Good morning.
Can I begin by acknowledging Carmel Hourigan, National President of the Property Council, along with the National Board for their leadership and vision.
I’d also like to recognise former Presidents Michael O’Brien and David Harrison — both of whom have made lasting contributions to the Council and to the national policy conversation over many years.
To Chief Executive Mike Zorbas and the entire Property Council team — thank you for the work you do every day to bring industry and government together. The Council has a long history of constructive engagement with us — in both government and in opposition — across planning, taxation, productivity, and the task of cutting red tape to support every kind of property investment.
That collaboration is critical — because sound policy settings in these areas aren’t just good for the sector, they’re essential to driving national productivity, attracting investment, and strengthening the economy for all Australians.
Thank you for the invitation to address this Property Leaders’ Summit.
❧
The property sector, as everyone in this room understands, is far more than a category of the economy. It is more than bricks and mortar. It is a bedrock of our economic prosperity, a colossal employer, and the arena where the cherished “Great Australian Dream” of home ownership is pursued by millions.
The Liberal-National Coalition wants your sector to succeed, because your success means the aspirations of our fellow Australians are in closer reach.
The “Great Australian Dream” of owning a home is not a recent invention; it is an aspiration that’s deeply embedded in the Australian psyche – an aspiration that has shaped our national identity and driven generations of Australians to work hard, save, and invest in their future and that of their family.
It’s a dream that speaks to a desire for security, for a place to call one’s own, and for a tangible stake in our nation’s prosperity.
It was Sir Robert Menzies, whose leadership drove the formation of the Liberal Party, who said in his landmark “Forgotten People” speech in 1942, that:
“The home is the foundation of sanity and sobriety; it is the indispensable condition of continuity; its health determines the health of society as a whole.”
Menzies saw home ownership not just as an economic goal, but as a cornerstone of a stable and thriving society. He famously said:
“One of the best instincts in us is that which induces us to have one little piece of earth with a house and a garden which is ours; to which we can withdraw, in which we can be among friends.”
This vision resonated in the era of Menzies, and under his leadership, policies were enacted that saw homeownership rates rise dramatically, from around 50% at the end of the war to over 70% by 1966.
Menzies understood that fostering the Great Australian Dream required practical measures. He focused on boosting housing supply and reviewed imposts such as sales taxes so that housing could be made more affordable. His government actively supported those aspiring to own their own home.
And so, consistent with the long and proud history of the Liberal Party, the first message I wish to convey today is that the Coalition reaffirms its commitment to the Great Australian Dream of home ownership.
As we now – post-election – chart a course forward, we must first acknowledge the sheer scale and profound economic significance of Australia’s housing market, alongside the acute challenges it faces.
The Australian residential housing market is valued at $11 trillion. To put this into perspective, this is approximately four times the size of our nation’s Gross Domestic Product.
This simple fact underscores the systemic importance of housing to our national economy and to the financial wellbeing of Australian households. Its performance, stability, and accessibility are not peripheral concerns; they are central to Australia’s economic health.
That sector defined as “Property operators and real estate services” directly contributed around $89 billion in Industry Value Added in the 2023-24 financial year.
Alongside this, the Construction industry, the engine room of new supply, added a further $177 billion in Industry Value Added.
These figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics quantify the direct economic horsepower of the sectors you represent.
Beyond these headline numbers, the residential building industry, in conjunction with broader construction activities, provides livelihoods for over one million Australians.
This vast employment footprint encompasses tens of thousands of small businesses and supports over 278,000 tradies, making housing policy intrinsically linked to job security, small business viability, and economic opportunity across the nation.
Yet, despite this economic might, we are in the midst of a deepening affordability crisis, the consequences of which are profoundly generational. The dream of home ownership, a cornerstone of Australian aspiration, is rapidly slipping out of reach for too many, particularly younger generations.
Consider this: in the early 1990s, an average household could save a 20% deposit for a typical home in about six years. Today, that figure has more than doubled to over twelve years.
This isn’t a gentle shift in market dynamics over time; it’s a seismic barrier to entry. And the impact is starkly reflected in declining homeownership rates.
For Australians aged 30-34, ownership fell from 57% in 2001 to just 50% by 2021.
For those aged 25-29, the drop was from 43% to a mere 36% over the same period.
This decline is not evenly distributed; it bites hardest among the poorest 40% within each age cohort, entrenching disadvantage.
This makes it far bigger than just an economic issue; it’s a social crisis that risks creating a permanent divide between the housing ‘haves’ and the housing ‘have-nots’.
International comparisons paint an even grimmer picture. The 2025 Dermographia International Housing Affordability report branded Sydney, Adelaide, Brisbane, and Melbourne as “impossibly unaffordable,” with median home prices soaring to nine times or more than the median household wage.
Sydney now bears the unfortunate distinction of being the second-most unaffordable city for housing globally, trailing only Hong Kong.
As league tables go, this isn’t one we want to lead.
The lived reality of these statistics is reflected in public sentiment. Gallup polling in 2024 revealed a record low 22% satisfaction rate with housing affordability in Australia, with dissatisfaction particularly acute among working-age adults. The title of Gallup’s report aptly captures the mood: “Australians’ Housing Crisis: Dreams Turn Into Nightmares”.
At the heart of this crisis lies a critical, and worsening, supply shortfall.
The Labor government’s own advisory body, the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council (NHSAC), forecasts falling 262,000 dwellings short of the National Housing Accord’s 1.2 million target. However your own research here at the Property Council paints an even more alarming picture, projecting a shortfall of 462,000 homes by July 2029 if current trajectories persist. This figure underscores the urgency of the situation.
The problem is immediate and ongoing.
This brings us to the undeniable imbalance between immigration-driven population growth and housing supply.
The current Labor government’s record is telling in this regard.
Under their watch, Australia saw 900,000 migrants arrive over an 18-month period to December, while only 265,000 homes were built – and a significant portion of those homes were merely knockdown-rebuilds, not net additions to housing stock.
This fundamental mismatch between the rate of population growth and the rate of new housing delivery is a powerful accelerant to the crisis we face. It intensifies competition for available housing, inevitably driving up prices and rents.
The confluence of these factors – a systemically crucial market, severe unaffordability, a chronic supply shortfall, and demand pressures exacerbated by uncalibrated immigration – has created a crisis that demands a comprehensive response and that is precisely what the Coalition is turning its mind to, under the guiding and extremely capable hands of the Shadow Minister, Senator Andrew Bragg, who works alongside me as part of the Coalition’s economics team.
As Opposition Leader Sussan Ley has outlined, in light of a bruising election result for our side of politics, it is with great humility and sincerity that we listen to the Australian people and we learn lessons that sometimes only defeat can teach.
And what that means for the many housing policies we took to last month’s election is – they will all be reviewed. And there is not a sacred cow among them.
We will of course have a laser focus on supply, and all options are to be considered.
And on demand, we still want to tilt the scales in favour of first home buyers.
We will take our time to get this right and we look forward to engaging with many of you along the way.
And thus, the second message I wish to convey today is that the Coalition is now embarking on a comprehensive review of its policies, and in doing so we want to work with you.
Formulating policy, however, is only half the job of an effective Opposition. The other half is to hold the government of the day to account.
While the Coalition is focused on working with industry to find constructive solutions to build more homes and help more Australians into them, the first order of business for the re-elected Albanese Labor government is to pursue a tax policy that poses a grave threat to retirement savings, investment, and the property market itself: that is, its plan to tax unrealised capital gains.
Labor’s proposed tax is not a minor adjustment; it is a fundamental and dangerous departure from established taxation principles in Australia. Labor intends to impose an additional 15% tax on superannuation earnings for balances exceeding $3 million.
Critically, this tax is slated to apply to unrealised capital gains – that is, the increase in the paper value of assets before those assets are sold and before any cash profit is actually received.
For generations, Australians have understood that you pay tax on profits when you make them, when the money is in your bank. Labor’s new superannuation tax turns that commonsense principle on its head.
And the ramifications for the 17 million Australians with a Superannuation Account and those with Self-Managed Super Funds (SMSFs) that own property, are deeply concerning.
Many SMSFs hold direct property which is, as you would all know, an inherently illiquid asset.
Taxing the ‘paper’ increase in a property’s value annually, without the fund having sold the asset or received any cash income from its appreciation, risks creating a severe liquidity crisis for countless funds.
Trustees could be forced into premature or distressed sales of property assets simply to find the cash to pay the ATO. This is not sound public policy – it’s bad public policy.
It is a recipe for instability, both for individual retirement plans and for the property market segments where SMSFs are significant investors.
As Domain’s chief of research, Nicola Powell, has warned, this tax could see SMSFs shift their investment strategies away from residential property and towards commercial property to better manage liquidity and tax liabilities. Such a shift would directly contradict all efforts to increase the supply of rental housing, likely leading to fewer rental properties available and, consequently, higher rents for tenants. This is a classic example of one Labor Government policy working directly against another Labor Government policy objective – namely, to increase housing supply.
Furthermore, Labor’s super tax will actively discourage the long-term investment horizon that assets like property require. It risks forcing investors into a “rolling 12-month investment cycle” as they scramble to manage annual tax liabilities on theoretical gains.
This is particularly damaging for farmers and small business owners, many of whom hold their farms or business premises within their SMSF. These are often appreciating, illiquid assets, and imposing an annual tax on their unrealised growth could be devastating, potentially forcing the sale of productive family enterprises.
The broader economic consequences of Labor’s super tax are equally alarming. Wilson Asset Management has warned of a potential $155 billion exodus from the superannuation system as individuals seek to avoid Labor’s new tax.
Individuals will be shifting funds out of superannuation and into direct property investments for their families, especially given one’s primary residence is tax exempt.
This diversion of capital, into existing housing, will only fuel higher property prices and further exacerbate the very affordability crisis that needs to be solved.
To put into perspective how significant $155 billion is, let’s do a simple mathematical exercise.
Let’s say that the average property investment from this diverted $155 billion is $1m a house – that extrapolates to 155,000 houses.
For many SMSF holders, they may redirect capital into their own home which of course would drive values up.
But let’s say that all the 155,000 houses that are invested in happen to be new home completions. In Australia, there were only 106,900 new completions of residences in 2023, so, we’re talking here about squeezing the market by around 1.5 years of supply.
You can do your own back-of-envelope using different assumptions of course, but you’ll come to the same basic conclusion. This super tax will have dangerous consequences.
One of the most insidious aspects of Labor’s super tax is the Government’s refusal to index the $3 million threshold. Through the combined effects of inflation and investment growth over time, this fixed threshold will inevitably draw more and more ordinary, middle-class Australians into its net.
My opposite number, the Treasurer Jim Chalmers, has argued that Labor’s super tax will only hit 80,000 people. He wants to give the impression that he’s a modern day Robin Hood, taking from fat-cat investors with multi-million dollar portfolio to fund good deeds of the government.
But, the way the tax has been designed ensures it will become progressively more punitive and widespread.
The work by Wilson Asset Management forecasts that by 2053 or nearly 30 years, over 8.1 million Australians will be captured by taxation of unrealised gains. This assumes an average superannuation balance, an average salary, and investment performance at 8 percent per annum in line with the 100-year nominal return for equities and bonds.
So, over time, more and more Australians will be captured.
Labor is effectively changing our superannuation system from a saving scheme for the individual to a revenue stream for the government.
Perhaps most disturbingly, this tax sets a dangerous precedent. Leading industry bodies, including the SMSF Association, have sounded the alarm: once the principle of taxing unrealised gains is embedded within the superannuation system, the door is opened for its expansion across other areas of the tax system.
What would stop the Labor Government, hungry for revenue, from applying its new tax principle to the family home, to investment properties held outside of super, or to shares and other assets? As one economic commentator described it, it’s “economic vandalism”.
Adding to the sense of unfairness is the fact that certain high-earning public officials, including the Prime Minister who has a defined benefit superannuation scheme, will be exempt from this tax.
The Coalition’s position on this matter is unequivocal and unwavering. We will fight it.
This is a tax on aspiration, a tax on money that people have not received and may never receive.
Labor’s pursuit of this tax is even more bewildering when one considers the damning international precedents. They need only look at reports on what happened in Norway, where a Labor-style wealth tax, which included the taxation of unrealised gains, sparked an $84 billion capital flight. Wealthy individuals and businesses fled the country, turning expected revenue gains into substantial net losses for the Norwegian treasury. The policy was directly linked to a decline in Norway’s GDP, a fall in venture capital investment, and an increase in household indebtedness. This is not a model to emulate; it is a stark warning of how such taxes can backfire.
The global experience from Norway to Spain is clear: no country has successfully implemented a broad, recurring tax on unrealised capital gains due to profound practical challenges related to valuation, liquidity pressures, administrative complexity, and fundamental issues of fairness and equity. The OECD notes a consistent trend away from net wealth taxes among its member countries.
Labor’s super tax is not just an impost on SMSF holders; it introduces systemic risk to our $4.2 trillion superannuation system and, by extension, to the broader Australian economy. It forces suboptimal investment decisions, risks triggering capital flight, and could ultimately put downward pressure on national savings.
Furthermore, by potentially forcing SMSFs to divest residential property or avoid it as an asset class, the policy directly undermines Labor’s stated housing affordability goals.
And so, the third and last key message I wish to convey today is that Labor’s super tax is super big and super bad, and it needs to be fought against, especially repugnant features like unrealised capital gains and no indexation.
Ladies and Gentlemen, despite the challenges I’ve spoken about today and my concerns about Labor’s super tax, let me close on a more positive note.
Australia’s property market possesses enduring strengths and it offers significant opportunities for investment and growth – to build not just homes but workplaces, sky scrapers and cities – to create Australia’s future built environment.
I believe our collective task – governments and industry – is to work together to unlock its full potential.
And I know that’s what the Property Council of Australia works towards every day, and the Coalition stands ready to work with it.
Thank you for your time.