Wednesday 13 May 2026

Transcript - Interview ABC Radio Melbourne, Mornings

Topics: Federal budget

E&OE...

Raf Epstein: Tim Wilson is the Shadow Treasurer, he is part of Angus Taylor’s federal opposition, and of course the Liberal Member for the seat of Goldstein here in Melbourne. Tim Wilson, good morning.

Tim Wilson: Good morning, Raf.

Raf Epstein: Are you really going to go to the next election promising a bigger tax break for property investors?

Tim Wilson: We're absolutely going to go to the next election with our own economic program focused on how we're going to build out the pathway for growth and opportunity, not what is in this bad-faith budget, which is not just broken promises, but it's actually lower living standards, higher taxes, and building fewer homes. Their own budget documents say as a consequence of these tax changes, 35,000 fewer homes will be built.

Raf Epstein: I'll come to that number in a moment, Tim Wilson. I can hear from you and I've heard from you, you don't like the changes to capital gains and negative gearing. Will you unwind them if you win?

Tim Wilson: Well, we've said we'll fight them every step of the way and if necessary repeal them, but we will always do things as part of our vision about what we want to build. And it is going to be about how to build a future economy based on growth and opportunity so young Australians look to the horizon. At the moment, this budget is just about sowing division and decline.

Raf Epstein: So you would be going to the election promising to increase tax breaks for property investors. Can you win an election if you do that?

Tim Wilson: Well, we'll be focused on making sure there's housing supply. Remember, the government's own budget documents say two things: that there'll be fewer houses built and rents will increase on young Australians. We don't want rent increases on young Australians. And I find it just absurd that the government is pitching this budget as being in favor of young people. They're going to increase rent, they're then going to tax their invested deposits—first-home deposits—further, and then they're going to build fewer homes. They are literally going to kneecap young Australians on the journey.

Raf Epstein: Let's see if we get to your point about people investing for a deposit. But just to address a few of your claims there, the budget does say 35,000 fewer homes built, but that's not all the budget says. The budget says actually over time there'll be 35,000 more homes built. 35,000 coming off because of the tax changes and an extra 70,000 coming on because of other parts of the budget. That's misleading, isn't it, if you say the budget has a 35,000 reduction? That is not what the budget says. The budget's net figure is an increase in housing, not a decrease. Aren't you being misleading?

Tim Wilson: No, not at all. I'm literally quoting what was in the budget papers because the budget papers explicitly talk about the number of houses that are going to be built and it says as a consequence of these tax changes there will be a decline.

Raf Epstein: But that's not all the government's doing, right? The government's doing other stuff. Net gain, not net loss.

Tim Wilson: Well, they're claiming these things but we are completely unconvinced. What we know is the more you tax something, the less likely it is to come to effect. That's what taxes are designed to do.

Raf Epstein: Can I come back to the numbers? You accept their negative number, right? You're basing your claim on a number that's in the government's budget. So you accept the little bit of bad news, but you don't accept the much bigger bit of good news. That's entirely inconsistent, isn't it, to accept one number in the budget and not another?

Tim Wilson: That's cute, Raf. We're going off their budget numbers which accept there are going to be fewer homes built and that there is going to be an increase in rents. That's what the documents show. They then make up boasts about the number of people who are going to be in a position to buy their own home, but they actually don't provide any modelling or basis for that. And in addition to it, we know that if you increase the price of rents, which people tend to rent before they buy their first home if they're not living at home, then they're going to increase the tax on first-home deposits if they're invested, and you're going to build fewer homes, you're going to end up in a situation which kneecaps young Australians.

Raf Epstein: 1300 222 774. Tim Wilson is the Shadow Treasurer. I'll get onto other things about credibility. Tim Wilson, I just want you to explain something because I've heard you say it a few times—I'm not sure people have heard your argument. You keep on saying they're taxing people's deposits. Why do you say the government's doing that?

Tim Wilson: Well, if first-home buyers invest their deposits to try and increase the size, like everyone else, to try and bring the future forward, they're going to be hit by a higher capital gains tax as a consequence of this budget. If you go and look at what young Australians are saying very clearly, for those who are saving and investing so that they can get themselves into to buy their first home, they're the ones saying that as well and have suddenly awakened to the fact that the government is targeting any investment because there was this assumption in the lead-up to this budget by lots of Australians that it was just going to hit property, particularly on their capital gains tax changes. Australians have woken to the reality that it's targeted at shares, and when a lot of young Australians invest in shares, invest in ETFs while they're saving to be able to buy their first home, they're just as much going to be targeted.

Raf Epstein: I wonder if you think the Coalition have got any credibility yet when it comes to promises. One of the things you pride yourself on the most is economic management. The Coalition promised to cut the debt—the "debt and deficit disaster" from Tony Abbott—again and again we heard that. You promised to cut the debt and deliver a surplus. You never delivered a surplus and you doubled the debt. So as for core business, that's pretty big for the Coalition. If you promised to cut the debt and you doubled it, have you got much credibility yet when it comes to making promises?

Tim Wilson: You may remember this thing called COVID, Raf.

Raf Epstein: No, Tim Wilson, you doubled the debt before COVID. Before COVID.

Tim Wilson: We made constant attempts to try and reduce the public debt and the Commonwealth debt and Labor blocked us every step of the way, and of course COVID had an impact.

Raf Epstein: You're now telling me governments can blame oppositions for not delivering their promises?

Tim Wilson: Well, if they vote against it in the Senate, that's absolutely part of the challenge.

Raf Epstein: So you can get into government but you're powerless.

Tim Wilson: No, I will absolutely be fighting every minute of every hour of every day to build an economy that creates jobs and economic opportunity for the next generation of Australians, but we also respect democracy. And unfortunately, when Labor gets in—look at what they're doing with the NDIS now. Most of the changes the Labor government is now trying to ensure were the things they blocked us doing.

Raf Epstein: I didn't ask you about the NDIS. I asked you about your credibility.

Tim Wilson: Exactly. And most of the changes the government is now saying we should do on the NDIS were things they blocked us doing. Imagine how much less corruption, less fraud there would be if the government then in opposition had simply supported us in trying to rein back the corruption and fraud in the NDIS. And that is part of the bigger story. Now we know the government's projecting debt to forecast out to one and a quarter trillion dollars, and that is tomorrow's taxes on young Australians as well.

Raf Epstein: Just to return to the guess the central policy offering from you. You don't like the changes on negative gearing and capital gains. Are you essentially saying to young Australians, "Look, house prices are just going to keep on—they're shooting up—the only all we can do to help you is invest in the share market and hope you can catch up to the housing market"? Is that what you're offering?

Tim Wilson: Resolutely not. Firstly, our objective is to build more homes—the government's budget says they won't. We don't want to increase rents. But in addition to that, the government's own budget documents say they're going to overshoot migration numbers again by 90,000 over the next two years. So they're reducing the volume of supply, they're increasing demand. Our focus will be how we back young Australians to get ahead, and tomorrow night you'll hear parts of that in the Leader of the Opposition's budget reply.

Raf Epstein: Every election review says you guys shouldn't target migrants. In that—just now you're talking about migration being the problem. Don't you keep repeating the same mistake?

Tim Wilson: I think it's very clear that when you've got the government overshooting their own targets by 90,000 people—that's what the numbers show; it's not my budget, it's their budget—that will increase demand. To engage in a form of denial about that reality, which even the government accepts now they're overshooting, says something really challenging about whether we're building the housing stock that we need to support people to integrate successfully. And if we don't, then of course prices will rise on young Australians. That's why when the government's own budget documents say they'll reduce the volume of supply of housing by 35,000, but they'll increase the number of people demanding housing, anyone who's thought about it for a few minutes will know that that will only lead to undermining young Australians' chance to be able to buy their own home.

Raf Epstein: I think that argument's going to appeal to some people. My question was more around—you have been told, I think, at the last two elections, don't talk about migrants being the problem. That stops you winning government.

Tim Wilson: I'm talking about the government being the problem. The government is the one who decides the levers of these measures and, more importantly, the practical effect. They're the ones who've acknowledged their tax changes will lead to fewer houses and their migration policy setting is not even that they're seeking to get that many more, it's that they're simply going to achieve more than that number of their own targets. So they're the ones whose numbers I'm quoting back and it will drive an impact on prices.

Raf Epstein: I appreciate you joining us the day after the budget. I know it's a busy day. Thanks so much.

Tim Wilson: Thanks.

[ENDS]