News · 10 July 2026 · 4 min read
2026 federal budget: why renters got nothing and owners kept more
The 2026 federal budget was sold as housing reform, but the numbers tell a different story: existing owners were protected, rents stayed high and supply stayed tight.
▶ Watch the full video on YouTube: 58% Own Property — The Budget Kept Renters Waiting
The 2026 federal budget was sold as housing reform. But when you strip away the politics and look at the numbers, the outcome is much simpler: existing owners kept their position, while renters saw no meaningful relief.
This matters because housing policy is never just about headlines. It changes incentives, and incentives decide who can compete for property, who can borrow, and who gets squeezed by rent and supply.
58% of federal parliament owns multiple properties
One number the press conference did not mention: 58% of federal parliament — 130 of 226 MPs and senators — have disclosed multiple properties, investment properties, or both.
That does not prove every decision was made in self-interest. It does, however, explain why the policy package feels designed to protect incumbents. When a majority of the room owns the asset class, the political incentive is a soft landing, not a reset.
The SMSF borrowing ban hit residential only
One of the loudest changes was the June 23 move banning self-managed super funds from borrowing to buy residential property.
That sounds tough on investors until you look at the detail:
- The ban applies to residential property only
- Commercial property borrowing inside SMSFs is untouched
- That means an SMSF can no longer borrow to buy a $600,000 rental house
- But it can still borrow to buy an office, warehouse or business premises
This is not prudential reform. Even the SMSF Association said these loans were never a systemic risk. It was a bargaining chip.
Rents kept rising after the budget
Ripehouse Advisory’s own rent database tracks the median advertised house rent across roughly 6,000 suburbs every month for four and a half years.
The result is blunt:
- Late 2021: $578 a week
- Today: $751 a week
- Increase: 30%
That is about $9,000 a year after tax out of renters’ pockets.
And after the budget? The data did not budge:
- May: $751
- June: $751
If the budget was designed to help renters, the rent data has not noticed.
Vacancy remains too tight for relief
A balanced rental market sits at around 3% vacancy.
Australia has spent the last year between 1.9% and 2.4% on Ripehouse Advisory’s measure, which is deliberately generous. Cotality puts it at 1.5%.
That matters because nothing in the budget adds a single rental property to the pool this year. In practice, grandfathering negative gearing on existing homes rewards investors for sitting tight, not expanding supply.
The housing target is still running behind
The government’s Housing Accord promised 1.2 million homes in five years, or 240,000 a year.
But the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council’s March report showed:
- 219,000 homes completed in the first five quarters
- A run rate of about 175,000 a year
- That is 73% of the required pace
- Completions are down 2% over the past year
Its own forecast now says the target lands in mid 2030. Tasmania is projected to hit it in 2033, and the Northern Territory sometime after 2034.
The budget re-announced the same target anyway.
Prices did not fall
Ripehouse Advisory tracked over 4,500 individual settled sales across 150 investment-grade suburbs.
The median settled price barely moved:
- March: $818,000
- April: $815,000
- May: $796,000
- June: $795,000
That is flat at roughly $800,000 straight through a budget and a rate hike.
Nationally, Cotality has values up 8.8% year on year.
So no, the budget did not make homes cheaper. It changed who is allowed to compete for them.
The real winner is the person who already owns
Follow the incentives.
Who benefits from a budget that:
- grandfathers existing negative gearing arrangements
- keeps the commercial borrowing door open
- does not dent prices
- leaves rents at record highs
The answer is obvious: people who already own property.
Guardian Australia’s analysis of the parliamentary register adds to the picture: 124 members of federal parliament, or 55%, declared multiple properties; at least 91 disclosed investment or rental properties; and at least 50 collect rental income as landlords.
That is all legal and declared. But it helps explain why the policy outcome looks the way it does.
The Ripehouse Advisory take
If you rent, stop waiting for a policy rescue. The supply maths points to tight markets for years, and the only lever you control is where you rent and what you are building towards.
If you are buying a home, flat medians in quality markets plus a grandfathering deadline mean the competition is not going away. Buy on data, not on headlines promising a crash.
And if you invest, structure matters more than ever. Existing stock is grandfathered, new builds get the tax break, and the SMSF residential borrowing door is closed. That changes strategy, but it does not change the fact that property remains a sound asset class when you buy the right one.
At Ripehouse Advisory, we do not read housing policy like a press release. We read it through vacancy, yield, growth, search demand, employment, projects and suburb-level data.
If you want to know which markets can still cope with tight vacancy, high rents and budget tweaks, the Ripehouse Advisory webinar breaks down the data signals to watch before you rent, buy or invest.
Frequently asked questions
Did the 2026 federal budget actually help renters in Australia?
According to the article, no meaningful relief flowed to renters. Rents stayed at record highs after the budget, and vacancy remained too tight to create real bargaining power for tenants.
Why does the article say existing property owners were protected by the budget?
The article says the budget grandfathered existing negative gearing arrangements and did not reduce prices. That means people who already own property kept their advantages, while the policy did not reset the market.
What changed for SMSFs buying property under the 2026 budget?
The article says self-managed super funds were banned from borrowing to buy residential property, but commercial property borrowing inside SMSFs was left untouched. So the change affects residential property only.
Why are rents still so high if the budget was meant to address housing?
The article points to tight supply, with vacancy still around 1.5% to 2.4% rather than a balanced 3%. It also says the budget did not add a single rental property to the pool this year.
Is the federal housing target on track after the budget?
No. The article says the Housing Accord target of 1.2 million homes in five years is running behind pace, with completions tracking at about 175,000 a year rather than 240,000. The council’s forecast now pushes the target into mid 2030.
General information only. It does not take your objectives, financial situation or needs into account, and nothing here is legal, financial, taxation or investment advice specific to your circumstances.
