Tax treatment and investment incentives

Question

Senator McKIM: Can I ask, though: when you make the comparison under existing tax policy settings-not the proposed changes-it's basically a 10 per cent effective tax rate after the CGT discount is applied, isn't it? That's pretty attractive. Ms D Brown: I was going to add to Ms Pai's comments. As you'd be aware, the government also changed the taxation arrangements of super recently to introduce division 296, the better targeted super concessions, which does impose a higher rate of tax for balances above $3 million and a higher rate again for balances above $10 million that need to be paid annually. Senator McKIM: When Dr Johnson was running us through the figures earlier, he said that he didn't have the number of properties. If this is a question for Dr Johnson, I'm happy to ask it after dinner when Dr Johnson's back at the table. Is that because you don't have them here or because Treasury just doesn't have visibility over the number of residential properties? Are you aware, Ms Brown or anyone else? Ms Pai: We might take it on notice. We may be able to get some data. Senator McKIM: As part of that, I wonder if, if your datasets allow, you could go back, say, five years and run us through the figures that Dr Johnson was able to give us this evening so we can have a look at the trends of what quantum of money is invested into which of those particular categories Dr Johnson was referring to. If you do have the number of dwellings for that period, that'd be helpful. Ms D Brown: To confirm, it's not just the amount of money in properties but the number of properties held in self-managed super funds and any trend information that we've got? Senator McKIM: Yes, please. Ms D Brown: We'll take that on notice.

Answer

See attached response.

Documents

• Question with answer (PDF) (opens in a new tab)
• SQ26-000457 BET221 - Tax treatment and investment incentives.pdf (opens in a new tab)