Hanson backs investor tax breaks for two homes

Pauline Hanson has backed negative gearing on two homes for every Australian, opening a new front in the political fight over Labor’s Budget changes to property investment and capital gains tax.

The One Nation leader used a post on X on Wednesday morning to reject Labor’s housing tax changes and place her party between the Coalition’s promise to repeal the measures and the government’s claim that the reforms are needed to improve fairness and direct investment towards new housing supply.

“One Nation supports negative gearing being allowed on 2 homes for everyone,” Hanson said.

“The Labor government claims to be helping the younger generation, yet they’re taking away an investment strategy that has been used by generations before them.

“We completely oppose the changes to CGT.”

The comments come as housing, tax and generational fairness dominate the post-Budget debate. Labor’s plan would limit negative gearing to newly built homes from 1 July 2027. Existing investment properties held before Budget night would keep their current treatment, while investors buying new builds would still be able to deduct rental losses against other income.

The government argues the change would focus tax support on new housing supply rather than bidding up the price of existing homes. Its broader tax package also includes changes to capital gains tax arrangements and a minimum tax rate for some trust income.

The political problem for Labor is that negative gearing is both a housing policy and a deeply personal financial issue for many voters. For younger Australians locked out of the housing market, the system is often seen as a tax advantage for investors. For small investors, including many migrants who have used property as a long-term savings vehicle, it is seen as a legitimate path to security.

Hanson’s position seeks to draw a line between full investor access and Labor’s restrictions. By backing negative gearing for two homes, One Nation is arguing for a cap rather than abolition. The message is aimed at voters who may accept that the tax system favours property investors but do not want property investment pushed out of reach for ordinary households.

The Coalition has taken a more direct position against Labor’s reforms. Opposition Leader Angus Taylor and senior Coalition figures have argued the changes would hurt aspiration, reduce investor confidence and place more pressure on the rental market. The Coalition has said it would seek to reverse Labor’s negative gearing and capital gains tax changes if elected.

That has set up a three-way argument. Labor says the system needs to be reshaped to help first-home buyers and encourage new supply. The Coalition says the changes amount to higher taxes on investment and would worsen rental pressure. One Nation now says negative gearing should remain available, but with a two-home limit.

The debate also reaches into Australia’s migrant communities, where property investment has long been viewed as a practical route to financial independence. Many families who arrived with little capital have used housing as a way to build wealth, support children and create a buffer against uncertain work or business income. At the same time, younger migrants and second-generation Australians are among those facing high rents, large deposits and rising borrowing costs.

Labor is trying to tell younger voters it is willing to take on tax settings that favour existing asset holders. The Coalition is trying to defend property investment as part of middle-class aspiration. Hanson is trying to appeal to voters who are angry about the cost of housing but wary of punishing small investors.

Supporters of the changes say restricting negative gearing to new builds could shift investment towards additional housing supply and reduce tax advantages tied to existing dwellings. Critics argue the construction sector is already constrained by labour shortages, high material costs and weak project viability, meaning the policy may not deliver enough new homes quickly.

There are also concerns about rents. Investor groups and Coalition MPs argue that reducing incentives for established property investment could shrink the rental pool and push rents higher. Supporters of reform say the current system has not prevented rental stress and has helped inflate house prices over many years.

Capital gains tax is another flashpoint. Labor’s changes are being pitched as part of a fairness argument, while opponents say they would discourage investment beyond property, including in small business and shares.

For voters, the question is becoming clearer. Should tax breaks for property investors be restricted to push money into new housing, or should they remain part of the investment system that many Australians have used to build wealth?