Australians Back Tax Reform Push: CGT, Negative Gearing, and Thresholds for Tax Cuts
February 16, 2026 — 6:00pm
A Resolve Political Monitor survey reveals Australians want Prime Minister Jim Chalmers to curb both the capital gains tax (CGT) concession and the benefits from negative gearing, while also trimming government spending—particularly by scaling back foreign aid—and delivering personal income tax relief.
The poll, conducted with 1,800 respondents from February 8–14, indicates strong support for using the May budget to prune expenditure. About two-thirds of participants favor spending reductions, with only 8% opposed.
Voters, however, want any savings to be returned to them as income tax relief, and they show a broad willingness to embrace meaningful tax reform—except for a proposed rise in the GST.
Chalmers has indicated the 2026-27 budget, which is expected to show a deficit of about $34.3 billion, will target inflation pressures, boost productivity, and refine elements of the tax system.
Overnight, the International Monetary Fund urged the government to pursue extensive tax reform, including a thorough overhaul of CGT, a reduction in the company tax rate, and an increase in the GST.
Half of those surveyed support income tax cuts, while 11% oppose them. Support is strongest among higher earners (58%), Coalition voters (55%), employed individuals (57%), and Labor supporters (51%).
With various options on the table to fund personal tax cuts, two-thirds favor spending reductions, 58% back higher taxes on banks, and 57% would raise taxes on mining companies.
Forty percent support trimming CGT concessions, 17% oppose, and 42% are undecided or neutral—leaving room for the case to be made to scale back the concession introduced in 1999.
The Liberal Party has signaled it will not back CGT changes, with new leader Angus Taylor pledging income tax reductions.
“We will present a robust, lower-tax package that must form the centerpiece of our next election platform,” Taylor told the Centre for Independent Studies.
There is stronger backing for curbing negative gearing on investment properties, with only 17% opposed to changes.
The only policy that most respondents oppose is a GST increase, with 54% rejecting it and 18% supporting it.
Chalmers stated the government does not back GST changes but did not rule out CGT reforms.
This masthead has previously reported that discussions about reducing CGT concessions are part of a broader tax reform plan, potentially alongside further personal income tax cuts.
The Treasurer stressed that the government already has an ambitious tax agenda, including planned income tax cuts, an enhanced standard deduction, and an expanded low-income superannuation tax offset, set to begin July 1.
Nearly half of all respondents think the focus should be on spending reductions to improve the budget balance. Last year that share was around 41%.
According to Resolve, 53% support cutting foreign aid to help fund reforms, with support strongest among One Nation voters (76%), and still substantial among Coalition (54%) and Labor supporters (49%).
In the current financial year, the government is projected to spend about $4.2 billion on foreign aid, within a broader $785 billion budget.
Foreign aid is the only option that garnered majority support from respondents.
There is notable backing for trimming some renewable energy programs, with 29% in favor. Support is highest among One Nation voters (49%) and low among Greens supporters (13%).
About 20% of voters support reducing unemployment benefits, which would affect federal funding of more than $17 billion this year. The current Newstart payment remains near $400 per week, versus about $540 for the age pension.
Yet support for cutting the largest budget items remains tepid. Only 5% back cuts to the age pension, and just 16% favor reductions in state aid—the federal government’s biggest expense.
What this means for the policy debate: a clear appetite for tax relief linked to restraint in spending, with spending cuts prioritized as a funding path and tax reform framed as a broader, potentially transformative program. The debate, however, is far from settled: can a balanced approach that trims CGT concessions and negative gearing while avoiding a GST hike win broad political and public support?
Would you like to see the tax reform package include specific timelines and protections for lower- and middle-income households, or should reform focus more aggressively on higher earners and corporate taxes? Share your take in the comments.
