❓ Treasurer answers question on foreign buyer surcharge revenue ($12M to date), defends the policy, and criticizes the opposition's stance, highlighting perceived inconsistencies and lack of clarity.
AnsweredQoN 970Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
FOREIGN BUYERS SURCHARGE —
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
970. Mr C.J. TALLENTIRE to the Treasurer:
I refer to the McGowan government's
foreign buyers surcharge, which requires foreign property buyers to make a contribution
to the infrastructure from which they benefit. How much has been raised by the
scheme to date; and is the Treasurer aware of any threats to the scheme that
would see the burden fall back on the shoulders of Western Australian
households?
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
970. Mr C.J. TALLENTIRE to the Treasurer:
I refer to the McGowan government's
foreign buyers surcharge, which requires foreign property buyers to make a contribution
to the infrastructure from which they benefit. How much has been raised by the
scheme to date; and is the Treasurer aware of any threats to the scheme that
would see the burden fall back on the shoulders of Western Australian
households?
AnswerView source ↗
It is amazing how aware I am of
these things, member! People will recall that we took to the election a foreign
buyers surcharge, because we on this side of the house think that foreign
nationals who buy residential properties in Western Australia should contribute
to the infrastructure from which they benefit and which has been paid for by
generations of Western Australians. This is not a new policy initiative; of
course, all states in the nation have similar policies, and most of them are
higher than ours. I note that some states even have an ongoing land tax
obligation. We do not have that, but I think we have a fair policy. Until a couple
of years ago in the lead-up to the implementation of our policy, between 1.5
and two per cent of buyers in the residential market were foreign buyers, and I
am pleased to say that since the implementation of the surcharge, the foreign
buyers are about 1.5 per cent, tracking exactly as it had in the lead-up to the
implementation of the policy. Through to late October, 424 taxable transactions
have taken place, raising around $12 million, so we are very much on track to
raising the sort of revenue that we expected. There has not been the Armageddon
or catastrophe that was predicated by the member for Bateman and others on the
other side. Indeed, I note that in an ABC interview on 23 October, the member
for Bateman predicted that there would be no foreign buyers at all next year. I
suspect that by Australia Day, the member for Bateman might be found incorrect.
He will be incorrect. No foreign buyers at all is a bold prediction, member for
Bateman. I note the contortion that the opposition has gone to to try to oppose
a tax cut. It is unusual, I must admit, to see a Liberal Party opposing a tax
cut. It is somewhat surreal to see the contortion in which the member for
Bateman is arguing that we need to abolish the foreign buyers surcharge.
The Leader of the Opposition, in her
radio interview—I found this curious—was asked, ''Will
you abolish the foreign buyers surcharge?'' According to my notes, she
said, ''Well, that is certainly one of the policies that we are
considering.'' That does not sound so definitive, member for Bateman.
Are we abolishing it or are we not, member for Bateman? Then the Leader of the
Opposition goes on to say —
We need to cost it and what we are
trying to get from the government is the actual figures.
Members, would it not be wonderful
if there were a document that had the figures and the fiscal impacts of
policies announced by the government, a document in which we could go and read
how much revenue those sorts of things will raise or how much things will cost?
It would be a wonderful document—say, something called a budget. Would
it not be wonderful if there were something like that that the Leader of the
Opposition could go to—rather like StudyPerth, to find out exactly how
much StudyPerth has been given? But then again, of course, the complaint from
the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Bateman is that foreigners are
being unfairly benefited by this, but at the same time they are going to
abolish the foreign buyers surcharge. This is the sort of bizarre scenario we
find ourselves in with the opposition. It does not know whether it is Arthur or
Martha.
I
want to conclude with this, because the Minister for Transport described it
better than I—often these are train-wreck interviews, Minister
for Transport. The question was put to the Leader of the Opposition about the
application of the first home buyers grant to existing properties. According to
my notes, the Leader of the Opposition, never one to be across the details,
said —
Well, that was certainly one of the
policies that we had in the last year of our government—was to extend
the first home buyers grant to existing properties, not just new builds.
Do
you stand by that, Leader of the Opposition? No, I did not think so, because
her government abolished that in 2015. If
she is going to go on the radio and make claims about the policies of her
government, which she seems to forget about , or our government, she has to be across the detail, because, again,
she has been found wanting in that radio interview.
these things, member! People will recall that we took to the election a foreign
buyers surcharge, because we on this side of the house think that foreign
nationals who buy residential properties in Western Australia should contribute
to the infrastructure from which they benefit and which has been paid for by
generations of Western Australians. This is not a new policy initiative; of
course, all states in the nation have similar policies, and most of them are
higher than ours. I note that some states even have an ongoing land tax
obligation. We do not have that, but I think we have a fair policy. Until a couple
of years ago in the lead-up to the implementation of our policy, between 1.5
and two per cent of buyers in the residential market were foreign buyers, and I
am pleased to say that since the implementation of the surcharge, the foreign
buyers are about 1.5 per cent, tracking exactly as it had in the lead-up to the
implementation of the policy. Through to late October, 424 taxable transactions
have taken place, raising around $12 million, so we are very much on track to
raising the sort of revenue that we expected. There has not been the Armageddon
or catastrophe that was predicated by the member for Bateman and others on the
other side. Indeed, I note that in an ABC interview on 23 October, the member
for Bateman predicted that there would be no foreign buyers at all next year. I
suspect that by Australia Day, the member for Bateman might be found incorrect.
He will be incorrect. No foreign buyers at all is a bold prediction, member for
Bateman. I note the contortion that the opposition has gone to to try to oppose
a tax cut. It is unusual, I must admit, to see a Liberal Party opposing a tax
cut. It is somewhat surreal to see the contortion in which the member for
Bateman is arguing that we need to abolish the foreign buyers surcharge.
The Leader of the Opposition, in her
radio interview—I found this curious—was asked, ''Will
you abolish the foreign buyers surcharge?'' According to my notes, she
said, ''Well, that is certainly one of the policies that we are
considering.'' That does not sound so definitive, member for Bateman.
Are we abolishing it or are we not, member for Bateman? Then the Leader of the
Opposition goes on to say —
We need to cost it and what we are
trying to get from the government is the actual figures.
Members, would it not be wonderful
if there were a document that had the figures and the fiscal impacts of
policies announced by the government, a document in which we could go and read
how much revenue those sorts of things will raise or how much things will cost?
It would be a wonderful document—say, something called a budget. Would
it not be wonderful if there were something like that that the Leader of the
Opposition could go to—rather like StudyPerth, to find out exactly how
much StudyPerth has been given? But then again, of course, the complaint from
the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Bateman is that foreigners are
being unfairly benefited by this, but at the same time they are going to
abolish the foreign buyers surcharge. This is the sort of bizarre scenario we
find ourselves in with the opposition. It does not know whether it is Arthur or
Martha.
I
want to conclude with this, because the Minister for Transport described it
better than I—often these are train-wreck interviews, Minister
for Transport. The question was put to the Leader of the Opposition about the
application of the first home buyers grant to existing properties. According to
my notes, the Leader of the Opposition, never one to be across the details,
said —
Well, that was certainly one of the
policies that we had in the last year of our government—was to extend
the first home buyers grant to existing properties, not just new builds.
Do
you stand by that, Leader of the Opposition? No, I did not think so, because
her government abolished that in 2015. If
she is going to go on the radio and make claims about the policies of her
government, which she seems to forget about , or our government, she has to be across the detail, because, again,
she has been found wanting in that radio interview.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.