Guardian Australia writers from different generations reflect on the 2026 federal budget, which overhauls capital gains tax and negative gearing to promote 'intergenerational fairness'. The budget, sold by Treasurer Jim Chalmers as a historic shift, aims to rebalance the property market away from investors. Four staff members—Ima Caldwell (Gen Z), Molly Glassey (millennial), Jonathan Barrett (Gen X), and Susan McDonald (boomer)—assess what it means for their age groups.
Gen Z: Not Off the Treadmill Yet
Ima Caldwell, a Gen Z writer born in Y2K, notes that while the budget addresses 'intergenerational equity', many young Australians remain locked out of housing. Reforms to negative gearing and capital gains tax are intended to help first home buyers, with the government estimating 75,000 will be supported over the next decade. A $59.4 million investment for social housing for 16-to-24-year-olds at risk of homelessness offers some hope. However, Caldwell remains skeptical: 'It’s unclear whether young renters will eventually benefit. No change will be quick enough to remedy unaffordable rental increases.' She highlights the burden of HECS debt and out-of-pocket healthcare costs, concluding: 'A lot of Gen Z is on a treadmill, funnelling wages into rent and bills. Intergenerational fairness still seems a long way off.'
Millennials: Young Parents Can’t Catch a Break
Molly Glassey, a millennial mother of two with a mortgage, asks: 'Where is the relief for my family?' She notes the budget offers little cost-of-living relief, though changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax may help first home buyers. An extra $2 billion for housing infrastructure aims to deliver 65,000 new homes over a decade. However, Glassey laments: 'What’s in this for me and my kids? Not a whole lot unless I have another child.' Paid parental leave will increase to six months from July, and a $10 billion fuel security package may reduce costs for her partner. Yet childcare was not mentioned in the treasurer’s speech, despite the prime minister's earlier promise of universal childcare. 'The costs of childcare, doctor’s appointments, and groceries were barely mentioned,' she says, adding that millennial parents are too busy to lobby for change.
Gen X: A Late Shot at Home Ownership
Jonathan Barrett, representing Gen X, describes his cohort as the 'sandwich generation', caring for both ageing parents and children. The budget is light on immediate cost-of-living relief but heavy on reform, with additional healthcare spending welcomed. Barrett supports the property tax changes, which end negative gearing for most future investors and reduce capital gains discounts. 'These reforms are a societal good,' he says, noting that tax benefits have been concentrated among high earners. The changes might prevent some Gen Xers from becoming landlords but could help others buy their forever home. Barrett uses the pandemic analogy of being in the same storm but on different boats: 'Boomers have cruise ships, younger generations have dinghies. Gen X has an old fishing trawler—not luxurious but better than a rubber ducky.'
Boomers: We Also Have Children and Parents
Susan McDonald, a baby boomer, acknowledges the cohort’s disproportionate wealth and accepts trade-offs for intergenerational equity. The winding back of the capital gains tax discount and negative gearing, along with a crackdown on family trusts, pass the 'pub test' even among boomers. 'I want my twentysomething children to be able to buy a home,' she says. However, she worries that reducing the private insurance rebate for over-65s may push seniors to public hospitals. On the spending side, extra funds for public hospitals, urgent care clinics, new medicines, and aged care are welcome. McDonald is disappointed by the lack of clean energy investment: 'The global fuel crisis seems the perfect time to turbocharge the shift away from fossil fuels. A gas windfall profits tax could fund renewables. Future Australians would have thanked us—intergenerational equity, anyone?'
