Similar effects to abolishing negative gearing (rapidly). You will just see rents go up squeezing those worse off and increasing demand for public housing and other types of welfare. This thing needs to be done on new investments and eased on those who already have them. Not an immediate budget sugar hit.
I don't understand this argument and it's thrown out every time their is discussion on eliminating negative gearing.
If you abolish negative gearing and wouldn't you get more houses on the market as people sell off their 2nd, 3rd and sometimes 4th house. More people will buy rather than rent. The total pool of houses remain the same, just the mix of owners to renters would change?
I've posted before how I think negatove gearing only benefits a small section of society and has made already well off people even more well off (on paper at least) at the expense of their fellow taxpayer. Not many cleaners or child-care wporkers own rental properties. And the 50% CG discount is the cherry on top for these people.
That and eliminating refunds of franking credits for superfunds that already don't pay tax would be the first things I would change.