碳排税对房地产的影响Carbon tax - what it means for property

ewelamb

Everyone is jostling for space in the carbon tax debate this week. Cate. Michael. And even Ross Cameron, a former Liberal MP known for campaigning on morals, and then proving, Clinton-style, that he didn't walk the talk, and losing his Federal seat as a result.

Among those in the ear of the Federal Government is the Housing Industry Association, which has declared its opposition. It argues that a tax on carbon emissions will flow through to adversely affect all building products and all sectors of the construction industry.碳排税会转嫁到建筑业和建筑产品。

"Building product manufacturers and new home buyers across Australia will be the hardest hit by a carbon tax," says HIA's chief executive, Graham Wolfe.建筑产品制造者和新屋购买者是最受影响的。

"There will be an immediate and inevitable flow through of cost increases across the broad range of building materials, products, fixtures and fittings," says Wolfe.成本马上会转嫁到建筑材料、产品、装饰材料上。

Wolfe says at $20 per tonne, a carbon tax will add an extra $6000 or more to the cost of building an average new residence, placing additional affordability pressure on new housing activity, and adding $43 extra per month to family mortgage repayments.每间新屋增加6000澳元成本，每月多还贷款43澳元

"That adds a further $12,800 in repayments over a 25-year loan," Wolfe says.

The HIA estimates that constructing the average new home and land package involves the emission of about 240 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

And Wolfe argues that $6000 – or about $12,000 if the price was to be $40 a tonne of carbon – could, for some people, be the straw that breaks the banks' willingness to lend to someone building a home.

"There are a lot of people who don't have a house who can't afford to buy a house who are saving as quickly and mightily as they can but they can't get across the line because they can't get the deposit together. I'm not going to dismiss $6000 as being a small amount of money that should not have some consequence on the cost impact of ... a new home."

But Wolfe concedes that the amount of carbon emitted during building could well come down – and is already doing so.

"Some of the steel manufacturers and the aluminium manufacturers, the cement manufacturers are already increasing the efficiencies of their production line," he says. "That is happening now, whether or not this makes it happen any faster, in time we might see the result of that. Efficiencies in carbon footprints are being improved all the time in any case."

He also says, should makers of steel, aluminium, cement and other building products be compensated, that could reduce the impact of a carbon tax on people building homes. "If there is a compensation for [manufacturers] ... then the cost increases won't be as significant. So the $6000 might be a little less. "

While the HIA has made up its mind that a carbon tax is a bad idea, pointing out that it could make people look for cheaper non-taxed products from offshore, not everyone in the building industry agrees.

Cameron Rosen, the director of sustainable building consultancy Australian Living, who has recently built four eight-star homes in Sydney's east, says a carbon tax would not necessarily cost more.

"Sure if you think old school, prices are going to up, but if you think new school, prices should come down," Rosen says. "I think it opens up the doors for innovation to come alive."

Rosen says a carbon tax could push builders to investigate more efficient building systems, that reduce waste, and open up the potential to integrate ideas from the commercial building sector.

On his recent build, Rosen used concrete from Boral that has a high recycled content. Doing so saved 13 tonnes of carbon emissions per home.

Rosen also says if a carbon tax pushes up the energy efficiency of new homes, people could save thousands of dollars on electricity and gas.

"About 38 per cent of our energy consumption goes to heating and cooling. It's the biggest amount of our energy expenditure and, through good design, you can wipe that 38 per cent out [or get close to it]."

高寿财

房价要涨

ah123

到时候肯定啥都要涨

askingsky

涨价 - 通胀 - 提高利率 - 房价？？

cangaru

原帖由 ewelamb 于 2011-6-1 09:36 发表
碳排税对房地产的影响Carbon tax - what it means for property
此文章由 ewelamb 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au和作者 ewelamb 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整！

Everyone is jostling for space in the carbon tax debate this week. Cate. Michael. And even Ross Cameron, a former Liberal MP known for campaigning on morals, and then proving, Clinton-style, that he didn't walk the talk, and losing his Federal seat as a result.

Among those in the ear of the Federal Government is the Housing Industry Association, which has declared its opposition. It argues that a tax on carbon emissions will flow through to adversely affect all building products and all sectors of the construction industry.碳排税会转嫁到建筑业和建筑产品。

"Building product manufacturers and new home buyers across Australia will be the hardest hit by a carbon tax," says HIA's chief executive, Graham Wolfe.建筑产品制造者和新屋购买者是最受影响的。

"There will be an immediate and inevitable flow through of cost increases across the broad range of building materials, products, fixtures and fittings," says Wolfe.成本马上会转嫁到建筑材料、产品、装饰材料上。

Wolfe says at $20 per tonne, a carbon tax will add an extra $6000 or more to the cost of building an average new residence, placing additional affordability pressure on new housing activity, and adding $43 extra per month to family mortgage repayments.每间新屋增加6000澳元成本，每月多还贷款43澳元

"That adds a further $12,800 in repayments over a 25-year loan," Wolfe says.

The HIA estimates that constructing the average new home and land package involves the emission of about 240 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

And Wolfe argues that $6000 – or about $12,000 if the price was to be $40 a tonne of carbon – could, for some people, be the straw that breaks the banks' willingness to lend to someone building a home.

"There are a lot of people who don't have a house who can't afford to buy a house who are saving as quickly and mightily as they can but they can't get across the line because they can't get the deposit together. I'm not going to dismiss $6000 as being a small amount of money that should not have some consequence on the cost impact of ... a new home."

But Wolfe concedes that the amount of carbon emitted during building could well come down – and is already doing so.

"Some of the steel manufacturers and the aluminium manufacturers, the cement manufacturers are already increasing the efficiencies of their production line," he says. "That is happening now, whether or not this makes it happen any faster, in time we might see the result of that. Efficiencies in carbon footprints are being improved all the time in any case."

He also says, should makers of steel, aluminium, cement and other building products be compensated, that could reduce the impact of a carbon tax on people building homes. "If there is a compensation for [manufacturers] ... then the cost increases won't be as significant. So the $6000 might be a little less. "

While the HIA has made up its mind that a carbon tax is a bad idea, pointing out that it could make people look for cheaper non-taxed products from offshore, not everyone in the building industry agrees.

Cameron Rosen, the director of sustainable building consultancy Australian Living, who has recently built four eight-star homes in Sydney's east, says a carbon tax would not necessarily cost more.

"Sure if you think old school, prices are going to up, but if you think new school, prices should come down," Rosen says. "I think it opens up the doors for innovation to come alive."

Rosen says a carbon tax could push builders to investigate more efficient building systems, that reduce waste, and open up the potential to integrate ideas from the commercial building sector.

On his recent build, Rosen used concrete from Boral that has a high recycled content. Doing so saved 13 tonnes of carbon emissions per home.

Rosen also says if a carbon tax pushes up the energy efficiency of new homes, people could save thousands of dollars on electricity and gas.

"About 38 per cent of our energy consumption goes to heating and cooling. It's the biggest amount of our energy expenditure and, through good design, you can wipe that 38 per cent out [or get close to it]."

n95

(paopaobing(47)) (paopaobing(47)) (paopaobing(47))

rlfamily

小聲問一下.........
碳稅收了之後要給誰???(paopaobing(79))

mike@lu@mel

谈税，叹税

cangaru

原帖由 rlfamily 于 2011-6-1 11:32 发表
小聲問一下.........
碳稅收了之後要給誰???(paopaobing(79))

government

dootbear

原帖由 rlfamily 于 2011-6-1 11:32 发表
小聲問一下.........
碳稅收了之後要給誰???(paopaobing(79))

大头给 中低收入家庭 （ 税前8万以下）

中头 给企业。

小头进 财政部的棺材

高寿财

原帖由 rlfamily 于 2011-6-1 11:32 发表
小聲問一下.........
碳稅收了之後要給誰???(paopaobing(79))

政府那来再分配，
并从中渔利。
(paopaobing(3))
这是她们的工作，
要不就闲得没事干了。

rlfamily

原帖由 高寿财 于 2011-6-1 12:10 发表

政府那来再分配，
并从中渔利。
(paopaobing(3))
这是她们的工作，
要不就闲得没事干了。

了解............
(paopaobing(77))

dootbear

原帖由 高寿财 于 2011-6-1 12:10 发表

政府再分配

会不会又给一些给印尼去做环保/减碳呢 ？？？

lingyang

而且有是到8w!!!! 为啥为啥, 8w-15w的人难道很富有吗, 脑残的工党, 脑残的Ross Garnaut

spaceboyc

因为8W-15W的基本都不投工党的票~~~

lingyang

难道都不想争取一下? 按照工党的算法, 以后8-9w的工作没人做了.

dootbear

原帖由 spaceboyc 于 2011-6-1 13:44 发表
因为8W-15W的基本都不投工党的票~~~

呵呵 是吗 ？？

工党在悉尼胜出的选区既有富人的东区， 也有中产的内西区， 也有中下级的 西区。

spaceboyc

总有一些例外的，看看上北区，下北区，西北区，和一些富裕的南区

spaceboyc

原帖由 dootbear 于 2011-6-1 13:49 发表


呵呵 是吗 ？？

工党在悉尼胜出的选区既有富人的东区， 也有中产的内西区， 也有中下级的 西区。

spaceboyc

真是期待联邦大选也来一次这样的，把工党那帮蠢货打入反劫不复之地。

dootbear

原帖由 spaceboyc 于 2011-6-1 13:59 发表
总有一些例外的，看看上北区，下北区，西北区，和一些富裕的南区

那些区传统都是自由党的， 联邦工党从来就没有在那一边长期胜过。

cangaru

对比一下最近两次选举的结果，可以看出贫下中农地区这次都跑去联盟党了，铁杆工党还在城里

(Liberal=Blue, National=Green, Labor=Red, Independents=Yellow):
Map of Sydney after the 2007 election:

Map of Sydney after the 2011 election:

spaceboyc

所以说，8W-15W本身就是联盟党的票仓，工党不在乎的。。。这个就是我的论点

大球球

没错，很多城里的专业人士收入稳定，务虚精神强，工党比较和胃口。墨尔本城区的联邦选区还选出一个绿党众议员。

spaceboyc

99%在城里上班的专业人士都是不住城里的。。。

steven_sa

碳税要成为万恶之源了

闲人甲

自由党啊,怒你不争气啊, 没法把工党赶下台.

CCNBand

反正工党下届要被选下去了，走之前破罐子破摔，谁也别想好过。

ATO

工党不能下台的，我们还有3年的project需要拨款呢，自由党一上台，咱就没法挥霍了，坚决要打压自由党的

dootbear

原帖由 spaceboyc 于 2011-6-1 15:16 发表
所以说，8W-15W本身就是联盟党的票仓，工党不在乎的。。。这个就是我的论点

上面的图案是 NSW省大选的图案， 并不是 联邦大选的图案。。。