Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Bragg's disallowance seeks to throw a spanner in the works of the build-to-rent scheme. That's a very good thing and One Nation will be wholeheartedly supporting it. Foreign corporations used to pay a 30 per cent withholding tax on housing investments like build to rent. Labor cut that in half, to 15 per cent.

Let's be clear: this Labor government said to foreign, corporate landlords like BlackRock, State Street, Vanguard and first state, 'We'll cut the amount of tax you pay in half.'

Forget the Australian dream of owning your own home. Labor's dream is that you live in a stack-and-pack shoebox apartment paying rent to BlackRock forever, while those foreign corporations pay less tax than you do. That's what build to rent means.

Whenever you hear 'build-to-rent', remember 'renting forever to a foreign corporation, a foreign corporate landlord and a foreign global wealth investment fund'. They'll build homes, for sure, and Australians will never, ever own them—never. It's built to rent forever.

I'll quote from the Economics Legislation Committee report into the Treasury Laws Amendment (Build to Rent) Bill 2024 and the provisions of the Capital Works (Build to Rent Misuse Tax) Bill 2024. The provisions of the bills include 'reducing the final withholding tax rate on eligible fund payments—distributions of rental income and capital gains—from eligible managed investment trust investments from 30 per cent to 15 per cent, starting from 1 July 2024'. So there you go—a tax cut in half for those global, corporate, predatory investors, who own almost everything and are determined to own everything. I'll say that again: they own almost everything and are determined to own everything.

The report states:

The draft legislation was adjusted as a result of this consultation to ensure the government's policy objective of incentivising foreign investment in BTR—

Build-to-rent—

including affordable housing supply, is achieved.

They are admitting that the objective of the bills is incentivising foreign and predatory corporations into owning your home. The report also states:

The Property Council advised the 15 per cent tax rate for investment in housing is already available to Australian investors. The MIT—

managed investment trust—

withholding tax rate applies to withholding tax that goes back to overseas investors—

Predators and parasites—

but foreign investors can also capital partner with Australian investors.

That is the most telling part of all. This bill would only change the tax treatment of foreign, predatory, multinational corporations. That's all. There's nothing for Australians. Australian companies could do it. Foreign companies pay a penalty—that's a good thing. Yet the Labor Party of Australia would change that; you in the government would change that. Are Labor the party for Australia, or are they the party for global, foreign corporations? Build-to-rent answers that question clearly. Clearly Labor are for the foreign corporations like BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street and First State. One Nation, though, is for Australians owning their own homes.

I'm going to do something a little unusual and quote extensively from the coalition senators' dissenting report on the build-to-rent bills—an outstanding report. I hope you don't mind, Senator Bragg. It goes to the very heart of what's wrong with the new Labor Party:

Build to Rent has had minimal cut-through in Australia because our tax settings are designed to favour individual, 'mum and dad' investors, not institutions. That is appropriate.

This legislation seeks to tip the scales in favour of institutions through tax concessions, in order to make Build to Rent projects profitable for industry super funds and foreign fund managers. Labor thinks that institutions need a leg up over Australian first home buyers.

Why? The report continues:

Dr Murray was critical of the Bill's attempted perversion of our tax arrangements:

It's not clear to me why local investors shouldn't be advantaged over foreign investors in Australian housing. I don't see that there's a good argument … for levelling the playing field there. It's not clear to me, if the intention is to attract super funds into this, why owning your own home via your super fund and renting your own home from your super fund is better than owning your own home and using that money to buy what is the best asset to own in retirement.

That's just like One Nation policy. The report goes on:

At the public hearing, the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia ('ASFA') suggested that Australians would prefer Black Rock and Cbus be the nation's landlords—

Really? You would?

and described mum and dad investors as undertaking a 'hobby activity'—

How condescending; how arrogant—

Senator BRAGG: Do you think the Australian people want to rent their house from a super fund?

Mr Clare: I think that they would be very happy with institutionally owned residential property where there is an option of having longer-term tenancies rather than the more-typical-in-the-market situation where there is a lack of assurance of continuity of tenancy because it's a small-scale, hobby activity for individual landlords.

The report continues:

This is the view of a vested interest. Most Australians would not agree with this proposal.

Other witnesses did not share ASFA's view. Grounded Community Land Trust Advocacy told the Committee:

Senator BRAGG: Are you concerned that we are seeing a corporatisation of housing in Australia?

Mr Fitzgerald: Absolutely. This is delivering horrifying results in the Northern Hemisphere, and this legislation makes no account of that—

No account of what's actually happening—

It perplexes me that this government, which purports to be in support of labour—

That is, workers—

is allowing rent-maximisation strategies to come through unabated. Yes, I agree: pushing mum-and-dad investors out of the housing market will result in less competition—

An oligopoly for the big fellas—

What we're seeing in the Northern Hemisphere is a horrific new software program called YieldStar, which in Atlanta coordinates rental increases for 81 per cent of rental properties. The board of supervisors in San Francisco has now banned this as a monopolistic practice—

Yet you want to bring it in—

There's just nothing in this legislation that even prepares us for what's coming.

The report goes on:

The Housing Industry Association pointed to the importance of Australia's housing market maintaining a focus on individual ownership.

Senator BRAGG: But isn't it the case that the character of the housing market in Australia is largely focused on individuals? … Do you think that's a good or a bad design feature?

Mr Reardon: I think that is a very positive outcome, with the association and connection with home and with location, and a sense of place and purpose—all of those dynamics.

This is reinforcing what we already know and what Senator Bragg has already discussed. Mr Reardon goes on:

All the evidence shows that people who own their own home are far less likely to be incarcerated and more likely to be gainfully employed. All of the evidence shows positive economic, social and cultural outcomes.

Personal responsibility is a cornerstone, a foundation of a safe and productive society. Personal responsibility enables and is the basis for a safe and productive society.

Senator Bragg's report then says:

Australians are not interested in subsidising institutional investors. When asked what organisations would be the key beneficiaries of Build to Rent tax concessions, Treasury confirmed that foreign fund managers would be at the centre:

There are a lot of foreign investors using the MITs because of the withholding tax concessions and other benefits from using that structure, but there can also be domestic investors using the MITs; they just get a different tax regime. Those investors will be working in partnership with commercial developers to develop these buildings.

The report continues:

Cbus Super has previously committed to scaling up in the Build to Rent sector, announcing a plan to scale up its portfolio to approximately $2 billion in apartments.

Some of the most alarming evidence from the public hearing was that the passing of this Bill could see Australian taxpayers subsidising foreign governments in their investment in our housing market. Dr Murray warned:

I find it interesting because we've already even got foreign investment funds doing build to rent. What's even funnier is that the largest one is a foreign government. We've got the Abu Dhabi Investment Council, who owns the Smith Collective on the Gold Coast, which is 1,251 build-to-rent dwellings, and we're now proposing to offer them a better tax treatment for something they're already doing—through a foreign government. I find that a bizarre outcome of this proposed bill.

It is bizarre. The report continues:

Approaches like Build to Rent endeavour to emulate the corporate housing model which has seen a downturn in the United States housing market.

Fund managers have become the predominant landlords in the US—

I will digress from Senator Bragg's dissenting report for a minute. The bankers in the United States said in the 1920s that their dream was a combination of predatory behaviour and legislation to get a monopoly and own every house that they could in the country—to control people—because once people have their residence at stake, they are easily controlled. The report says:

Fund managers have become the predominant landlords in the US. According to the US Government Accountability Office ('the GAO'), large institutional investors emerged following the global financial crisis, purchasing foreclosed homes at auction in bulk and converting them into rental housing.

In 2023, corporate housing funds held $1 trillion USD in assets. In Atlanta, Charlotte and Jacksonville, institutional investors own 25, 18 and 21 per cent of the rental stock respectively.

That is what you are wanting here. We don't want it. The report continues:

This corporate housing model, in order to generate a return on investment for institutional investors, relies on individuals being locked into a cycle of perpetual renting—

This is exactly what we've been warning for the last five years. It continues:

There is a growing consensus in the US that this model has failed and is hurting prospective first home buyers. Lawmakers from both sides of politics are introducing legislation to limit institutional investment accordingly—

Watch what's happening; this has failed—

While the US is moving away from corporate housing, the Australian Labor Party is forcing Australians into it.

Well, Senator Bragg, I'm not ashamed to admit we probably couldn't have written it better ourselves; thank you.

Build-to-rent is an abomination that destroys the Australian dream of owning your own home. One Nation raised this cruel reality years ago. One Nation rejects making Australians forever renters to a cartel of greedy foreign corporations.