Prosper Australia

Australia needs tax reform. But good tax reform should improve incentives, not make them worse.

Prosper Australia’s submission on the Government’s proposed CGT reforms focuses on clear design principles that promote fairness and increase economic equality and opportunity.

While we support the goals of improving housing affordability and intergenerational equity, we believe the package is aimed at the wrong target. The reforms would increase taxes on shares, startups and productive business investment while leaving many of the tax advantages enjoyed by property investors largely intact.

The bigger opportunity is to shift the tax burden away from work and productive investment and towards economic rents. That means reducing property tax concessions, capturing planning-created land windfalls, and using the revenue to lower income taxes.

Our submission argues that if governments are serious about housing affordability and economic productivity, they need to tackle the tax treatment of land rather than further discouraging investment in businesses that create jobs, innovation and growth.

Read the full submission on our website:
https://www.prosper.org.au/2026/06/submission-treasury-laws-amendment-tax-reform-no-1-bill-2026-and-income-tax-rates-amendment-tax-reform-no-1-bill-2026/

Housing affordability is often discussed through statistics, policies and economic models.

Common Wealth tells the human story behind those numbers.

Prosper Australia is proud to support the distribution of this new Australian documentary, which explores why housing has become increasingly unaffordable and what can be done to create a fairer system.

We'll be joining screenings around the country over the coming weeks, with opportunities to hear from the filmmakers, policy experts and community advocates working on housing reform.

Rayna will be speaking at:

📍 Canberra – 25 June, alongside Kane Guglielmi, David Pocock and Katherine Trebeck

📍 Melbourne – 14 July, alongside Kane Guglielmi and Thomas Walker

Our colleague Emily Sims will also be joining the Coffs Harbour screening on 24 June.

If you've been following the housing debate and want to dig deeper into the forces shaping Australia's housing system, we encourage you to come along.

More screening events are being announced soon. Check out the trailer and screening details below.

Common Wealth film screenings | Prosper Australia Prosper is proud to support a compelling new documentary, Common Wealth. Find out about screenings, Q&A's, and other events across the country. See you there!

ICYMI: Last week, we released a new report on one of the biggest public giveaways hiding in plain sight: development rights.

If governments literally created a whole new strip of land and handed it to private landowners for free, there would be a public outcry.

But we effectively do the same thing — vertically — every day through rezoning and planning approvals that can be worth millions overnight.

The difference? Because it happens “in the air” rather than across the ground, we barely notice it.

Our research estimates that governments are giving away around $11 billion worth of publicly created development rights every year.

These rights are a valuable public asset and remain the community's property until they are privatised through a development permit.

Which raises a simple question: why are we giving it away for free?

If we want better infrastructure, more affordable housing, and fairer tax systems, we need to start putting a proper price on giveaways of public assets.

READ THE REPORT: https://www.prosper.org.au/development_rights/

Australia is giving away around $11 billion every year in publicly created development rights to major landowners

Meanwhile, Australians are struggling with housing affordability.

Our new report, Pricing Development Rights, argues that when governments create enormous land value through rezoning and planning approvals, the public should receive a fair return.

By failing to price these rights, governments across Australia are effectively giving away $11 billion a year to major landowners.

The ACT has operated a version of this system for more than 50 years. And it works.

If applied nationally, the revenue could:
• abolish stamp duty for first home buyers
• help fund almost 200,000 additional social homes
• reduce reliance on taxes that punish productive work

This is about fairness, efficiency, and ending a hidden transfer of wealth that rewards speculation over productive development.

Housing help should go to the have-nots — not the have-lots.

Read the report:
https://www.prosper.org.au/development_rights

Treasurer Chalmers has taken a small but welcome step toward ending the tax bias that rewards speculation over work. But Australia still needs bold, comprehensive tax reform that shifts the burden off earned income and onto unearned gains.

For too long, Australia’s tax system has asked workers and productive businesses to carry the load while enormous windfall gains from land, natural resources, and speculation are lightly taxed — or not taxed at all.

At the same time, we continue to give away publicly owned resources for a fraction of their value. The minerals beneath the ground, the spectrum in the air, and the rising land values created by public investment and population growth generate immense wealth, yet much of that value is captured privately instead of returned to the community that created it.

Young Australians should be able to choose meaningful careers in teaching, nursing, social work or the arts without being locked into a lifetime of renting and financial insecurity. A fair economy should reward contribution and productive effort, not simply owning scarce assets at the right time.

Australia does not have a shortage of wealth. We have a revenue system that taxes the wrong things.

Real reform means simplifying the tax system while rebalancing it away from earned income and toward the unearned gains that distort our economy, drive inequality, and fuel housing speculation. That conversation is long overdue.

We need a tax shift.

There is a deep unfairness at the heart of Australian housing policy.

State governments, by way of their planning systems, routinely give away public assets worth billions of dollars each year.

States should charge for development rights by adopting their own versions of the ACT’s Lease Variation Charge (LVC), a proven and efficient model for capturing value created by the planning system.

Prosper Australia has a new report that unveils the extent of this public giveaway problem and outlines plans to fix it. Written jointly with Henry Williams, this research examines how states could call time on an unjust and unjustifiable giveaway of public value.

Come to our free members and supporters night next Monday (18th, 6pm) for a sneak peek.

Registration essential:

Pricing development rights: A game changer for housing affordability You are invited to attend our next members and supporters night and get a sneak preview of Prosper Australia's latest research report.

Everyone is talking about economic pressures: inflation, fuel costs, stagnant productivity, and household stress.

But the role of land in the economy is rarely mentioned as the major driver underneath it all.

Today, Prosper Australia has released The Land Cycle by Catherine Cashmore — a major new paper examining the recurring pattern behind housing booms, financial instability, and economic downturns.

For more than 200 years, economists and analysts have observed a repeating cycle driven by rising land prices, expanding credit, and speculation. The paper argues Australia is now showing many of the same warning signs seen before previous downturns:

• high household debt
• worsening housing unaffordability
• speculative price growth
• dependence on property-driven growth

This isn’t about alarmism. It’s about recognising patterns that are too often ignored in mainstream economic debate.

When land values rise faster than the productive economy, more wealth is funnelled into speculation instead of productive investment. The result is greater inequality, financial fragility, and growing pressure on households and businesses.

The paper also argues that the problem is not simply “housing demand”, it’s a tax system that rewards land speculation while penalising productive work.

If we want a more stable and affordable economy, we need to start treating land differently.

Read The Land Cycle today:
https://prosper.org.au/landcycle

Australia’s airwaves belong the the Australian people, and we aren't giving them away for free.

Recent reports that Elon Musk’s SpaceX may withhold satellite mobile services unless granted free access to valuable spectrum should raise serious concerns.

At Prosper Australia, we see this for what it is: corporate brinkmanship.

Spectrum is finite and immensely valuable. Allocating it through transparent, competitive processes ensures it serves the public interest — not just the profit margins of a single company.

Yes, expanding mobile coverage through initiatives like the Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation matters. But that doesn’t justify giving away public assets for free.

If a company walks away because it has to pay a fair price, that says more about its business model than Australia’s policy settings.

And let’s be clear: auctions don’t automatically drive up consumer prices. Competition and regulation shape outcomes — not simply input costs.

Whether it’s land, minerals, or spectrum, the principle is the same: public resources should deliver a fair return to the community.

Rack off Musk: Australia’s public spectrum is not a corporate freebie | Prosper Australia Hey Musk: Australia’s airwaves are a public resource, not a bargaining chip for billionaires.

Are Australians getting a fair return on our gas?

We often hear comparisons to Norway, where oil and gas profits are taxed heavily. Meanwhile, Australia’s offshore gas sector contributes surprisingly little through mechanisms like the Petroleum Resources Rent Tax, even during global price booms.

So what’s the alternative?

There are three main ways governments can capture value from natural resources:

1. State ownership
2. Profit-based taxes (like the PRRT)
3. Royalties on production

The problem with profit-based taxes is simple: profits are easy to manipulate on paper. That’s a big reason why the PRRT has underperformed.

A flat royalty — like the proposed 25% export levy backed by David Pocock — is simpler and harder to game. But it has its own flaw: it doesn’t adapt to boom-and-bust price cycles. Too high when prices fall, too low when prices surge.

There’s another option: scaled (variable) royalties.

Think of it like a progressive tax:

When gas prices are low → lower royalty rates
When prices spike → higher rates that capture windfall gains

This approach:
- Shares risk between the public and producers
- Captures more value during booms
- Avoids accounting loopholes
- Maintains incentives to invest and produce

It’s already working in places like Queensland, where variable royalties have raised billions during recent commodity spikes.

The bottom line:
If Australians own the resource, we should charge for it like a commercial landlord. We should not rely on complex profit calculations that can be engineered away.

Flexible royalties are a pragmatic alternative to resource rent taxation could be enacted straight away without complex royalty redesign or rate-setting processes.

Get the details from Cameron Murray on the Prosper blog today:

How to get a decent public return from Australia’s gas resources — A 25% export tax? Or something else? | Prosper Australia Cameron Murray explains how a scaled variable royalty does the job of a super-profits tax to share risk and get a better public return from resources.

While federal tax reform dominates headlines when it comes to housing affordability and intergenerational equity, some of the most transformative changes happen at the local and state levels.

In 2025, Baden-Württemberg, a German state of 11 million people, quietly implemented a land value tax. Instead of taxing buildings and land together, they now tax land value alone.

It's one of the largest implementations of land value taxation in a major industrial economy, and it happened with surprisingly little fanfare.

Why does this matter for Australia?

Because it proves that land value tax isn't just a theory. It's policy. And it's working in a real economy with real land markets: dense cities, suburbs, and rural regions.

While we debate federal tax settings, our local councils are making decisions now on how to fund infrastructure, manage growth, and address housing affordability. Land value taxation offers a smart path forward:

- It rewards productive use of land, not speculative holding and vacant land.
- It encourages compact, sustainable development.
- It taxes wealth that communities create together, not the improvements individuals build.
- It's fairer. Similar properties pay similar taxes.

The German experience shows this isn't politically impossible. It took years of coalition-building, the right political moment, and a broad alliance of environmental groups, tenant advocates, and urban planners. But it happened.

Federal reform matters. But so does what happens in our cities and towns.

Prosper Australia has led campaigns for rating reform for decades, and we are seeing increasing interest from policy reformers who want to discuss rate reform. It's not easy, but it's definitely possible.

Get in touch if you're keen to get involved in a campaign near you.

A German State Quietly Implemented a Land Value Tax In Baden-Württemberg, a quiet reform shows land value taxation isn’t just theory—it’s already happening.