Pauline Hanson reveals plan to cap negative gearing at just two properties

Tim McIntyre

Updated 30 May 2026, 5:04am

First published 30 May 2026, 5:00am

Pauline Hanson has a different view on negative gearing to Labor’s. Picture: Martin Ollman

---

ANALYSIS

Pauline Hanson revealed One Nation’s alternative plan for tax changes on investment properties this week, and it makes sense.

Rather than banning negative gearing outright, except for on new properties, which is the Labor model currently presented to the Senate, Hanson’s change would allow negative gearing to continue for everyone, but capped at a maximum of two properties per investor.

MORE:Neg gearing changes to create rental crisis

This would enable “mum and dad” investors to build wealth for their retirement by using the strategy and would also allow first home buyers to ‘rent-vest’, where they get a foot on the ladder by buying an investment property as a first home instead of an owner-occupier.

The most recent statistics available from the ABS and ATO suggest that 22 per cent of Australian households own an investment property.

MORE:Home prices sink by more than 32 per cent

Treasurer Jim Chalmers has brought his tax overhaul to Parliament this week. Picture: Martin Ollman

---

Among property investors, about 71 per cent have a single property, 19 per cent have two, 6 per cent have three, and 2 per cent have four. The 29 per cent of investors with multiple properties own about half of all investment properties in Australia.

Those able to negatively gear three or more properties are usually in the higher earner brackets. How else would they be able to pay their own money into multiple investment home loans each month?

Indeed, 8 per cent of investors have property worth more than $2 million, while 62 per cent have property worth less than $750,000.

MORE:New home builds hit 12 year low as housing crisis deepens

Surely those higher earners are the ones that Labor would most like to deter from buying up multiple properties?

Meanwhile, families and young buyers could still have access to the incentives that the generations before them enjoyed.

Of course, Labor’s use of grandfathering means that the wealthiest of property investors are able to carry on negative gearing their existing investment properties. They will only be affected if they expand their portfolio further.

So in a way, Labor is actually propping up the “top end of town” that they famously wanted to target during Bill Shorten’s failed election campaigns when property tax changes were first flagged.

MORE:Investors warned to get valuations or pay more tax

A tax overhaul plan didn’t help Bill Shorten in his 2019 election campaign. Picture: Lukas Coch.

---

One Nation didn’t have to do much to come up with their current alternative, because it was regularly mentioned as part of the conversation in the lead up to the May budget, when commentators were speculating on what changes Labor might try to make.

Hanson indicated she would also do away with any changes to capital gains tax (CGT) and leave it as is with the 50 per cent discount in place.

But while One Nation continues to gather clout with each new poll or by-election around Australia, the more important party are the Greens when it comes to the reforms announced on budget night.

MORE:Huge twist in supermodel’s landlord war

The Greens hold the balance of power in the Senate, where treasurer Jim Chalmers this week introduced the first tranche of the legislation he needs to pass to make the tax changes.

During last year’s election campaign, the Greens wanted to go one step further than One Nation’s current plan and limit negative gearing to one property only (grandfathered) for existing investors, but banning it all together for future purchases. The Greens would also allow CGT to remain in place for one property per investor.

Labor’s plan left a lot to be desired as it entered the Senate, let’s see what it looks like when it comes out.