The Qantas board looks set to be spared a humiliating spill motion at the airline’s upcoming AGM, after an influential proxy advisory firm recommended shareholders vote in favour of the executive remuneration report.
Last year the remuneration report was voted down by a resounding 82.9 per cent of shareholders, angered by large salaries and bonuses for executives who oversaw the trashing of the Qantas brand.
The result prompted a review of corporate governance at Qantas, and led to the decision to deny former CEO Alan Joyce $9.26m in bonuses, and slash other executives’ short term bonuses by a third.
Rene Rivkin was found guilty of insider trading over the purchase and sale of Qantas shares across consecutive months in 2001 for a profit of just c.$2,665 for which he was fined $30,000 and did gaol time. Makes one wonder.Thanks @cove
Story in today's Oz
Qantas AGM shaping up to be less fiery affair after support from influential proxy advisory firm
A bit of it
Ah rubbing shoulders with the well healed of the terror fraternity. Not so many now of-course.Mrscove is the real Qantas shareholder even though the shares are jointly owned. She got them for us in the float all those years ago.
We now don’t fly with QF internationally because they are not good enough. It may change but Qatar is coming.
Chicken feed even then and I look at the more substantial trades in more recent times. Not asking for comments as any allegations could be misguided.Great memory @prozac. I do wonder who got Rene’s worry beads.
Insider trading is still a crime but very few have ended up in prison.
I do hope you are enjoying the stock markets going up and down.
Sydney and Melbourne are not the centre of the universe. Plenty more to be had in Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth. I wouldn't like to give a view on Darwin though.Actually both Sydney and Melbourne real estate auction results seem to be tanking. Buyers are maxed out it seems. Saw clearance rates below 60%.
I know people who’ve been waiting 30 years for the big Sydney market correction. It didn’t come and unlikely to. The family home averages 5.4% growth pa (CGT free).Actually both Sydney and Melbourne real estate auction results seem to be tanking. Buyers are maxed out it seems. Saw clearance rates below 60%.
At a risk of derailing the thread, I feel you are conflating two different issues (the housing shortage and the tax incentives).I know people who’ve been waiting 30 years for the big Sydney market correction. It didn’t come and unlikely to. The family home averages 5.4% growth pa (CGT free).
This article (slightly dated) gives the gist of things and the sage advice - time in market, not timing the market is better in the long run.
Interesting, some of the other cities with really big spikes might be more problematic in the short term.
Meanwhile back in SYD, the real issue for the so called “housing crisis” is lack of new dwellings for the ever increasing population. All this silly, ill informed talk about “negative gearing” and CGT just stifles investment and new developments. Supply and demand (one tanking and the other on the way up) just means more and more are priced out of the market.
Talk of abolishing CGT and is so much bunkum. It won't happen and there is no intention to remove them. It is a dummy pass, a feint, a distraction, a red herring designed to take attention away from the privacy reform bill parliamentary discussion. Look over there!I know people who’ve been waiting 30 years for the big Sydney market correction. It didn’t come and unlikely to. The family home averages 5.4% growth pa (CGT free).
This article (slightly dated) gives the gist of things and the sage advice - time in market, not timing the market is better in the long run.
Interesting, some of the other cities with really big spikes might be more problematic in the short term.
Meanwhile back in SYD, the real issue for the so called “housing crisis” is lack of new dwellings for the ever increasing population. All this silly, ill informed talk about “negative gearing” and CGT just stifles investment and new developments. Supply and demand (one tanking and the other on the way up) just means more and more are priced out of the market.
No, not really. Renters are also feeling the pinch and from the perspective of broader investment portfolios, the uncertainty around tax treatment is holding back investors from new property developments.At a risk of derailing the thread, I feel you are conflating two different issues (the housing shortage and the tax incentives).
Yep. Although, it is horribly out of kilter at the moment.Sydney houses will always rise in value as its a world class city in an amazing country and there will be never be enough houses built to make a glut.
Interest only loans are actually harder to come by now. For my two properties, I was unable to renew on IO basis several years ago. Going P&I actually increases the tax deduction (negative gearing) while paying down the principle and increasing net equity.As such housing is very likely to be a winning investment. Negative gearing increases the available capital for investors (especially as the ATO allows negative-gearers to run an "unprofitable" business for decades using interest-only loans). The CGT discount magnifies those gains (accepting that PPOR is exempt).
Slightly ironically, if CGT was removed entirely, there would be greater turnover of property because a lot of peeps hang on because they don’t want to pay tax on the sale (same applies for shares and other investments). That’s just how we are.As such, a higher proportion of established properties end up being owned by investors rather than owner-occupiers. One must accept if an investor sells if it becomes less tax-advantageous, that leaves a property for someone to buy as their own home.
As above, what incentive is there for a developer if they can’t be certain they sell sufficient units of the plan?The idea of encouraging development by restricting NG and/or a high CGT-discount to new developments seems sensible to me as new houses are what is needed. The Australian voters seemed to disagree when it was offered to them however. There are other models that could tilt things towards home owners
When you buy off the plan, the CGT clock starts ticking at contract signing so, invariably, 12 months have passed before the sale even completes. This means that the owner could sell one day after completion and still take advantage of the 50% reduction for CGT.Slightly ironically, if CGT was removed entirely, there would be greater turnover of property because a lot of peeps hang on because they don’t want to pay tax on the sale (same applies for shares and other investments). That’s just how we are.