A clear majority of Australian voters trust the Albanese Government less due to broken budget promises on housing reform.
In the first national poll since Tuesday’s federal budget, voters are divided over whether the changes will work but more Australians back changes to negative gearing than the status quo.
Younger Australians are most likely to support overhauling negative gearing and capital gains tax, but they are also sceptical it will help them buy a home.
Broken promises
The poll was conducted by strategic campaign agency Wolf+Smith for Amplify, a nonpartisan community group founded by technology investor Paul Bassat.
A clear majority of Australians surveyed – 51 per cent – are less likely to trust the government as a result of the changes.
Nearly seven in ten Australians said the fact that changes to negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount were ruled out before the election was important to how they viewed the policies.
Amplify chief executive Georgina Harrisson said the data pointed to a fundamental problem for the government’s reform agenda.
“Half of Australians surveyed say they have less trust in the Federal Government after the Budget compared with before,” Ms Harrisson said.
Just 27 per cent believe the budget will be good for the country as a whole, compared to 40 per cent who think it will be bad.
“This dramatic fall in trust comes amid a backdrop of already declining trust in the ability of governments to solve the housing crisis,” she said.
Aussies who back the changes
More Australians support changing negative gearing than oppose it, with around 41 per cent in favour of restricting the tax breaks for landlords.
18-34 year olds are the most supportive cohort at 47 per cent in favour, with only 21 per cent opposed – the strongest net positive of any age group.
Middle-aged Australians (35-54) sit in the middle at 41 per cent support and 28 per cent opposed.
Those aged 55 and over are the least enthusiastic, with support dropping to 36 per cent and opposition rising to 31 per cent, making it the only age group where the gap between supporters and opponents nearly closes.
However, real concerns exist that it could increase rents, and sceptical younger Australians aren’t convinced it will improve their lives.
The survey of 1002 people was conducted on May 13 – the morning after Treasurer Jim Chalmers handed down the budget.
Support for capital gains tax changes
The poll found that 41 per cent of respondents support replacing the capital gains tax discount with indexation for investment properties.
Only one in four voters – 26 per cent – oppose the move.
Support was even stronger for the abolition of negative gearing on existing properties, with 53 per cent backing the change compared to 27 per cent opposed.
Labor voters led the charge at 51 per cent support for the negative gearing changes, while Coalition voters were more divided, with 42 per cent opposing them.
Renters and younger Australians were among the most enthusiastic supporters across both measures.
Voters were far less convinced the reforms would actually solve Australia’s housing shortage.
Nearly four in ten respondents said the budget’s housing measures would be “fairly ineffective”, while a further 18 per cent called them “very ineffective”.
Only 27 per cent thought they would be effective.
Ms Harrisson said the public’s desire for reform remained intact, but came with conditions.
“What they want is reform that is honest about its aims, credible in its design, and genuinely focused on the thing that will solve the crisis: building more homes.”
Amplify noted that fieldwork was conducted within hours of the budget being delivered, with large “unsure” cohorts across multiple questions suggesting opinion is still forming.
Ms Harrisson said that created both a risk for the government.
“It has been less than a week since the Budget was handed down. The community is yet to be properly engaged on the substance of the changes.
“Our research tells us that when the community is excluded from the conversation, or when commitments made to them are walked back, the damage goes beyond any single policy.”
The poll was conducted online using research-only panels and weighted to match the general population, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 per cent.
