sign uplog in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

CoreLogic expects housing market to cool but says speculation that changes to tax rules for residential property investors will force up rents is probably unfounded

CoreLogic expects housing market to cool but says speculation that changes to tax rules for residential property investors will force up rents is probably unfounded

Property data company CoreLogic expects the total number of residential property sales to be lower this year than it was last year, as the market starts to cool.

It also says speculation about sharp increases in residential rents and a mass exodus of investors from the market following changes to tax rules announced by the Government last month is probably unfounded.

CoreLogic's Property Market Update for the first quarter of this year said a recent feature of the market was a shortage of listings but this could change.

"Theory would tell you that listings may start to rise over the coming months as more would-be sellers (e.g. investors) react to previous strong capital gains and look to lock in their profits," the report said.

"Although we don't anticipate that the recent taper/removal of interest deductibility will cause a wave of selling by current investment property owners, there may still be some who will take that course."

"Speculation about rents increasing and investors racing to sell rental properties is likely unfounded," CoreLogic's chief property economist Kelvin Davidson said.

The report says there is also likely to be a slowdown in new mortgage lending.

"We suspect that the peak for mortgage lending in this cycle may have already passed or is near," the report said.

"Although the reinstated loan to value ratio rules don't officially reach their full scope until May 1, when the 40% deposit requirement kicks in again for investors, we know that the banks themselves have moved ahead of the rules and actually went to a 40% investor deposit threshold a few months ago.

"All else being equal, tighter LVRs on their own would be anticipated to slow demand from investors as the months pass, exactly as they did throughout the course of 2017 when we last had a 40% deposit rule.

"As an aside, it is important to note that lending conditions to owner-occupiers haven't really changed.

"Even without the LVR speed limits in place, banks were still requiring a 20% deposit, as well as income/expense testing and ability to service the debt at higher interest rates, so the reinstatement of the official rules is unlikely to have any noticeable effect in this segment of the market," the report said.

"Overall, the recent strength of the property market was always going to be unsustainable and a slowdown [is] likely to occur in the second half of 2021 - the Government changes just reinforce that," Davidson said.

  • You can have articles like this delivered directly to your inbox via our free Property Newsletter. We send it out 3-5 times a week with all of our property-related news, including auction results, interest rate movements and market commentary and analysis. To start receiving them, go to our email sign up pagescroll down to option 6 to select the Property Newsletter, enter your email address and hit the Sign Me Up button.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.



Corellogic says that house price will cool....does it mean house price will rise in single digit from double digit earlier, as even that can be termed as cooling in compariso.

Fom massive leap by as much as 50% in a year, even a percentage rise is doom for average Kiwi and FHB adding to FOMO

One headlines is that house market will cool and the other headline for the same data/news is that house price will not fall (This is like one doctor telling the patient that you will live for another three months and another doctor saying that you will die in three months) :


Yes it looks like gains have dropped into single digits according to One Roof. Rodney house "Only" went up 9% last month so for a house that I watch thats only about $135K up in a single month. Top end valuation on mine has now gone over the $1M and still predicting the midrange price will hit $1M by Christmas. Really doesn't matter if they cool now the damage is already done.

"One headlines is that house market will cool and the other headline for the same data/news is that house price will not fall"
Your comment - similar to many others on this site - suggests that you are expecting the future to be certain and to be spoon fed that information. It simply really reflects a naivety.
As to what is going to happen to the market is full of uncertainties - some of the biggies are what affect the recent Government announcements will have, how successful will the Government being in addressing supply issues, what action will the RBNZ take on DTI ratios and interest only mortgages, and even is there going a further outbreak of Covid in NZ.
Bottom line is that are no certainties to the future and a economists will have differing opinions on these and come to their own opinions.
A hallmark of a successful person is one who reads a variety of opinions especially those in conflict with one another and then comes to their own conclusion and acts on that.


A hallmark of a successful person is one who reads a variety of opinions especially those in conflict with one another and then comes to their own conclusion and acts on that

Depends on how you define success. For ex, a younger person may possess far more potential than the majority of older farts in NZ. That doesn't mean that the young person will find it any easier to enter the housing market (and may be advised to not even bother) despite how much he or she reads. Don't mistake credit-driven, state-supported property bubbles as an indicator of success. They're not..

Cast aside your preconceived entrenched biases - it applies to one "younger person" compared to another "younger person".
Over 32,000 mortgages (50,000 people) have gone to FHB in past 12 months.


Yes and I'm sure they are going to be very 'successful'.

Burdened with debt and the risk of rising interest rates!

Looks like JC has you 5-0 on the up vote count. Perhaps we should look somewhere else for an 'entrenched bias'. Where could it possibly be?!

It is no measure. A clown being dumb can get lots of applause. :)

Are you saying JC is a dumb clown?

As I said, depends how you define success. Holding up willingness to jump into a property bubble may be an indicator of success. But it may not be. When you define successful outcomes, it's useful to think widely as you seem to be promoting.


"A hallmark of a successful person is one who reads a variety of opinions especially those in conflict with one another and then comes to their own conclusion and acts on that" - not to be mistaken for someone born at right time as a massive home Ponzi bubble was created and inherited lots of assets.

There you go again - excuses and blame shifting.
Do take a drive around your council's retirement social housing community for a look - its really, really sad. Not all older people have been successful and done well - just those that made the right decisions.
As I have pointed out, there are over 50,000 people in the past year that have become FHB up 13% from the previous year. They have initiative and goals and for them they achieved their goal.
If either you or others being a FHB is not your goal, then that's fine get on with life. If being a FHB is your goal then think how those other 50,000 did it as whining and using pitiful excuses such as "born at the wrong time" (hell a lot of worse times and places so you are lucky) as it doesn't achieve anything other than bitterness and unhappiness.

Indeed, blaming one's circumstances and finding excuses is a sure way not to get ahead in life


Ahead of what? Your brother, sister, nephew, niece?

I see, in your opinion getting ahead means "at the expense of others", not in my world. For me one can only really get ahead by providing something of value to someone else, be it a product or a service. You cannot get ahead by forcing something people don't like or want onto someone. The reason why Gates is one of the richest man on earth is because he provides computers to so many people because they are happy to part with their cash to buy them. You should try to understand the win-win situation in a trade/exchange

I don't really care what's going on 'in your world'.

I'm going by the social division and economic instability that is presenting itself because of a bunch of people are 'are getting ahead' (of others)....we then need to house those others in motels (oh you own motels!) and the people who actually pay taxes get given the bill....while those who are 'getting ahead' (property investors) make no profit so they pay no taxes. Its dumb...dumb...dumb...

You missed the point of my post, you still think that getting ahead in life means getting ahead of others, you even said so in your post. You don't seem to understand that you can get ahead in life together WITH others.

ROFL The reason Gates is rich is because he used other peoples stuff to get his break and then locked most competition out by buying government policy to own and enforce IP protections eg being anti competitive and monopolistic. That's your average 'free market' capitalist in a nutshell for you.

There you two go again - thinking you are smart and clever spreading your "wisdom" to us all. Rather you got lucky - just admit you were born and the right time and got in at the bottom? Yvil do you really think your $900k profit from home sold (probably not at the top) was due to being clever?
And at the end of your time what exactly are you going to leave behind Print8 for the next generation apart from massive debt?

Buying and selling property depending on the likelihood of the market direction is not about luck. It was about actions based on decisions. Not all will necessarily do well - those who do may be fortunate but those more likely to do so will have made the right decisions. One is not going to be right all the time but critically reading and evaluating a range of information helps.
Not sure what you mean by being clever - but making the right decisions is certainly not about acting dumb.
Frazz, just make sure the basis of your thinking is not that “I am owed”. Plenty of young doing exceptionally well.

Have you read any of Robert Shiller's works yet p8?

It looks like given your recent posts you might actually be into reading widely now (but didn't appear to be interested in that in the past).

Remember Shiller has a Nobel Prize for asset pricing - so in terms of being into investment, its equivalent to reading Einsteins Theory of Relativity if you're into physics.

Frazz, the born at the right time is a really dumb argument, get over it. It's like me saying "oh poor me, I wasn't born at the right time like Frazz was, Frazz could invest $1'000 into bitcoin and he would now be a gazillionaire but I didn't have this chance when I was young". What a complete nonsense! Instead of whining about when you were born, make the most of what you have now.

Do you live in a bitcoin?

No, I don't live in a Bitcoin but if Frazz spent $1'000 on a few bitcoins a few years ago, he could now afford several houses, do you now understand?That's still not the main point of my post which you keep missing, it's dumb complaining over things that are past or that one cannot change, it's much better to focus on the present and do something about one's life. Surely you must be able to understand this ?

Absolutely understand Yves - but read some Buddhism or something similar to understand the interconnected reality of society. Then you realise its not just about 'me' but how my actions impact others for good or bad.

These latest Government changes along with tenancy rule changes and Healthy homes etc are and will be negative for the available rental pool. Rent's will continue to increase as they have already 24% since Labour took office. Unintended consequences from a naive Government. Like all taxes/money grabs the end user pays.


I remember all our homes getting kitted out to a healthy standard in England back in the mid-90s. I don't remember much fuss. It shouldn't be too surprising the landlords are still dragging their heels over it 25 years later in NZ. Your properties earn more than people, and you're still bitching & moaning about having to provide a healthy home.

Apples and oranges.... houses there are joined together coronation st style and multi level. That makes a lot less surface area to retrofit than nz style stand alone and single level. For a start single level equates to double or triple roof and ground floor spaces. Anyway we are way past that because from memory the cut off date for insulation of rentals was in 2019. Get a life northman46

So because you're incapable of forming a solid rebuttal, you have to resort to insults?

"Get a life northman46" You know nothing about my life. Go back to watching Coronation St.

Flying high is a Shortland street fan - loves NZ Monolithic architecture


Maybe if a home is unhealthy to live in, it shouldn't be in the pool?


Sounds like a cesspool.

Does not apply to Wellington - should start exporting mould for blue cheese as endless supply down here. (Extra income stream for landlords)?


Well if you're renting out a house then it's a business isn't it? If a poorly maintained retail shop or restaurant made people sick then they'd be liable as a PCBU under Worksafe.

Hopefully these houses that are removed from the rental pool go to renting "FHB" that were outbid by their Landlords.


But are they businesses? Latest tax changes suggest not, but they are, but they're not, but they are, but...sigh.


Who knows? Your second sentence mirrors the way Landlords flip-flop when it suits them. They are a business for tax purposes, but it's not a business when they want to borrow money, but it is a business when claiming expenses, but it's not a business when it comes to Health and Safety requirements or tenants wanting to hang a picture.

Maybe no one should be able to buy investment properties without being a registered development business with all their associated costs to set up, run, maintain and wind down etc.

If you are specifically investing for retirement, a system like Australia's SMSF's would make the process more costly and laborious for purchases of residential property eg if you want to invest for your retirement then you must salary sacrifice into your super fund and then the fund invests on a commercial ‘arm’s length’ basis. The basic rules are as follows, though these are not complete:

You can only buy residential property through your SMSF if you comply with these rules.
The property must:
*meet the 'sole purpose test' of solely providing retirement benefits to fund members
*not be acquired from a related party of a member
*not be lived in by a fund member or any fund members' related parties
*not be rented by a fund member or any fund members' related parties
If your SMSF purchases a commercial premise, it can be leased to a fund member for their business. However, it must be leased at the market rate and follow specific rules.
To borrow to purchase, the loan must be a ‘Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangement’ and must be held by a bare trust with the SMSF being the beneficiary of the trust.

My rent has been static since Labour stole the election. Where are the stats to back that claim, I call bullshit on an average of 24% across all of NZ.

I call rubbish on your comment labour stole the election

Your ears must have been burning!

I voted for them, hence am guilty by association


The question might be, if the money moves out of housing where will it go?
These asset bubbles are the result of too much liquidity - like a damn overflowing, the water has to go somewhere.
Perhaps NZ should launch a crypto - The Dairy Coin (or con)?
As long as this QE printing madness continues the bubbling will continue.

Very interesting post Rastus, maybe the money will move into high yielding NZ shares in an attempt to get some return ? Anyone else with a good opinion ?

Central America

Central America... what?

A return or store of value? The trend has become to chase the next big thing, purely on the basis of the next bigger fool theory (dogecoin, gamestop, Tesla etc).
Oil and PM's. Real stuff.

LOL - I love my GME (especially this week). HODL.

Tesla make cars Rastus - quite popular I believe some research on the con that is Tesla. And it's not fake, but sound analysis.

I see and talk to very content people driving Tesla's around - that's my research. Next time I will ask them how they feel about be conned?

Don’t ask them, they won’t have a clue. Tesla has serious accounting issues. House of cards and spin. Go look.



I don't know whether my opinion is 'good' or not. What i do know is that I have been investing in the stockmarket for many decades;in the UK and for the past 17 years in NZ in dividend paying companies and that has worked out very well. It has generated a better overall return than my rental property.

Thanks for your insightful comment Linklater


I agree the market has probably topped out and a fear of paying too much is still prevalent - but it looks like the real estate industry is still trying to generate FOMO fear in the market.

Friends of ours put an unconditional offer this week on a house - 400K (40%) over RV (on a 2019 RV) at the top of the valuation. When presenting the offer the Real estate agent said - that price wont be high enough - you will need to up it to ahve any chance in this tender. Apparently they looked at her and said no thanks - not playing that game anymore. Their attitude is they are happy to wait than pay too much. There are a lot of stupid prices out there but with lots of real estate agents trying the old FOMO tricks too.

There is still, scope for the government to cool prices - but they need to start with the real estate industry which is full of a number of dubious characters - they are a massive reason why house prices have soared and they are incentivised (through the higher commissions they receive) to do this.

To change attitute, Perception is very important ( Is this not what Mr Orr tries to do with his announcement) and to change perception both government and RBNZ has to act like the recent housing policy announced by government, wether it helps or not, only time will tell but it helps in creating a perception and NOW Mr Orr too has to rise above by acting on DTI and Interest Only Loan ( More than DTI it is important to target tool used by speculators for their activity - interest only loan). By targeting, a message will be send and will help in changing the perception that come what may RBNZ and Government will not allow the housing ponzi to stop.

So announcement from government and RBNZ is must if have to change the perception.

So Mr Orr may be looking at wait and watch approach to deflect from taking action but should remember that even Kiwis are Waitning and Watching him - may have got away earlier by his stunts but this time will be different.

There's nothing "dubious" about a RE agent trying to extract the highest price possible for a house, that's exactly what they are paid to do. Don't forget, vendor pays the RE agent, not the purchaser.



The real estate agent is the mortal enemy of the home buyer.

Stop being so melodramatic, Brock, the buyer and the RE agent need each other, without each other there are no sales (except some extremely rare private sales)


If we deported all the real estate agents tomorrow, houses would continue to be bought and sold just fine.

Probably better in fact.


I vote we try it and find out.

Go ahead Brock, buy your next house without having an agent involved on the selling side and see how much choice you have

It's not the norm in NZ I grant you, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be. Canada has about 30% private sales (or sale by owner as they call it).

Apart from the fact it causes young people to go further into debt to get to a higher price due to FOMO. (especially in tender situations where the buyer is blind to other bids) Which creates risk and structual issues for the economy when those young people stop spending in order to pay high mortgages that are driven by perverse incentives. Fixed commissions rtaher than percentage commissions removes the incentive for the Real Estate agent to jack prices up as far as they can go.

Inexperienced buyers should consider using a buyers agent. Self responsibility instead of expecting the govt/nanny to come and help.

Buyers' agents might be a good idea, but they're not common.

Yes the "agent" is the seller's agent and works for them. That doesn't mean that they have no obligations to treat the buyer fairly, or that their behaviour in NZ does not often stray very close to, if not over, that line.

Yes bloody Nanny State - not so your generation ah Rastus? You did it all by yourself!
From February 1958 civilians on small incomes were granted 3 per cent loans at a time when the standard State Advances interest rate was 4¾ per cent and the prevailing rate charged by private institutions was 5½ per cent. These loans became much easier to obtain in April 1959, when it became possible for parents to capitalise the family benefit (up to £1,000) to assist in financing a house, making additions, or, in some cases, to reduce or pay off a mortgage.
Many people with families who had been unable to save enough to bridge the gap between the cost of a house and the loan limit were able to obtain a house and slow savers no longer had to wait. On the other hand, the Government was finding up to 100 per cent of the cost and some people of limited financial experience were at short notice entering into large commitments of a new kind and at the same time forgoing the receipt of a regular benefit.

sigh. I have been highly critical for years on this site as regards the short straw being given to our young and the wealth transfer to boomers. You have the wrong man.

However, unfortunately many the young think nanny and socialisms is the answer.

Don't confuse the issues.

the natioanl wealth of New Zealand will always increase.

Oh yeah! I got a fortune cookie one time with that exact gem.

The new rules won't create a rush of new listings because investors sell but it will sharply lower new buying from investors. This in itself will significantly lower the number of sales followed by a sharp drop in price rises or even a small decline. This will be followed by lower demand from FHB as they will be worried about buying into a potentially falling market. Rents will not skyrocket but they are bound to go up because less investors are buying, hence providing rentals.
In summary, over the next 6 months, the number of house sales will drop dramatically, the prices of houses will stop rising or even decline by maybe 10% and rents will go up.
(Happy to be held accountable for this position in September)

Totally agree. It’s amazing how click bait reporting such as this article by Corelogic is on the increase - of course rents will continue rising and probably more rapidly than over the last 12 months - we have witnessed 6 months where there was a price freeze on rents, new laws to prevent a rent increase unless 12 months have passed. Many landlords increased rent after the price freeze & will not be able to increase rent for 12 months after that. The government has piled on costs with healthy homes, non-deductibility of interest, Brightline test changes etc. Corelogic is probably gambling on rent caps to justify their forecast for rent increases. It is likely rent increases will be subdued until 12 months has elapsed from last price increase. Then we will see higher percentage rent increases than has been seen over the last few years. The government has prioritised first home buyers rather than renters - it’s a political move to win votes off the the centre right rather than look after its base.

Good call. I personally agree with a measured 10% decline in 6 months, but I think that'll be just the beginning as sentiment takes over. We'll enter into a bit of a stalemate, and it'll come down to whether FHB can afford to keep paying rent vs Landlords can afford to keep topping up the costs. Whoever budges first will determine the price direction. If FHB see house prices falling they may hold off, and Landlords may see this as the end Capital Gains for a while and look to sell, resulting in a death spiral.

Agree rents will go up, but I don't think supply is the issue, Landlords don't supply houses they just take existing stock away from FHB. It's more around the universal price signal the government sent when removing interest deductibility. A Landlord without a mortgage will also likely follow the herd in rent price setting.

Corelogic data is untimely. Although it provides all the relevant sales data it is quite historical compared to other indicators if that is what it is using to update its forecasts. Rents are (and remarkably in some niche areas) continuing to rise.
Total available listings ( Trade Me), in the three areas we follow in NZ as a whole, Auckland and Waiheke (as a niche market) over the past six weeks , are all lower including since the last round of government announcements. Whether the flow on/off in listings sees a rise or fall in stock for sale will quickly become apparent, although current stock levels in absolute numbers and when adjusted are low. From a historical perspective turnover of existing housing stock in 2020 was very low, not surprising given its cheaper to own than rent.

Rents will have to go up after this absurd business curtailment by this government. People will sell or charge more to recoup the significant losses. People do not rent houses for the fun of it, there must be reward for running a legitimate business. Investors not speculators have been vilified by the government. Running rentals is not for the faint hearted.


Sell then.

Bright line and extra benefit of being able to continue to expense interest for 5 years (which no new buyer will be able to) suggests that investors should hold for at least 5 years to consume the full benefit before considering selling.

Then the whinging should cease.

Not true. I was looking to bowl and build 12 new dwellings on some land (having just completed a couple of other projects). I now have no idea what counts as a new build or if I will get stuck with reduced value houses (if say they don’t sell within 6 months of completion), or even if new builds will be exempt. I am whining about this uncertainty that is causing me to lose out on profits whilst having to pay the holding costs on developable land (currently only has 2 dwellings on it) and causing my fellow countrymen to have fewer houses to live in!

Not all heroes wear capes eh sadr! Guess you could just sell up and find something else to do like everyone else.

But there is a housing crisis!

Ok so need to be a DGM then about it all?

Yeah I have questions about whether landlording is a 'legitimate business' though. Sure some are...but many are doing it as a means of placing capital somewhere to avoid taxation and to speculate on capital gains.

So little pity from me given how 'fantastic' and investment is has been claimed to be by so many for so long. If it isn't so fantastic....sell and do something else with your money. There are plenty of FHB out there who wouldn't mind the house you own, so do them a favour and yourself one while you're at it.

Patience young one. You’ll need to wait out the 5 year bright line test and the 5 years “phase in” during which time holding existing property has an advantage that no new property buyers can get. (Selling causes the tax deductibility of interest associated with that property to disappear)

Great - so no need to be a DGM then. Can you just pass that onto your mates on the property investor facebook pages please?

Not true. I was looking to bowl and build 12 new dwellings on some land (having just completed a couple of other projects). I now have no idea what counts as a new build or if I will get stuck with reduced value houses (if say they don’t sell within 6 months of completion), or even if new builds will be exempt. I am whining about this uncertainty that is causing me to lose out on profits whilst having to pay the holding costs on developable land (currently only has 2 dwellings on it) and causing my fellow countrymen to have fewer houses to live in!

How on earth can policies that cause me to have to hold off on new developments until at least October (when the PM said she would provide details) possibly be good in this supply constrained market?

Wow you're such a hero trying to build affordable housing for everyone. Perhaps you should go and get a job with the labour party given this is your calling?

Am fairly convinced that labour has no actual intention of resolving the issue, they look to be all about professing that they care about the issue whilst capitalising on the politics of envy.
Why else would they throw up all these road blocks to the construction of new dwellings? (Even if they are above median priced, whoever moves into them vacates a cheaper dwelling for someone else to occupy)

sadr001 for nobel peace prize!

I thought rents were set by supply and demand - or are landlords changing their view on that now?

Anyone with initiative is free to have a crack at building rentals/ affordable homes. I say good on them as it's thankless and full of fish hooks. Good old Kiwi tall poppy going on there just because someone wants to build 12 houses. Big deal. My neighbour renovated and sold about that many caravans last year. Angle grinders, compressors and the like going around the clock on the street all year round.

So what, do we hear people getting envious because someone sold 12 caravans even though it was really hard work and he made tons profit all taxfree too?

Need to look past what others do and just focus on your own thing not harass someone for building 12 houses. How do you think houses get built anyway?

Also a question... how many people on here built their own house? I'll counter 99% bought an existing house (except maybe Obolensky whom we haven't heard from in a while). So we're all to blame for not adding new housing then if we don't build our own and then someone builds 12 houses gets harassed.

Bizarre country.

Just my opinion, but the whining is worse than the diff in my Austin A30.
The facts are it doesnt start till October, it will be phased in over 4 years for existing holdings. What is the problem ?
Landlording is government sponsored tax evasion. I have said this many times previous, but in what world would you buy a business that purposely loses money, requires constant capital injection, all for the promise of future value heading North to make it work. Sounds like ........ Gambling !!
Running rentals is not for the faint hearted ? No its for the sheeple who are risk averse, but dont really understand the risk they are undertaking.

Your last sentence nailed it.

Im pretty sure Dave Rennie and TTP are the same person

New Builds still flying down here in Tauranga. Another stage opened up in Ohauiti recently and all the sections now have SOLD stickers. Three Creeks is still going nuts as well. Total inventory still exactly HALF of say 18 months ago. No stopping it down here when you can get a brand new house for $800K.

Yes we viewed some in Otumoetai - cookie cutter heaven. One old main road out of there to state HW 2, paradise.

There are so many wonderful comments and predictions on the housing market! Surely at least one of them must be correct?
Core logic, Grant Robertson and Jacinda all clearly state that investors are pushing up the prices. Goodness they say almost 30% of all sales are going to investors alone. Well hello 34% of all dwellings are rentals. So why would anyone expect less than 30% of all sales to be by anyone apart from investors.

And what happens when only 10% of houses sold become rentals? While another 10% sit empty on the market for months awaiting a first home buyer. Where do the tenants evicted from those houses go?

I have read this title before.

Rents will continue to rise as long as:
1. Tenants can make increased payments
2. Govt assists those who can't with top ups
3. Govt assists those who can't despite the top ups into other forms of accommodation.

My opinion is that we as a nation get caught up on FHB vs Investors, yet the real issue is the economic disadvantage of renting vs owning in New Zealand. Let’s make long-term renting economically and socially equal and perhaps a lot of our housing issues would be solved.

The price/cost of rent is directly linked to the price/cost of ownership, so the way to make rents more affordable is to make ownership more affordable.

Yeah, remember when rents were slashed when mortgage rates were? Me either.

You mean when they dropped from 5-6% of property value to 2-3% of property value?

Nope. Rents stayed the same because they are tied to incomes, not landlords "costs".

Whose income?

Exactly - its bizarre that they're playing the victim card when they've been creaming it for the last decade or more and not sharing those benefits with anyone except themselves.

Imagine at any point over the last 10 years saying to their renters - hey look the reserve bank just dropped interest rates again so the servicing on the mortgage got easier - I'm a decent person so I'm going to drop your rent to reflect that.

You will find as a general rule worldwide that the cheaper the cost of building a house, the cheaper the rent is, as is the cost of owning the house. You need to work from a first-principles basis.

Social equality is a human construct and only exists in the realm of philosophy. It is not seen in either the animal kingdom or in nature. The basis of human evolution depended on this system of inequality to achieve a better good for the entire population. Cancelling inequalities will result in cancelling evolution and we wonder why NZ is so slow in every aspects compared to the rest of the world- we failed to evolved by artificially resisting it.

Communism was touted as the best means of achieving social equality and look how well the countries are who adopted the ideology.

Utopia is a great idea, but best kept being just that.

Yes let’s celebrate neoliberalism as the cure to all of communist evils! Severe inequality, social division and financial instability.

As Borat would say...’great success!’

The rate can't go too low or people will be forced to limit their spending to the level of their incomes, then quality of life will really crash and deflation take hold. RBNZ must keep house prices up.

I don’t understand what the incentives for investors to buy new are. We don’t know if new builds will be exempt or even what constitutes a new build. All we know is that making new builds exempt will be consulted on.

Most new builds were cashflow negative under the old rules which is why many investors didnt bother. Now they face the risk of substantial capital depreciation if they need to sell the property within a few years as it will no longer be "new". As for rents, new houses rent for more than equivalent old houses, so average rents will go up. Tell me how the single mum with 3 kids evicted from her cheap rental will be able to afford the rent on a brand new 3 bedroom house?

That is an argument against building new houses. I was asking what the much touted incentives to buy / build new are?

Was following the B&T auction in Takapuna today. Just ten sales from 30 lots (33.3%). Although three lots were just individual titles that were also offered as a single lot, so you could argue 10/27 (37%). Four were sold prior so that would increase the total to 14/31 (45.2%) but still less than half selling.
However, ,what interested me was that of the ten that sold at auction, eight went for the reserve with only two having more than one bid over the reserve. While this was no bloodbath, and there are still some willing to pay steep prices, it seems the bidding wars of recent times may have ceased.

"Even without the LVR speed limits in place, banks were still requiring a 20% deposit"

No, they weren't. As much as many like thinking so, Corelogic included as it seems, the RBNZ data shows that right before LVR were reintroduced about 35% of FHB loans were over 80%.

"Even without the LVR speed limits in place, banks were still requiring a 20% deposit"

No, they weren't. As much as many like thinking so, Corelogic included as it seems, the RBNZ data shows that right before LVR were reintroduced about 35% of FHB loans were over 80%.

"Even without the LVR speed limits in place, banks were still requiring a 20% deposit"

No, they weren't. As much as many like thinking so, Corelogic included as it seems, the RBNZ data shows that right before LVR were reintroduced about 35% of FHB loans were over 80%.