'Topping up $300 a week': How much money do property investors actually make?
Photo:
Unsplash/ Artful Homes
A big chunk of property investors do not make money from their investments - and those who do are pulling in an average of less than $16,000 a year.
RNZ revealed last year, more than 50,000 of the roughly 120,000 property investors in the country were making losses on their property portfolios.
Now, new data released under the Official Information Act has shown even those with a profit were making a limited amount.
In the 2024 tax year, the average rental income made across all entities reporting a profit was $15,680.
Based on the average house price, that is a return of 1.7 percent.
Individuals were making $13,240 and trusts $26,490.
The year before, the average income was $15,590. A year earlier, it was $16,680 and in 2021, $14,800.
Simplicity chief economist Shamubeel Eaqub said it highlighted people were not investing in property for cash yields but for other reasons.
Simplicity chief economist Shamubeel Eaqub said capital gains was a motivator for investors.
Photo:
Supplied
Those included being able to borrow from the bank to invest in property in a way that other investments were not able to, and the lack of tax on properties not captured by the bright line test.
"The real motivation is capital gains - because the cash return means tenants aren't the main business, the house is.
"Roughly, if your cash earning yield is 1.7 percent, and let's say the cost of equity is 10 percent - probably a bit higher in NZ, then investors are assuming house prices will increase by over 8 percent a year forever.
"So we have this weird setup, that encourages people to make a pretty serious financial bet, through tax and banking regulation, and cultural norms."
Including capital gains, investors would have made 6.6 percent a year on average over the past five years.
In 2022, they would have had a 19 percent return, and in 2021, 15. percent, before recording total losses in the most recent two years.
He calculated investors would have made an average $179,672 in the 2021/22 year, thanks to capital gains, and $111.464 the year before.
But they would have lost almost $85,000 in the 2023 year and another $21,362 in the 2024.
NZ Property Investors Federation spokesperson Matt Ball said he was not surprised by the data.
"We have one rental property ourselves and I'm putting in $300 a week at the moment because I'm stuck on an interest rate of 6.65 percent.
"But we've been doing that for the last year, 18 months. We'll make a loss just because that's how it is."
He said property investment was not "winning Lotto".
"It's hard work and to make money out of it you have to put in some effort. You can't just buy a place and sit down and watch the money roll in.
"That's why if you can add a bedroom or upgrade it so you get a bit of rent of rent or whatever, do some work to it, that's the goal."
He said 85 percent of property investors had another job.
"I think if you could put the money into other investments you'd probably be getting a strong income… the leverage is the difference, I can't borrow $1 million to put into shares."
Sarina Gibbon, general manager at Auckland Property Investors Association said some investors would be operating across multiple entities.
"Since FY22, when interest deductibility started being phased out, the IRD hasn't been privy to the economic reality of investing, let alone reporting it accurately. It has been reporting legislated distortion.
In FY24, landlords could only deduct 50 percent of interest costs. Cash-poor portfolios got pumped into the system and spat out as paper-rich operations.
"So, no, the numbers are not surprisingly low; they are deceptively high. We are taxing revenue, not profit.
This sort of tax distortion is nothing else but political theatre. Here's the irony, though: flawed as the policy was, it did rewire investor behaviour from accumulating to improving.
"Sure, more deductible repairs and upgrades led to better-quality housing, but also higher rents. So the adversarial policy borne out of flawed design and bad leadership cornered investors into action to benefit their tenants and no one else."
She said now investors could claim their home loan interest against their income again and interest rates had fallen, there was some breathing room.
"In the long term, I expect investment to be more dynamic, yield-focused and taxable income from the investor cohort to grow."
Property investment coach Steve Goodey said investors starting out would usually make losses but people who had been investing for a while would often have properties without mortgages.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
8 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Supermarkets plead guilty to pricing errors, Consumer NZ calls for penalties
A dodgy multibuy refers to a situation where the individual price and the multibuy price don't add up to a saving. A mince special where a tray of meat was $4 or people could buy three for $20. Photo / RNZ Consumer NZ pointed to a mince special where a tray of meat was $4 or people could buy three for $20. In another case, packaging seemed to be making a confusing difference. Two individual bags of Gingernuts were selling for $5 but the club price for a 500g twin-pack was $5.59. The Gingernuts that were selling for $5 but the club price for a twin-pack was $5.59. Photo / RNZ Sometimes the price on the shelf tag does not match what you pay at checkout. In this case, supplied by Consumer, the price tag on the shelf said $27, but the customer paid more than $35 at the checkout. A box of Coca Cola a customer paid more at checkout for than the shelf price tag. Photo / RNZ Sometimes it's just hard to work out what the price is. Consumer provided an example of double cream brie 'reduced' to $10.60 for a quick sale – or was it on sale for $9.80? Sometimes it seems as though there are multiple labels for the same item. Double cream brie with two prices. Photo / RNZ In this case, two signs had two different prices for a single avocado. 'One said $1.69. The other said $1.99,' Consumer NZ spokesperson Abby Damen said. A sign saying a single avocado is $1.99. Photo / RNZ 'The customer was charged $1.99. She returned two days later to ask what could be done about the pricing error. 'She was offered a refund of the price difference but after pointing out the supermarket's new refund policy, she was refunded $2 and also kept her avocado.' Chief executive at Consumer Jon Duffy said anyone charged more than the shelf price was entitled by law to a refund of the difference. He said both supermarket chains promised a full refund in that scenario, but consumers sometimes had to know what was available. A Foodstuffs spokesperson said with more than 14,000 products in a typical supermarket, and prices changing frequently due to supplier costs, promotions or new product lines, pricing was a complex job. 'But for our customers, it's simple. They rightly expect the price on the shelf to match what they pay at the checkout,' he said. 'We take pricing accuracy as seriously as health and safety, aiming for zero errors. 'Across our local, family-owned stores, we manage tens of thousands of price labels and process millions of transactions every week, and we've invested in better systems, daily checks and electronic shelf labels to help get it right. 'If we do get it wrong, our policy is that the customer gets a refund and keeps the product. We've also strengthened staff training and store processes to make sure pricing is clear and accurate.' Woolworths said it had more 3.5 million transactions in stores weekly 'and sometimes errors do occur'. 'When they do, we try to make things right, through our long-standing and market-leading refund policy. Under that policy, if a customer is charged more than the advertised price for a product, they get a full refund and can keep the product.' Duffy said Consumer had received 20 complaints about supermarket pricing since Tuesday. A normal rate would be two a day, he said. -RNZ
Otago Daily Times
9 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Supermarket pricing errors to be wary of
By Susan Edmunds of RNZ Consumer NZ says supermarkets are still making pricing errors, despite increasing pressure and scrutiny on them. Charges have been filed and a number of supermarkets have pleaded guilty to breaching the Fair Trading Act due to inaccurate pricing and misleading specials. But Consumer NZ says misleading specials are still costing shoppers tens of millions of dollars a year and has launched a petition calling for tougher penalties for breaches of the act. It provided examples of a number of ways that people could be caught out by misleading signage in supermarkets. Dodgy multibuy A dodgy multibuy refers to a situation where the individual price and the multibuy price don't add up to a saving. Consumer NZ pointed to this mince special where a tray of meat was $4 or people could buy three for $20. In another case, packaging seemed to be making a confusing difference. Two individual backs of Gingernuts were selling for $5 but the club price for a 500g twin-pack was $5.59. Different pricing Sometimes the price on the shelf tag does not match what you pay at checkout. In this case, supplied by Consumer, the price tag on the shelf said $27, but the customer paid more than $35 at the checkout. Confusing Sometimes it's just hard to work out what the price is. Consumer provided an example of double cream brie was "reduced" to $10.60 for a quick sale - or was it on sale for $9.80? Mismatches Sometimes it seems as though there are multiple labels for the same item. In this case, two signs had two different prices for a single avocado. "One said $1.69. The other said $1.99," Consumer NZ spokesperson Abby Damen said. "The customer was charged $1.99. She returned two days later to ask what could be done about the pricing error. She was offered a refund of the price difference but after pointing out the supermarket's new refund policy, she was refunded $2 and also kept her avocado." Chief executive at Consumer Jon Duffy said anyone who was charged more than the shelf price was entitled by law to a refund of the difference. He said both supermarket chains promised a full refund in that scenario, but consumers sometimes had to know that was what was available. A Foodstuffs spokesperson said with more than 14,000 products in a typical supermarket, and prices changing frequently due to supplier costs, promotions or new product liens, pricing was a complex job. "But for our customers, it's simple. They rightly expect the price on the shelf to match what they pay at the checkout," he said. "We take pricing accuracy as seriously as health and safety, aiming for zero errors. "Across our local, family-owned stores, we manage tens of thousands of price labels and process millions of transactions every week, and we've invested in better systems, daily checks and electronic shelf labels to help get it right. "If we do get it wrong, our policy is that the customer gets a refund and keeps the product. We've also strengthened staff training and store processes to make sure pricing is clear and accurate." Woolworths said it had more 3.5 million transactions in our stores each week "and sometimes errors do occur". "When they do, we try to make things right, through our long-standing and market-leading refund policy. Under that policy, if a customer is charged more than the advertised price for a product, they get a full refund and can keep the product." Duffy said Consumer had received 20 complaints about supermarket pricing since Tuesday. A normal rate would be two a day, he said.
Otago Daily Times
9 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Four common supermarket price errors to look out for
By Susan Edmunds of RNZ Consumer NZ says supermarkets are still making pricing errors, despite increasing pressure and scrutiny on them. Charges have been filed and a number of supermarkets have pleaded guilty to breaching the Fair Trading Act due to inaccurate pricing and misleading specials. But Consumer NZ says misleading specials are still costing shoppers tens of millions of dollars a year and has launched a petition calling for tougher penalties for breaches of the act. It provided examples of a number of ways that people could be caught out by misleading signage in supermarkets. Dodgy multibuy A dodgy multibuy refers to a situation where the individual price and the multibuy price don't add up to a saving. Consumer NZ pointed to this mince special where a tray of meat was $4 or people could buy three for $20. In another case, packaging seemed to be making a confusing difference. Two individual backs of Gingernuts were selling for $5 but the club price for a 500g twin-pack was $5.59. Different pricing Sometimes the price on the shelf tag does not match what you pay at checkout. In this case, supplied by Consumer, the price tag on the shelf said $27, but the customer paid more than $35 at the checkout. Confusing Sometimes it's just hard to work out what the price is. Consumer provided an example of double cream brie was "reduced" to $10.60 for a quick sale - or was it on sale for $9.80? Mismatches Sometimes it seems as though there are multiple labels for the same item. In this case, two signs had two different prices for a single avocado. "One said $1.69. The other said $1.99," Consumer NZ spokesperson Abby Damen said. "The customer was charged $1.99. She returned two days later to ask what could be done about the pricing error. She was offered a refund of the price difference but after pointing out the supermarket's new refund policy, she was refunded $2 and also kept her avocado." Chief executive at Consumer Jon Duffy said anyone who was charged more than the shelf price was entitled by law to a refund of the difference. He said both supermarket chains promised a full refund in that scenario, but consumers sometimes had to know that was what was available. A Foodstuffs spokesperson said with more than 14,000 products in a typical supermarket, and prices changing frequently due to supplier costs, promotions or new product liens, pricing was a complex job. "But for our customers, it's simple. They rightly expect the price on the shelf to match what they pay at the checkout," he said. "We take pricing accuracy as seriously as health and safety, aiming for zero errors. "Across our local, family-owned stores, we manage tens of thousands of price labels and process millions of transactions every week, and we've invested in better systems, daily checks and electronic shelf labels to help get it right. "If we do get it wrong, our policy is that the customer gets a refund and keeps the product. We've also strengthened staff training and store processes to make sure pricing is clear and accurate." Woolworths said it had more 3.5 million transactions in our stores each week "and sometimes errors do occur". "When they do, we try to make things right, through our long-standing and market-leading refund policy. Under that policy, if a customer is charged more than the advertised price for a product, they get a full refund and can keep the product." Duffy said Consumer had received 20 complaints about supermarket pricing since Tuesday. A normal rate would be two a day, he said.
