four households that were renting spent more than 40 per cent of their disposable income on housing costs, compared with one in five households that were paying a mortgage.

A comprehensive capital gains tax has been ruled out by both major political parties. While the bright-line test was expanded by Labour in 2020, this applies to only house sales.

What about those investment properties sitting empty for investment reasons?

Here’s what online subscribers had to say:

Read the full story: Ranjana Gupta: The problem of ‘ghost homes’ – a useful housing tax is being overlooked

Have your say by going to bayofplentytimes.co.nz or dailypost.co.nz and becoming a Premium subscriber.

Who cares about whether houses are empty? It is superfluous to society. More importantly, why are we running around looking for ever more reasons to tax? — Brady N

Ghost homes — owned by people who live outside of NZ for much of the year or for many years — i.e. those with dual citizenship living when it suits in China and India for example, returning to NZ infrequently or holding homes near universities and popular schools for their children’s education, when that time comes. — Lou S

Another envy tax. If people want to buy a property and leave it vacant, fair enough, and to be honest anyone who has owned rental properties knows why you would do that.

Owning properties as an investment is no different than owning, say gold.

There’s a shortage of supply in relation to demand so the value goes up.

That’s what investment is all about.

Investors aren’t bound by the ethics of socialism or the Robin Hood theory of economics, it’s business.

Are you going to place an extra tax on gold because they have got some and you haven’t and want some? — Guy M

The author of this article is silent on whether there would be a tax deduction for the costs related to owning the property she wants to tax, e.g. mortgage interest, repairs and maintenance, depreciation etc.

She has also not attempted to estimate the costs of administering such a policy.

I would not be surprised if the net gains did not justify the proposed tax. — Laurie S

The day the state decides it knows best as to what use I put my personal property to, and most especially my house, is the day I leave. — Ray S

Make it easier to build.

Get out of the way of development.

Take the power away from vocal minorities/special interest groups to clip the ticket and get in the way.

Get councils out of the consenting business. Fund infrastructure properly.

Allow imports of building materials.

Things like passing new, even worse resource management legislation ain’t it. — Jonathan S

We own an old family home that is empty following the passing of two of our parents.

It is an older home that is warm and dry but falls below the standards required for a rental and would not meet market expectations.

We can’t be bothered to upgrade it because it is old and will probably be demolished one day.

Even if we did upgrade it, we can’t be bothered to entertain the hassle of renting.

It’s our right to do with our assets as we wish without some academic telling us we should be taxed because stupid governments are unable to match housing market supply with demand by controlling immigration numbers effectively.

Balancing the housing market by controlling immigration seems like some pretty simple maths in a spreadsheet.

Why do we tolerate government incompetence on such a scale? — Richard M

– Republished comments may be edited at the editor’s discretion.

The Rotorua Daily Post and the Bay of Plenty Times welcome letters from readers. Please note the following:

• Letters should not exceed 200 words.
• They should be opinions based on facts or current events.
• Personal attacks and defamatory comments will not be accepted.
• Letters should be emailed.
• No noms-de-plume.
• Letters will only be published with names and suburb/city.
• Please include full name, address and contact details for our records only.
• Local letter writers are given preference.
• Rejected letters will not be acknowledged.
• Letters may be edited, abridged, or rejected at the Editor’s discretion.
• The Editor’s decision is final. No correspondence will be entered into.

Email editor@dailypost.co.nz or editor@bayofplentytimes.co.nz