Negative Gearing

Negative gearing is a form of leveraged speculation in which a speculator borrows money to buy an asset, but the income generated by that asset does not cover the interest on the loan (Interest > Income). In a few countries the strategy is motivated by taxation systems which allow deduction of ongoing speculative losses against highly taxed income, but tax capital gains at a much lower rate. When income generated does cover the interest it is simply geared investment which creates a source of passive income.

A negative gearing strategy can only make a profit if the asset rises so much in price that the capital gain is more than the sum of the ongoing losses over the life of the speculation. The speculator must also be able to fund the planned shortfall until the asset is sold. The different tax treatment of planned ongoing losses and possible future capital gains affects the investor's final return. This leads to a situation in the countries which tax capital gains at a lower rate than income. In those countries it is possible for a speculator to make a loss overall before taxation, but a small gain after taxpayer subsidies.

Deduction of negative gearing losses on property against income from other sources for the purpose of reducing income tax is illegal in the vast majority of countries, the exceptions being Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

Famous quotes containing the words negative and/or gearing:

    The idealist’s programme of political or economic reform may be impracticable, absurd, demonstrably ridiculous; but it can never be successfully opposed merely by pointing out that this is the case. A negative opposition cannot be wholly effectual: there must be a competing idealism; something must be offered that is not only less objectionable but more desirable.
    Charles Horton Cooley (1864–1929)

    There’s no telling what might have happened to our defense budget if Saddam Hussein hadn’t invaded Kuwait that August and set everyone gearing up for World War IIĀ½. Can we count on Saddam Hussein to come along every year and resolve our defense-policy debates? Given the history of the Middle East, it’s possible.
    —P.J. (Patrick Jake)