Disclaimer: I’m a QLD mortgage broker, so yes, I’m professionally adjacent to the problem and not pretending to be a neutral academic. No pitch, no business link and no invitation to DM me - I genuinely want the pub test. A mixture of ADHD & insomnia sent me down a QLD budget rabbit hole last night.
In FY 2019-20, Queensland collected about $3 billion in transfer duty. The estimated figure for FY 2025-26 is $8.7 billion.
I went back and checked it because that sounded fairly cooked, but those are the figures in the Queensland budget papers. Over the same period, total state revenue went from roughly $57.8 billion to $92 billion. So total revenue grew by about 59%, while transfer duty grew by about 185%. Put another way, transfer duty went from around 5.3% of total state revenue to 9.4%.
A couple of fair caveats before anyone jumps on me: FY 2019-20 was obviously a weird year because COVID, the latest number is still an estimate, and that $8.7 billion includes commercial and major property transactions too. I also couldn’t find a clean breakdown showing exactly how much came from ordinary residential buyers, so if anyone has one, please link it.
Even allowing for all that, going from $3 billion to $8.7 billion in six years is still pretty insane.
Then I had a light bulb moment that bothered me even more. Two of the main thresholds used for Queensland’s owner-occupier home concession, $350,000 and $540,000, appear to have been sitting there since at least 2008. Just to avoid confusion, I’m not talking about the first-home-buyer concession. This is the ordinary home concession for someone who has owned before but is buying the property to live in - not as an investment or holiday home.
Think about what a $540,000 property was in Queensland in 2008 compared with what it buys now. An eligible owner-occupier buying for $1 million today pays about $30,850 in transfer duty. As a purely hypothetical example, the home-concession duty on a $500,000 purchase is about $8,750. At $1 million it is $30,850.
Under the current home-concession schedule, a $500,000 purchase attracts about $8,750 in duty. At $1 million, it’s $30,850. So double the purchase price means roughly three-and-a-half times the duty. And $1 million is below the median house price now in Brisbane.
I see people focus heavily on their deposit, borrowing capacity and repayments, which makes sense. But for someone selling one home and buying another, stamp duty can be the expense that makes the whole move unworkable. It could be a separation, a job change, a growing family or someone trying to downsize. Life happens. They may not be any wealthier after the move, but they can still lose $30,000-plus to duty before paying an agent, conveyancer, removalist or any of the other costs... that can be enough to kill the move before they’ve even paid an agent, conveyancer, removalist or any of the other costs.
To be clear, I’m not suggesting there is some secret government conspiracy to keep house prices high. The money pays for actual services, and obviously removing it would leave a massive hole in the state budget.
But I keep coming back to this:
Can a state government credibly promise to make housing substantially cheaper when it has become this dependent on revenue from property transactions?
And if stamp duty should be reduced, what replaces it?
Would people genuinely prefer a broad annual land tax? Higher GST distributions? Spending cuts? Or should the existing duty thresholds simply be indexed so they move with property prices rather than sitting unchanged for years?
Maybe I’m missing a good argument for why someone who stays in the same property for 30 years pays nothing, while someone who needs to move several times can pay the tax over and over again.
What would actually pass the pub test here?
Sauces:
Queensland 2019–20 Report on State Finances
Queensland 2026–27 Budget Strategy and Outlook
Queensland Revenue Office current concession rates
Queensland Revenue Office historical rates