Negative gearing comes up constantly in property conversations. Yet many people who use it — or plan to — don’t fully understand the mechanics behind it. However, the concept itself is fairly simple once you explain it clearly. Deciding whether it’s the right strategy for your situation is a more personal question.
An investment becomes negatively geared when the costs of holding it — such as loan interest, maintenance, and other expenses — exceed the income it generates. Consequently, this creates a loss. You can generally offset that loss against your other taxable income, such as your salary, reducing your overall tax bill for that year.
If a rental property generates less in rent than it costs in loan interest, management fees, and other holding costs, the shortfall becomes a loss. You then deduct that loss from your other income when calculating your taxable income. This means you pay less tax overall than you would without the property. Therefore, a reduced tax bill effectively subsidises part of the property’s holding cost. However, the property owner still bears the actual cash shortfall.
A negatively geared property costs more to hold than it earns. This creates a tax-deductible loss, but requires the owner to cover the shortfall out of pocket.
A positively geared property earns more in rent than it costs to hold. This generates taxable income rather than a deduction, but provides a positive cash flow.
Consequently, neither approach is inherently “better” — they suit different financial situations, risk tolerances, and investment goals.
The appeal of negative gearing generally isn’t the tax deduction itself. It’s the expectation that the property will grow in value over time, with the eventual capital gain outweighing the ongoing holding costs. Therefore, negative gearing is fundamentally a long-term growth strategy, not simply a way to reduce tax. The tax benefit is a byproduct, not the primary goal.
You’re still out of pocket. The tax deduction reduces the loss, but doesn’t eliminate it. You still need to genuinely cover the shortfall between rental income and costs each year.
It relies on capital growth. If the property doesn’t grow in value as expected, no eventual capital gain offsets the ongoing losses. This leaves the investor worse off overall.
Interest rate changes affect the numbers. Loan interest is often the biggest cost driving the negative gearing position. Rising interest rates can significantly increase the shortfall you need to cover.
It’s not a strategy for everyone. Negative gearing tends to suit investors with strong, stable income who can comfortably absorb the shortfall. It suits them more than those relying on the property for immediate cash flow.
The strategy depends heavily on your income, cash flow capacity, and expectations for the specific property. Because of this, it’s worth modelling the numbers carefully — both the ongoing shortfall and the tax benefit — before committing. Don’t rely on general commentary about the strategy.
EBATS helps property investors understand the real tax and cash flow impact of a negatively geared property, based on their actual financial situation.
📍 Suite 2.2/47 Queen St, Campbelltown NSW 2560, Australia 📞 0404 471 816 🌐 www.ebats.com.au 📧 [email protected]
Ethical Accounting & Taxation Services | Campbelltown NSW | Trusted Tax, Accounting & Business Support Since 2011