Prices at Barfoot's auctions ranged from $315k for a modern house in Hikurangi to $2.29m for a 2brm apartment in Herne Bay and houses in Matamata were popular at Bayleys' latest auctions

Barfoot & Thompson sold more than half the properties the agency marketed for auction last week, although the total number of properties being auctioned remained low.

Of the 93 properties Barfoot's marketed for sale by auction, 50 were sold under the hammer giving an overall clearance rate of 54%.

The lowest sales rate was at the Pukekohe auction where one of the three properties offered was sold, while a couple of the smaller auctions had sales rates of 100% (see table below).

At the Manukau auction the sales rate was 56% and on the North Shore it was 45%.

All of the auctions held at Barfoot's head office auction room at Shortland Street in the CBD had sales rates above 50%.

Prices ranged from $315,000 for a modern three bedroom house at Hikurangi in Northland to $2.29 million for a two bedroom apartment in Herne Bay, Auckland.

Sales were a bit slower at Bayleys Auckland auctions last week, with just 11 Auckland properties marketed for auction by Bayleys and sales achieved on three of them, giving a clearance rate of 27%.

Things were a bit more buoyant at the Bayleys auctions south of Auckland, with properties in Matamata, Hamilton and Havelock North all going under the hammer and sales achieved on 57% of them.

Prices ranged from $317,000 for a three bedroom house in Matamata to $912,000 for a character house on a six hectare lifestyle block, also at Matamata.

The full results from Bayleys and Barfoot & Thompson's auctions are available on our Residential Auction Results page.

Barfoot & Thompson Auction Results 4-10 September 2017
Date/Location Sold* Not Sold* Total  % Sold
4-10 September. On site. 3 3 6 50%
5 September. Manukau. 14 11 25 56%
5 September. Shortland St, CBD. 6 5 11 55%
6 September. Mortgagee/high Court. 1 - 1 100%
6 September. Whangarei. 4 - 4 100%
6 September. Shortland St, CBD. 9 9 18 50%
6 September. Pukekohe. 1 2 3 33%
7 September. North Shore.  5 6 11 45%
7 September. Shortland St, CBD. 4 4 8 50%
8 September. Shortland St, CBD 3 3 6 50%
Total 50 43 93 54%
*Sold includes properties sold under the hammer or by 5pm the following day. Not sold includes properties that remained unsold by 5pm the following day or that had their auction date postponed or were withdrawn from sale.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment or click on the "Register" link below a 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.


Unwise to read too much into this.

Could be a mere spike in the data.

what is a "spike in the data"? that makes no sense

clearance rates over the past 2 or 3 months have been between 30 - 40% so above 50% is clearly an improvement especially as the sample size is quite good.

What does it all mean though? that is the question. Are vendors just more willing to take lower prices to get a sale across the line or is the market becoming a bit more buoyant ...


Most vendors are panicking now since Labour is ahead in the polls to overtake National. Vendors are now trying to sell their properties instead of waiting for CGT and Land Tax to be implemented before X'mas. Interesting time ahead.

Where are they listing these? Trademe has 18 listing in total for Kohimarama, and a quick filter shows next to nothing for family homes.

Mark my words, it's clear Taxinda is targeting investors only. She's ruled out any taxes on family homes, the land under it and this morning ruled out inheritance tax. We are entering a period for increased investment in owner occupied homes and less investment in rentals. If rental properties are held, they will get the absolute bare minimum upkeep as any improvements are likely to be taxed when the property is sold.

Interesting observation. As you say, in the now likely case that labour wins there will very likely be a flood of properties to the market in the short term, sending prices downwards. However following the implementation of the CGT, and additionally their extension of the bright line test to five years could well see the listings dry up - ironically this could actually push prices higher.

Kiwiguy . As far as listening drying up. Only a small % of say Auckland houses are put on the market over a year. Over the hole 3 to 4 year boom most of Auckland had nothing to do with selling there houses. Which means most of Auckland have owned there homes longer than 4 years which is totally understandable and payed very little for them. People will carry on selling there homes for the normal reasons like up grading. Downsizing. Moving etc etc. and at the same time demand will be low anyway because they can only afford a lot lower than today's prices. A recession is even on the cards. But yes maybe at some stage demand will pickup and listing might be a little low but without overseas investors massive money flow I wouldn't think a boom was on the cards , just a normal slow market like 2008 to 2012 minus the most recent investors . Of course investors could jump back in but they didn't in 2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013. Not to the Overseas investors created large as capital gains local investors jumped in with money signs glowing from there eyes. It takes a massive kick up the butt to start a boom. I just can't see where that could come from. Maybe very low prices could do it


Top of the morning to you!

You could be correct. I certainly don't dismiss what you say.

Problem is that after implementation of a Capital Gains Tax, people are going to be reluctant to sell. And that will mean a reduced supply of property going on the market - and increased house prices.

Is that what Labour voters want?

See my post below. I worry that Labour is showing all the hallmarks of being an imprudent, populist government (if it gets in on 23 September).

Any changes to tax wouldn't happen until at least the later part of 2018 (except extending the bright line and banning foreign speculators).

But anyway, why anyone would speculate on an asset that has such low liquidity and is so politically sensitive is beyond me (greed and delusion I guess). This bubble has been madness on a grand scale. It was always going to unwind no matter who was in Government.

thank the lord National OUT !
This has to happen
9 long years of nothing
What was Johnny Keys great master plan for NZ again ?
Oh that's right there was no plan
He was a populist politician really
No other reason for his 3 terms can be offered
He achieved what exactly for NZs future ?
Give new blood a chance

Well he balanced the books and steered the country to surplus, probably not much else but i think that's pretty much all he promised.


We've already seen data that prices in Auckland are dropping. So naturally auctions are. Sales will grow

It's Spppprrrriiiiinnngggggggg!!!!!!

Overall low volumes, with some (54%) realistic vendors who need to move on, desperate/worried agents. Political uncertainty.. will either stupefy some in the the market, for others it will bring clarity and focus and a realistic market response. Would be interesting to see who bought the homes.. also do we have any information coming in about non auction sales volumes..?

Plenty of Chinese salespeople ... I Drew a Little conclusion

People will be dropping there prices . Specially if unsure if the election is going in there favour. Normal downturn behaviour. I'm surprised it isn't higher actually

O4 normal
I know it's the internet but please can you use "their" & not "there"
Check out a dictionary

Check out a dictionary

No can do. The council is defunding library budgets.

I was about to give him a spelling lesson myself.

I have a real concern that if Labour governs after 23 September, it will implement policies that look good superficially but are, in fact, heavily flawed. I'm talking about populist policies and a capital gains tax would be a prime example.

We've seen the populist trend worldwide in recent times - Brexit, Trump.

I hope NZ doesn't go down the populist track - but with Jacinda/Labour I would worry.

You want them to go down the unpopulist track?


This is more or less a perfect description of National - why have they done nothing about the housing crisis? Because it would have been unpopular to do so by people like they've essentially been running populist policies for the last 9 years instead of taking steps to effectively manage issues......look, we're going to make a certain part of society very well off, bugger the rest...But people are starting to wake up to that fact and are jumping ship.....


Key relied on constant polling for much of what he did, about as populist as you can get.

No wonder he couldn't remember his stance on the Springbok tour in 1981. No chance to poll Kiwis first.

He was essentially NZ's version of Donald Trump (rich white older male that wanted to take people for a ride and to boast one's own ego) - but with a better mask making it more difficult to see the real person...

No matter what rules and regulations are put in place, it is impossible to legislate to stop stupidity, greed, recklessness, risk-taking and...... hope. (Timothy Geithner)

"In short, if people are willing to do something silly, such as lie ( eg: about the 'intention' of their 'investment') in their quest to make a buck, then there's really not much anyone can do."

With Bill English as Finance Minister, there was never much chance of National running populist policies!

He's been a very cautious and competent Finance Minister. He did damned well to get NZ through the Global Economic crisis as well as he did - and that ought not to be forgotten.

Bill English did what?

Michael Reddell has been regularly repeating that NZ did not have a GFC crisis to get through

Inclined to believe him more than you

anyway - For 7 years National have been claiming it was John Key

Ouch...Michael Reddell really ruining one of the key talking points, right there.

Tothepoint ? Hardly
The NZ & AU banking system were not involved in subprime mortgages or derivatives involved in that sector.
They did not have exposure to the CDs sold around the world
It was Johnny Key who helped the ASB get overseas funds to help get NZ through during the banking systems
temporary break.

Why is a capital gains tax floored... is it because it would not go far enough? Houses are a public good, and should not be an investment category. A land tax would be a brilliant place to start.. its just unfortunate its political suicide to put it on the family home

Just like John Key, many asset rich investors will rush to capture their capital gains before any potential change in government or further deterioration in price. You can't fault the logic really.

OMG how is this gangsta handshake going to help National's campaign??
The former PM as you've never seen him: Sir John rocks gumboots and shorts, doing 'gangsta' handshakes

I didn't know I could cringe this much, this early in the day.

hahaha too funny, that's partly why I like J K, he doesn't take himself seriously

The world doesn't take JKey seriously now either after his ponytale pulling went global
Never ceases to amaze how some of the smartest people let a fetish catch them out

The family's got a great chance to rival The Osbournes.

What the savvy investors have done is sold at near peak & will be back again once prices level out.
Auckland was a nice place to live if only National had instigated a properly thought out immigration strategy.
Instead it's been giving open visas to Chinese who come and work in NZ !
Surprised they don't allow the Chinese Communist Party to set up factories for Chinese workers in NZs dairy industry ..... Oh they are doing that through go between companies
Now explain how this helps Kiwis ?
Thanks National

CGT look forward not back. When CGT is implemented the value will be locked in and you will be taxed on the gain from there. As such there will be no rush to sell, in fact there will be a reduced incentive to sell.

CGT does seem to imply an admission that prices will continue to increase. Oops old comment.

Barfoots sales have cratered in the past 3 months. We marched them up to the top of the hill.........

We'll be lucky if it's an orderly march down I reckon. I'm guessing it's going to be more like Humpty Dumpty to be honest.

Now when you're up,you're up,
And when you're down,you're down,
and when you're only half way down,
You're neither up nor down.

I can't see labour or national doing anything negative to do with housing. CGT or DTI. Even banning overseas investors at all, they're already gone anyway china made that decision . The market is already dropping and both party would be fully await from past attempt it's hard enough doing positive things to stop a downturn. If anything they'll reverse the LVR . If anything they might wait and see for 6 months. Normally the RB about now would be dropping a very high interest rate but they can't do that so that's negative because no large drops there. Government will need to start getting very positive or there'll be a recession

I think reversing the LVR would be a bit premature........

House prices can take off quickly - and it's notoriously difficult to get the genie back in the bottle.

And, by the way, house prices haven't fallen too much at all. According to a number of pundits here, the winter of 2017 was going to be one of substantial falls in house prices - but that hasn't transpired.

I can't remember anyone saying a crash bust or correction was going to happen in 5 minutes. Corrections can last for 2 to 6 years. And from the highs of the boom and 6 months of everyone saying the highs alone came down a bit each month I would say the market has changed a lot. And dropping LVRs wouldn't do much. Demand is very low . Investors would be hurting already and banks very wary. Overseas investor that triggered the boom gone. Na LVRS probably need dropping to stop a major plummet

Hi tothepoint,

You write: "According to a number of pundits here, the winter of 2017 was going to be one of substantial falls in house prices - but that hasn't transpired."

This is probably the 3rd of 4th time I've asked you to cite at least ONE instance of someone saying this, and not once have you proved it. Never mind "a number of pundits" - all I ask is ONE pundit.

No one has ever said house prices would fall substantially in winter 2017, yet you keep saying lots of people do. Why do you keep spreading misinformation? What do you get out of this?

In April, Westpac analysed the opinion of the "pundits" and said this;

"The feeling among property commentators is that, in mid-2017, we’re at the top of the clock. Infometrics calculates its own property cycle indicator, and chief forecaster Gareth Kiernan says he thinks it’s about half past 12"

This is the opposite of what TTP has suggested. The consensus (as observed by Westpac) is that we have only just edged past the peak (ie 12 oclock on the property cycle clock) and that we have almost as far to go, as we have come, before we reach the bottom of the cycle. No one is suggesting how long that will take but previous property cycles have taken between 2 and 4 years to go from peak to bottom.

Hi RichMuhlach,

If you go back to earlier this year (or from about mid-2016), there were plenty of people here anticipating tumbling house prices through 2017. And, of course, it wasn't just in this blog: many other fora attracted similar comments. Admittedly, much of it was wishful thinking.......

Never mind: people are entitled to have their say. And I don't hold it against any of them.

I'm not singling out people - as that might only cause them embarrassment now. There's no need for that sort of thing. But you're welcome to go and search the historical threads for yourself.

Certainly, to assert that nobody here talked of house prices falling through winter 2017 (or autumn 2017 for that matter) is not credible. People talked of a major correction in house prices (particularly Auckland) as if in a desperation. And some of them still persist with such prophecies, as we're all aware.

RichMuhlach - you've been coming here a while now, so you should know better.

Exactly, I have been coming here for a while and I do know that I better not trust anything you say, especially if you cannot provide any evidence.

And no, I will not search historical threads for you. You do that and you tell me if you find anyone saying house prices will fall by winter 2017.

Yes, people have talked about a major correction, but the consensus is it would take a couple of years to unravel. No one has ever said it would be all over and done with by winter 2017.

If you're talking about non-credibility and false prophecies, I think you might be referring to Ted Stanton. He kept saying late last year that "the Chinese are going to buy up after Chinese New Year!" and that prices are going to skyrocket again. Well, here we are and the Chinese have stopped buying and prices are actually falling. Does anyone else here remember our buddy Ted?

Hi RichMuhlach,

You write, "No one has ever said it would be all over and done with by winter 2017."

Can you show me where I wrote that? I said no such thing.

You need to read things properly.

by tothepoint | Mon, 04/09/2017 - 18:13
"A few pessimists here had been predicting the Auckland housing market would now be in the doldrums - having fallen through the floor by winter 2017"

If "fallen through the floor" does not mean "over and done with" then sure, I might have some reading comprehension issues.

What's lower than a floor by the way? Basement? Earth's crust? Outer core? Inner core? Hell?

Hi RichMulach,

Indeed, you have comprehension problems.

Rich- well said and I agree with your comments. No one here takes TTP seriously. He is getting a bit desperate lately trying to be first in the comment streams -as if that makes his point of view more credible.

I rent a house in a very popular and affluent suburb in Wellington and watch the local market very closely as a prospective buyer.
Christmas 2016 trademe value estimate for the house was 950k-1.23 million. As of this week, the estimate is 840k-1.06 million. This has been born out in all the local sales.

Rather looks like they are falling through the floor to me.


I don't want to share my actual address, but here is a very close local example.

This house sold in June 2017 for 1.34 million. Current trademe value estimate is now 1-1.26 million.

That's in less than 3 months.

And I've been watching those trademe estimates in Tauranga and they seem very accurate and lately big drops

Gingerninja, I would not read too much into trademe property insights or as is a guestimate, can only go on actual sales. I would look at REINZ numbers as adjusts for the mix of properties sold. For Wellington REINZ numbers through July 31 2017 had 3mth number up 0.4% and 12 month up 10.3%.
I will use any post election stall in Wellington property market to buy, as a Labour government or horse trading in National coalition will expand public service in Wellington. Also properties not on slopes should do well given earthquakes and recent slips. There is limited room for Wellington to expand. Once Transmission Gully comes on line with more commuters from Levin, Otaki, Waikanae and rest of Kapiti Coast, hitting the Ngauranga Gorge delays due to traffic congestion will magnify. Can also add commuters from the new-subdivisions in Wairarapa and Upper Hutt into the mix.This unforeseen set of circumstances should boost Wellington property prices beyond the SH1/2 merge/ bottleneck.

MJA, I only mention the trademe estimates, because the property bulls in these comments have been doing so, to evidence their position for the past year or more.
I have seen two houses in my suburb sell this month, after reducing their price by more than 100k. They would show up in August or September, rather than July. I definitely didn't see any price reductions in the 3 months to July so not surprised by those REINZ figures.
I agree on the long term upward price trajectory for Wellington owing to the factors you mention, however, I don't think that means that Wellington will avoid any down turn that may occur. But it may stabilise again sooner than other areas.

Gingerninja. I agree in good areas I have found property slumps stall property prices/ mild decline, but creates bargains due to a reduction in demand. I typically would look for a 20% discount off previous peak. Key is to not wait for doom scenario and delaying buying in a recession, if can secure good property 10-20% off previous peak you have done well. I have found if buy within 6 months of officially entering recession due to delays in economic data, will have hit timing nicely. If buying in Wellington aim for a flat site/ mild slope. Also watch out for social housing areas going forward, as this will affect values includes areas of Mt Cook, Berhampore and Newtown, amongst others.
I too will vote Labour, cannot get past negative per capita GDP and the goosing of GDP via immigration.

I would not read too much into trademe property insights or as is a guestimate

I agree. They change their estimates which is reasonable for what they are trying to do but percentage above 2014 CV seems to be a better way of analyzing things as the CV stays unchanged like a benchmark. It's hard to remember what the older estimates were unless you write them all down.

@mja; In that case you need to track because prices have been dropping consistently there as well, quite a consistence wouldn't you say or perhaps they're tracking the actually property price data.

Actually, Gingerninja, house prices are pretty firm in Wgtn which, I understand, is a much less volatile market than Auckland.

No doubt, of course, people can point to exceptions - the odd property here and there that has sold well below (or well above) its value of a year or two ago. But there are usually particular reasons in such cases.

Wellington, as always, is a pretty safe bet for property ownership/investment.

I looked at dips post GFC. Wellington was 13% and Auckland was 8%. If I was living back in Wellington I'd be less worried about price and more looking for the perfect location. The good positions are tightly held.

Ahh... Just when we thought that you were turning a new leaf Tothepoint with all your talk of moving to pastures new and becoming a real human. Guess the leopard never changes his spots.

Any how; this data is over a two week period not one week which is what would normally be submitted. So I would say that the sales figures are still subdued. And remember most property crashes (Down turns what ever phrase you want to use) takes two years to fully play out not one.

I don't know if we can avoid a recession at some point...? When it's all been blowing up a property bubble and driving "growth" via immigration alone while declining in productivity...

We can't avoid one. It's going to be a new experience for most people under 40. You'll ask yourself why if it's just a small amount of negative growth the effect on daily life is so big? Full time jobs harder to come by, discretionary spending tanks. Long term decisions are put off. Tax revenue plummets. It's a crappy time to be in debt and to govern. That's why I have zero debt, am saving every cent I can and have voted National. Personal fiscal prudence has been my mantra and it's served me well. Believe me new taxes will make the recession worse as avoidance will be rife. In most cases that means don't put yourself in a position to have to pay e.g. don't sell any property.

I'm very similar to you ex-expat. I have zero debt and save every penny. However, I will be voting Labour this time.

Winter is coming regardless of who sits on the iron throne. I mean, whoever forms the government will have to face the end of the cycle. However, IMO National policy over the last 9 years has left us ill prepared for the end of the cycle and that is why I won't be voting for them this time.

If Labour extend the bright line test to 5 years, this will only effect a small number of people, mostly the speculative investor. They aren't applying CGT to the family home. I don't understand the hysteria.

What if you have 2x family homes? One in Auckland and the other one in Tauranga, and you spend 50% of your time in each. Would both family homes be exempt too?

You might be able to offset against all the petrol tax you are paying

It's interesting how people perceive history in different ways. I see a Labour Government that partially squandered some of the best economic times NZ has ever had from 1999 to 2008. National takes power and ends up having to deal with the GFC, a few earthquakes and a bust in the Dairy Industry. They haven't ignored the less fortunate, but the reality is that the electorate appears ready to toss that aside. It's akin to the Mother that does the child rearing heavy lifting after a separation, only to see them leave to spend time with party dad when they reach 18.

As for tax, this is akin to my wife trying to hide greens in the kids meal. They aren't taken in by declarations there's hardly any in their meal and they wont taste it, and neither am I by new taxes. There's a reason we tax the way we do. My household pays $100,000 per annum in PAYE. We can't escape it. These new taxes will be avoided like there's no tomorrow e.g. a native Norfolk Islander once told me about a financial transaction tax that the locals avoided by endorsing cheques from one to another. Soon there wasn't room to write on the cheques. If I had an investment property I'd likely make a decision now to sell or keep. If I kept it I would do nothing that attracted more tax, like improvements and I would never sell it. I'd also change ownership to a vehicle that allowed the property tax to be avoided if I died. It's like going back to the 1980s for those of us who can remember that.

EDIT: We don't pay $100,000 PAYE. My error. If we spent everything we earned after tax, the total tax bill would be $100,000. We don't pay that much in reality because we try to spend as little as possible and therefore don't incur GST on everything.

There's a reason we tax the way we do.

That's another interesting point raised. What is the reason we (not everywhere in the world, obviously) consider income tax to be somehow better or fairer than other taxes?

We seem to be getting to the point we need to ask such fundamental questions. Especially in a world where people can generate significant wealth without it ever being exposed to income tax, and benefit from the income tax of those who live nearby to them.

"Income generally includes most types of receipts that enrich the taxpayer" (Wikipedia), and there's a good reason people seek to own land in certain locations - because of the enrichment they gain from the presence of others around that land.

May I ask what makes you see things this way? How did Labour squander those times? I worry that this was a picture sold to us by those who followed and started writing history.

I was voting National in 2008 too, but I'm curious about how you reckon they squandered those economic times.

Look at the trend in government income and spending over the period the Labour Government were last in. You'll see that revenue growth accelerated when the World economic times were good and we didn't put enough aside for the inevitable downturns, hence the big borrowing when times turned tough later on, even though the position passed to the National Government was sound. It's like saving $50,000 when you could have saved $100,000, both are good but one is better. My financial position is comfortable because I think about the risks of income loss and save. Even with Prefu these elections turn into a lolly scramble, which irks me as which prudent person does that in real life? Governments do it because they have the unique ability to tax to cover shortfalls. I vote National because I see them as less idealogically pre disposed to resort to taking my income to transfer to someone else, even though they all do it.

"I see them as less idealogically pre disposed to resort to taking my income to transfer to someone else, even though they all do it"

Just remind me how much National are spending on motels and subsidies right now because they don't want to address the immigration issue (i.e. we can't house all the people coming here)?

Thanks Ex Expat.

I'm actually similar politically, albeit I'm not voting National this time (still undecided who I will vote for).

Re putting enough aside for the economic downturns...they did pay down govt debt, and they did also create the Cullen Fund with the specific intent of putting money aside to prepare for a demographic time bomb. In retrospect (I was a dyed in the wool Nats voter at the time) I feel bound to credit them for that fiscal prudence.

My feeling is we're going to face a decision point about what sort of level of healthcare we want to provide to our society, and how much investment this will take. And housing - will re reintroduce some of the state involvement that was a marker of the 20th century governments?

Thinking about how much we spend per household, we'll, I feel, inevitably end up facing questions like those...And some of them have downstream effects, as we're seeing with National upping Working for Families and the Accommodation Supplement because hard choices aren't being made re the housing crisis (in my opinion). I worry that these downstream costs (along with the health costs from unhealthy housing) are increasing our inefficient spend.

I see 70,000 people coming into NZ a year and average auckland price of houses up at 1 million greater then 10 time DTI.

Recession is not necessarily a disaster for those in debt, as tends to reduce interest rates. I note the US 10yr treasury yield is falling and Fischer the most hawkish member of the Fed has resigned. The big issue being grappled with is the failure of Phillips curve regarding inflation/ unemplyment rate trade off, talk is the Fed may move away from this model. The Phillips curve has been the model pushed by hawks to justify increasing the Federal Reserve rate.
From my own GFC experience if you do something useful re:employment, you remain employed and suddenly find the cost of everything falls, more sales in stores, tradies etc cheaper, mortgage interest rates decline and you have more disposable income. Say unemployement expands from 5 to 10%, this means 1 in 20 people lose their job. Add to this approximately 1 in 5 self-employed people whose income falls and you find that 75% are on the same incomes and relatively better off. This is not often written about, I first read about this with regards to the US depression, where this was the outcome for many but was not discussed as was not PC when many others were suffering. You will find that there is a lot of dogma regarding this causes that, that does not necessarily pan out in the real world. You just need to keep thinking, and see what others can't. This is the reason I'm in my early 40s and watching the NFL with my teenage sons rather than in an office or stuck in traffic. Note I did not make the majority of my money from property, though I have made money from property, principally through anticipating the decline in interest rates post GFC and the effect this would have on asset prices (insight derived while building a timber fence in 2010).

Post GFC interest rate falls were the godsend that allowed me to be mortgage free. Middle NZ got an instant income boost on the whole. If I'd lost my job it would have been a different story. Been there done that in the early 90s recession. Once you've had your financial weakness exposed you are stupid if you allow it to happen again. I haven't left myself exposed since then. 50% deposit on the first house and now debt free with FU money in the Bank, albeit gold is starting to tempt me as its more fungible.

An increased auction clearance rate just before the election is certainly a surprise to me. It will be very interesting to see the mean & average house sale values for September. I fear these values will be significantly down, which would explain the higher auction clearance rates because some vendors are getting worried about the possibility of Labour forming the next government and introducing several new taxes

Sales volumes have not collapsed because of an impending election, prices have not peaked because of an impending election.

OMG - imagine if we have affordable housing in this country as a result of government policy....the calamity...

There is a backlog of failed sales at auction over the past 6 months - perhaps there is a clear-out going on and vendors are now meeting the market

Just like the Brightline test a CG Tax will probably only able to apply to new purchases once altered or implemented. So no need for a mass sell up if purchased prior to the Brightline, all comes back to the ratio of speculators and real investors. If investing for long term, then you are going to have to weather, change of Govts, policies, market trends, boom and busts. Long term property investment will still be a viable bet, many other countries have various property taxes and still people invest, while it may cool things slightly it is not going to slam the market!! Does anyone have any credible evidence of how many "speculators" vs long term investors are at play in the market? I think this would be hard to pin point. Short term buying you are essentially gambling, rolling the dice, flipping for heads or tales and that's where you come unstuck, but no one has the numbers on how many houses have been speculated on so we are only just guessing.
I'm with you *tothepoint* that I see long term investors holding tight which will reduce those houses for sale in the market, increasing pressure with a lack of building (and a big backlog shortage) for demand. Anyway these players have rents covering mortgages at reducing amounts each year, whether the market goes up, down, sideways, they couldn't care less.....they end up with a paid off house (and no CG paid as they don't sell) and an income stream for retirement regardless of the govt/policies in place, these investors will not be running for the hill in the short term!

The smart-money will be transferring all property holdings from the Right-Hand to the Left-Hand at current market valuations - if the market tanks after that and they need to sell a property or two there will be a tax loss - no profit - no tax to pay - so long as it's outside the current 2 year brightline test period
It has been said before - CGT's should only be introduced at the bottom of a market - never at the top - never - ever

As I understood it, Capital Gains tax was introduced by National already and that Labour intend to lengthen the bright-line test to 5 years (rather than 2).

I'm recommending establishing a new cost base in order to create future losses

Could be a reason Labour thinks it needs a bit more expert input rather than simply being a case of "Yep, we'll put it in". If the market is turning then chances are a working group with experts would advise it not be applied.

Exactly - should a prolonged downturn occur a poorly introduced CGT raises enormous tax credits or refunds or postponed tax entitlements - and ties the hands of the next administration - becomes a dead-end

Its that sort of avoidance based thinking that means the model has to be really simple. How about any property that has had any Income tax offset applied, at any stage of its ownership, family home or not, would be subject to this tax.

Nice - like your thinking - only works for loss-making activities - full equity ones escape

You gotta smile

For 30 years Australia has had a CGT since 1986 and it hasn't brought it to its knees

Meanwhile, in 2017, New Zealand is frothing at the mouth over finally staring at the inevitable CGT that was introduced last year by National - but hey, good to have an excuse to froth at the mouth - better late than never

Meanwhile, in 2017, Australia is light-years ahead in showing what it is doing in another area that is a problem in New Zealand, but not getting any attention. Might do one day when the FMA and SFO get some serious funding

Agreed 2og, what about if Labour introduced a land tax ?

My old flat in early 2000. I believe it was bought like $4-500,000 back then . Look at it bow.. 4 times the price now