Anyone who has held an investment property through a full tax year knows the real expense is not always the tax itself. It is the hours, the records, the adviser fees and the fear of getting a deduction wrong. CPA Australia now puts a national price on that burden: about $60 billion a year in tax compliance costs across individuals, small firms and large groups.
That figure is an advocacy estimate, not a government audit. Treat it as a size-of-the-problem marker, not a precise ledger.
Where the $60 billion actually lands
The split matters more than the headline. Businesses turning over less than $100 million carry about $31 billion, or 1.1% of GDP. Individuals account for roughly $16 billion. Large corporate groups bear around $10 billion.
So the smaller you are, the heavier the load relative to your resources. A big group has a tax team. A small operator, or a landlord with two properties, does the work personally or pays someone to do it.
For small businesses, GST is reported as the most time-hungry obligation. Many owners handle the paperwork themselves.
Key numbers
- About $60 billion a year: estimated total compliance cost
- About $31 billion: firms under $100 million turnover
- About $16 billion: individuals
- About $10 billion: large corporate groups
- 62% of self-employed borrowers paid an adviser, but only 10% consulted a mortgage broker
Why property investors sit in the middle of this
Most small-scale investors fall into the individual bucket, and many also run a business, a trust or a self-managed fund alongside. That layering multiplies the paperwork: rental schedules, capital gains records, depreciation, GST on any commercial holdings, and entity-level returns.
The pain is not evenly spread. A salaried investor with one unit has a manageable return. An investor who is also a sole trader, or who holds property through a structure, faces several overlapping sets of rules and deadlines. If you already feel like you are paying twice to prove the same thing, the estimate probably describes your year.
The lender data points to a quieter gap. Of self-employed borrowers, 62% paid an adviser, yet only 10% spoke to a mortgage broker. Tax advice and borrowing advice are being bought separately, and often by different people who never compare notes. That can matter when income documentation drives a loan outcome.
The 10% target: ambitious, or just a number?
CPA Australia wants a 10% reduction, around $6 billion annually, by 2030. It also proposes lifting the fringe benefits tax minor-benefits threshold from $300 to at least $500, using payroll data to stop businesses reporting the same information twice, and indexing thresholds that have been frozen for years.
It also wants Canberra to release the Board of Taxation’s red tape review, due in June 2026. That request is telling. A target is only credible if people can see the baseline it is measured against.
Here is the catch. Compliance cost is hard to measure, and easy to redefine. A government can claim a cut by counting a form it removed, while the real time burden barely shifts. Without a published method, a 10% goal could be met on paper and missed in practice.
What this means for an investor’s next move
Simplification is a long-run bet, not a plan. Nothing here changes your obligations this year, and no policy has been legislated on the basis of this estimate.
The practical response is smaller and closer to home:
- Keep one clean set of records per property, updated monthly rather than in a rush at year end.
- Ask your accountant which of your entities and filings actually overlap.
- If you are self-employed and borrowing, get your tax adviser and your broker talking about the same documents before you apply.
The political test is simple. If the review is published and a measurable target follows, investors get something concrete to hold governments to. If it stays unreleased, the $60 billion figure remains a talking point.
General info, not financial advice.
Want the weekly signal on policy and property? Subscribe to the newsletter.
For related reading, see how SMSF property loans are tightening as banks exit and why serviceability rules are squeezing younger borrowers.
