I'd like to see real consultation with regional Australia. We aren't the people benefiting from inner-city policy debates. We carry the weight of them, though.
On the record · Public response
What Australians are saying.
Promised one thing. Doing another. I'm not interested in what the Treasurer says now — I care about what was said in April. That's the standard.
I'm 29 and putting every spare dollar into a unit so I can eventually trade up. The whole point was that capital gains worked a certain way. Changing it mid-game punishes anyone trying to get ahead.
30-year-old teacher. I bought one small share parcel in a renewable energy company because I believe in backing the future. The CGT discount on long-term holdings is what made it worthwhile to commit. Removing it punishes the very behaviour we say we want.
I'm 79. I shouldn't be having to ring my accountant about new tax laws at my age. Leave us alone.
I rent. I'm not an investor. But I know taxes on capital eventually find their way into rents. The Government acting like only owners pay is naïve.
I'm 26. I've been working since 17. I've saved aggressively, no nights out, no overseas trips. The CGT framework was part of the rules I played by. Changing it now is bait and switch.
Voted Labor my whole life. Cannot believe this is the hill they're choosing to die on. Lifelong supporters are watching very closely.
If the Government wants people to invest in Australia rather than overseas, taxing those investments more is a very strange way to send that signal.
FIFO for 18 years. Made sacrifices most desk-bound politicians can't imagine. Bought a unit in Perth so we'd have something when the mining cycle ends. Now I'm told to be grateful for less of it.
I'm 38, two young kids, mortgage. I bought a small share portfolio so we'd have something for emergencies. Tinkering with CGT discourages exactly the saving behaviour Government keeps saying it wants.
We funded our kids' university because we saved through CGT-advantaged investments. That money was already taxed, twice in some cases. A third bite feels like daylight robbery.
Pensioner, 74. Why is the easiest political answer always “tax the people who saved”? Find harder answers.
Engineer in my 30s. The reason I take career risk — start companies, leave secure jobs — is because the upside exists. Remove the upside and I'd rather work for someone else. Australia loses.
When I was young the message was: save, invest, take responsibility. Now the message is: doing that makes you a target. I'm appalled by the shift.
Investing in a regional town like ours already feels like a gamble. Now the Government wants to make the upside smaller. Brilliant.
Honesty in politics is rare enough. When it shows up as a broken commitment, voters notice. We won't forget.
What about the people who put money into Australian small business shares because they believed in backing this country? You're punishing the loyal.
The Government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. I would like to see one credible plan to reduce wasteful programs before I accept any new tax.
I worked in childcare for 30 years on modest wages. The one investment my late mother left me will fund my retirement. Reading that the CGT discount might go for people in my situation is genuinely frightening.
If the rules can change after you've made a 20-year decision, no one will make 20-year decisions in this country again. That's not better for Australia.
My husband and I are both nurses. We bought one rental to help with our kids' education. We aren't the wealthy. We're tired of being treated like we are because we own one extra dwelling.
I'm a widow. The family home is fine, I know that's exempt. But the small portfolio my late husband built for us is what tops up the pension. Changing CGT on shares hits us, not millionaires.
Northern Australia already struggles to attract investment. Why on earth would you make capital harder to deploy here? Whoever drafted this hasn't been north of Brisbane.
Why is the conversation always about taxing more? Why is it never about spending less? My household has to live within its means. I'd like the Government to try the same.
We bought our rental in 1998 when no one wanted it. Held it through floods, repairs, bad tenants and three interest rate cycles. The tax rules in place when we bought are part of the deal we made.
Capital is mobile. Capital is also patient. The people with the most to lose under this change will simply move it offshore. The middle will pay.
I voted for this Government on the explicit understanding that CGT was not on the table. The shifting position is the issue. If they wanted a mandate, they should have taken it to the election.
If the Government wants more revenue, find it somewhere other than the people who actually saved. We did the right thing for decades and now we're the target.
As a young Australian and a parent, I'm worried about housing costs and my daughter's future. Limiting CGT concessions on property makes sense — it's clearly pushed prices up. But extending the same changes to shares and other investments doesn't. That kind of investment should be incentivised, not punished. Cutting the discount across every asset class contradicts the government's own stated aim. It looks like an opportunistic tax grab.