Anthony Albanese claims ignorance on Treasury’s probe into negative gearing changes

Anthony Albanese has claimed he had nothing to do with Treasury examining changes to negative gearing or the capital gains tax discount as a growing number of Coalition MPs push Peter Dutton to consider their own property tax changes.

Anthony Albanese in Launceston on Wednesday. Picture: Picture: NewsWire / Patrick Gee

Anthony Albanese has claimed he had nothing to do with Treasury examining changes to negative gearing or the capital gains tax discount – and is refusing to say whether Jim Chalmers knew about the modelling – as a growing number of Coalition MPs push Peter Dutton to consider their own property tax changes.

While both the Prime Minister and the Treasurer said tweaks to negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount were not part of their policy agenda, Mr Albanese adopted the same language he used before reforming the Morrison government’s stage three tax cuts, by saying he had “no plans” to change the tax breaks for property investors.

When asked on Wednesday if he was considering making changes to negative gearing and CGT concessions, Mr Albanese said: “What our government is considering is fixing housing supply by getting our legislation through the Senate. That’s what we’re considering.”

But the Labor leader hardened his language on the matter later in the afternoon, declaring he had “had no discussions” with “anyone”, including his cabinet. “I have no plans to do it. It’s not our policy,” the Prime Minister told 2GB radio.

The Opposition Leader said Mr Albanese had repeatedly told Australians he wouldn’t touch legislated tax relief “but he did”.

“You can’t trust him not to break his word,” Mr Dutton said.

Mr Albanese said he had not directed anyone in the public ­service to undertake modelling on possible changes to negative gearing and the CGT.

When asked whether Treasury had conducted the work without his direction, he said: “I assume so.”

Mr Albanese said he didn’t know whether Dr Chalmers had asked his department to consider options for winding back the policies. Labor MPs privately urged the Prime Minister and the ­Treasurer to “tread lightly” on changes to the tax breaks, which could be “too politically hot” to touch after the party’s devastating 2019 election loss.

“The government feels it’s got to keep the door open (to negative gearing changes) ever so slightly to shut the Greens up, but they can’t leave that door open much bigger than it is because otherwise a Coalition will smash the door in. It’s quite a dangerous edge,” a senior Labor source said.

“It’s a little bit smart, what the government’s doing, and I understand why they’re doing it. I just don’t want them to be too smart.”

A Labor MP said: “I understand the political risk with ­taking negative gearing back to another election is probably pretty high, not necessarily in and of itself because of the policy but because (of) how it contributed to the loss in 2019.

“We do need a strong taxation policy offering to take to the next election and I want us to have that conversation and explore options but I don’t start with a fundamental position of what must be on the table.”

Greens housing spokesman Max Chandler-Mather said it was clear “we need some movement on those tax handouts”, ­reiterating that his party would be willing to help Labor pass its key pieces of housing legislation should it make changes to negative gearing or CGT concessions.

Mr Chandler-Mather and Greens leader Adam Bandt attempted to take credit for Labor leaving open the possibility of reform. “Labor said it was impossible. Now they admit it’s possible. They must commit to doing it,” Mr Bandt said.

Despite efforts by Mr Albanese to distance himself from the modelling and the potential for negative gearing to be tweaked, the Coalition leapt on reports the property taxes were being reviewed. “The Albanese government is modelling changes to capital gains tax and negative gearing concessions, which is all part of Labor’s long-term plan to replace Australian mum-and-dad investors with major foreign corporate landlords, who will reap the most generous tax concessions available,” opposition housing spokesman Michael Sukkar said in a joint statement with assistant home ownership spokesman Andrew Bragg.

However, several Coalition MPs expressed a desire for the party to consider its own changes to negative gearing.

“Why are we encouraging investors to buy their 10th home?” one Coalition MP said. “There are only 85,000 people owning more than three properties; that’s not a big enough number to die on a hill for. Some literally have hundreds and you can bet these people live in teal seats and didn’t vote for us last time. Are they’re the ones we’re really going to side with, or is it the first home buyers who want hope?”

Coalition MPs suggested the party was split along generational lines on the matter of negative gearing.

“There’s a fair chunk or even a majority of those in the party room under 50 open to doing something about it,” another Coalition MP said. “The difference comes down to those under 50 and those over 50.”

A third Coalition MP said the issue was “more front of mind than it’s ever been”. “Your only way in now is the bank of mum and dad. And if people are really only getting property through family connections, this country fundamentally changes in its nature,” the MP said.

However, all MPs the Australian spoke to agreed there was currently “no appetite” among the Coalition’s leadership to risk losing a key criticism of Labor and its past policy of changing negative gearing arrangements.