The Treasury Laws Amendment Act that passed on 26 June 2026 banned negative gearing on established homes, or so the headlines claimed. What the legislation actually does is narrower and stranger: it stops new investors from deducting rental losses against wage income, but leaves a legal pathway open for anyone who already owns positively geared property.
If you hold rental properties that generate a profit, because you bought years ago and paid down the mortgage, or because rents have risen faster than your interest bill, you can still acquire another established dwelling and offset its losses against that existing rental income. The law blocks you from sheltering your salary, but it does not stop property-to-property cross-subsidy within a portfolio.
First-time investors, by contrast, carry their losses forward as a tax credit that sits idle until they sell the asset or generate rental profit, potentially years away. The policy intent was to tilt capital toward new construction without destroying the entire investment market. The practical effect is a two-tier system: incumbents keep most of the old tax structure while newcomers face a higher effective cost of entry.
The mechanics in plain English
Section 26-155 of the Income Tax Assessment Act now says that if your residential rental expenses exceed your residential rental income in a financial year, the excess is not deductible against other income sources, wages, business profits, dividends. That excess still exists on paper; it rolls forward and can be used later against future rental income from any residential property you own, or against the capital gain when you sell.
The key detail: rental income is rental income. If you own Property A (positively geared, generating $15,000 net annual income) and buy Property B (negatively geared, losing $10,000 a year), you can offset the $10,000 loss against the $15,000 profit and pay tax only on the $5,000 net. Your wage income remains untouched, but your portfolio-level tax bill falls.
If you own no positively geared property and buy your first investment dwelling that runs at a loss, that loss cannot touch your salary. It sits in carry-forward until you either acquire a profitable rental or sell and realise a capital gain.
Callout: The catch
The law does not distinguish between someone who owns two properties and someone who owns twenty. It only cares whether you have rental profit to absorb the loss. Larger portfolios, especially those acquired before recent rate rises, are far more likely to include older, lower-LVR holdings that generate positive cashflow. First-time buyers rarely do.
Who this helps and who it locks out
Investors with established portfolios can continue to expand into the secondary market. The constraint is cashflow and serviceability, not tax treatment, if you can afford the repayments and have profit elsewhere in the portfolio, the deduction structure remains largely intact.
First-time investors face a different equation. Negative gearing was historically the mechanism that made early-stage property investment viable for middle-income earners: the tax refund offset part of the cashflow shortfall while they waited for capital growth. Without that mechanism, the upfront cost of holding a negatively geared property rises materially. You either need higher income to service the shortfall from post-tax dollars, or you target positively geared assets (typically regional, lower-growth markets or new builds with depreciation).
The policy steers new money toward construction, which was the stated goal. The unintended side effect is that it also steers new investors toward either new builds or abandoning the asset class entirely, while experienced investors retain flexibility to buy established stock that may offer better location, land value, or scarcity premium.
Three scenarios that change the math
-
Rate cuts materialise faster than wage growth. If the RBA moves to a sustained easing cycle and rental yields hold or compress only slightly, more properties flip to positive gearing naturally. That reopens the deduction pathway for smaller portfolios and reduces the penalty for first-timers, since fewer deals would be negatively geared to begin with. Base case: partial relief by late 2027 if cuts begin mid-2026.
-
Supply surge from new construction. If the policy successfully drives a wave of new dwelling completions over the next 24 months, rental growth may slow or reverse in markets with high apartment supply (inner Melbourne, Brisbane). That would widen the negative gearing gap for established properties and make the tax asymmetry more painful for anyone locked out. Higher risk in markets where new builds dominate current pipeline.
-
Grandfathering gets challenged or amended. If housing affordability remains a political flashpoint and data shows portfolio investors are still accumulating established stock at scale, there is a non-zero chance the government tightens the rules further, either by capping the number of properties eligible for cross-portfolio offsets, or by phasing out the deduction entirely over time. That risk is speculative but not implausible if the policy is seen to widen wealth inequality rather than narrow it.
Market liquidity and the next twelve months
Established property markets have already softened through the first half of 2026, housing markets in Perth and Brisbane have joined the national decline, and Sydney’s prestige segment is under pressure as tax reform flows through. The negative gearing change adds another variable: if first-time investors pull back and existing investors step in selectively, transaction volumes may stay low but the composition of buyers shifts.
Anecdotal evidence from buyer’s agents suggests portfolio holders are watching the correction closely. The logic: if prices fall another 5 to 10 per cent and financing conditions ease, the ability to still claim losses against other rentals makes established stock more attractive than it would be for a newcomer. That could put a floor under certain sub-markets, particularly inner-ring, high-land-value properties that appeal to investors who already understand the tax mechanics.
The flip side: if first-time investors exit the market in meaningful numbers, that removes a cohort of buyers who historically competed for entry-level stock in the $500,000 to $800,000 range. Investor demand has been a key support at the lower end of the market, and any sustained pullback could push prices lower in that segment, especially if owner-occupiers are also constrained by serviceability.
What this means if you are deciding now
If you already own investment property and it generates positive rental income: you retain most of the old negative gearing benefit when acquiring additional established dwellings. The trade-off is serviceability, banks still apply the higher assessment rate, and your cashflow buffer matters more than the tax treatment. Run the numbers on after-tax cashflow assuming no wage-offset, then check whether rental profit from existing holdings is sufficient to absorb the loss.
If you are a first-time investor: the question is whether you can afford to hold a negatively geared property without the tax refund. That means either targeting positively geared assets (new builds with depreciation, higher-yielding regional markets, or waiting until rate cuts improve cashflow), or accepting that the loss sits in carry-forward and only helps you years later. The practical constraint is not the eventual tax benefit, it is the cash required to cover the shortfall in the meantime.
If you are waiting for clarity: the law is now in force, and the grandfather clause is not a loophole, it is the design. The asymmetry is intentional, even if the wealth-gap consequence was not advertised. Markets will reprice this over the next 12 to 18 months as buyers and sellers adjust expectations.
The bottom line
Negative gearing is not dead, it has been tiered. Existing investors keep a version of the old system if they have portfolio cashflow to absorb it. First-time investors face a higher barrier to entry, with losses deferred rather than immediately deductible. Whether that widens the wealth gap or successfully redirects capital toward new supply depends on how the construction pipeline responds, how fast rates fall, and whether policymakers revisit the rules if outcomes diverge from intent.
The next signal: watch transaction volumes in the sub-$800,000 established market over the next two quarters. If first-time investor activity drops and portfolio buyers do not fill the gap, prices in that segment will tell you whether the grandfather clause is working as a market stabiliser or as a barrier.
Subscribe to Australian Property Review’s weekly newsletter for updates on tax policy, rate moves, and market data as this plays out.
General info, not financial advice.
