Let the current rules settle and prove themselves
As New Zealand's election approaches, the housing debate risks becoming a stage for bold promises rather than considered stewardship. Mortgage advisers Hamish Patel and Vijay Gounder are offering a quieter counsel: that markets, like people, need periods of stillness to find their footing. After years of policy turbulence that has left borrowers, developers, and investors navigating an ever-shifting landscape, the most meaningful reform the next government could offer may be the discipline to hold course.
- Years of lurching policy changes — from planning rules to tax settings — have created a fog of uncertainty that drives up costs for developers and ultimately prices out the first-home buyers the policies were meant to help.
- The bright-line test and interest deductibility rules have been adjusted so repeatedly that investors and everyday buyers alike have struggled to plan with any confidence, risking a return of short-term speculators if settings shift again.
- Targeted interventions — reviewing Kāinga Ora income caps and reinstating First Home Grants — are being proposed as surgical fixes that could open doors for locked-out buyers without rattling the broader market.
- The financial advice sector itself has been caught in the same regulatory churn, with advisers spending more time reviewing compliance processes than actually guiding clients toward homeownership.
- Open banking reforms remain an underutilised opportunity: instant, consent-based access to client financial data could eliminate weeks of manual document chasing and redirect adviser energy toward strategy and advocacy.
As New Zealand's election campaign intensifies, housing affordability is set to dominate political debate — and with it, the temptation to announce sweeping new reforms. Mortgage advisers Hamish Patel of MortgagesOnline.co.nz and Vijay Gounder of Loan Market Remuera are urging a different instinct: restraint.
Both advisers have watched years of policy churn create whiplash across the market. Planning reforms have genuinely worked — unlocking housing supply in major cities and moderating price growth — but that progress erodes when the rules keep shifting. Developers need certainty to manage infrastructure costs, and when they can't find it, first-home buyers ultimately pay the price. On tax settings, Gounder warns that adjusting the bright-line test or interest deductibility rules again could invite short-term speculators back into the market before genuine long-term buyers have established themselves. The current settings, he argues, are finally delivering the predictability the market has long needed.
Stability, however, does not mean standing still. Both advisers see room for careful, targeted support. Gounder points to the Kāinga Ora First Home Loan scheme, where bank equity requirements often exceed the scheme's stated 10 percent deposit threshold, squeezing household budgets. Reviewing the income caps attached to these loans could open pathways for people currently locked out. Reinstating First Home Grants — scrapped in the name of fiscal restraint — would help aspiring buyers bridge the deposit gap, with broader economic benefits that the savings argument tends to overlook.
The financial advice sector has been caught in its own cycle of regulatory change. Patel acknowledges that recent reforms have raised professional standards, but the constant fine-tuning pulls advisers away from clients and into compliance reviews. A pause — time for current regulations to prove themselves — would be welcome. He also notes that many first-home buyers don't realise they can access professional guidance at no cost, and that better promotion of resources like Financial Advice New Zealand's online directory could be quietly transformative.
Technology offers further opportunity. Open banking reforms could allow advisers to access verified client financial data instantly with consent, eliminating weeks of manual document chasing. But Gounder cautions that the system must be designed with advisers in mind — as a tool to enhance their work, not circumvent it. What both advisers ultimately describe is a housing policy vision built on consistency rather than drama: let the goalposts settle, make the system easier to navigate, and trust that stability itself is a form of progress.
As New Zealand's election campaign heats up, housing affordability will inevitably dominate the political conversation. But mortgage advisers are pushing back against the instinct to announce sweeping new reforms. What the market needs most, they argue, is something far simpler: the chance to breathe.
Hamish Patel, who runs MortgagesOnline.co.nz, and Vijay Gounder, a mortgage adviser at Loan Market Remuera, have watched years of policy churn create whiplash for borrowers, lenders, and developers. Planning reforms have actually worked—they've unlocked new housing supply in major cities and helped keep prices from climbing as steeply as they might have. But that progress gets undermined when the rules keep shifting. Patel points out that developers need certainty to plan infrastructure and manage costs. When policy changes constantly, those costs climb, and first-home buyers end up paying the price. "Fewer planning rule changes and more certainty about what's actually possible would make a real difference," he says.
The same logic applies to tax settings. Gounder has watched the bright-line test and interest deductibility rules get adjusted repeatedly over recent years, creating a fog of uncertainty for investors and everyday buyers alike. The current settings, he argues, are finally providing some predictability. Rolling them back now would likely do more harm than good—it could invite short-term speculators back into the market before genuine long-term buyers have a fair chance to establish themselves. "What the housing market needs right now isn't another massive policy shake-up," Gounder says. "Leaving the current tax and investment settings alone will give the market the stability it desperately needs."
But stability doesn't mean inaction. Both advisers see room for targeted, surgical interventions that could genuinely help first-home buyers without destabilizing the broader market. Gounder points to the Kāinga Ora First Home Loan scheme, where tight equity margins set by banks create immense pressure on household budgets. The scheme technically allows loans with as little as a 10 percent deposit, but banks often require more. A review of the income caps attached to these loans could open doors for people who are currently locked out. He also argues for reinstating First Home Grants, which were fundamental in helping people bridge the deposit gap. The counter-argument—that government spending needs to fall—misses the broader economic benefits of homeownership itself.
The financial advice sector, too, has been caught in a cycle of regulatory change. Patel acknowledges that much of the recent reform has genuinely improved professional standards. But the constant fine-tuning creates its own kind of uncertainty. Advisers spend time reviewing processes and delivery methods instead of actually helping people. A pause—a chance for current regulations to prove themselves—would be welcome. "The biggest thing the government could do for financial advice right now is ease off a little," Patel says.
One of the simplest opportunities to help first-home buyers remains almost entirely overlooked: professional advice. Many consumers don't realize they can access guidance from a financial adviser at no cost. Patel believes better promotion of resources like Financial Advice New Zealand's online directory could help more people understand their options before they start house hunting. These are advisers committed to higher professional standards, and pointing more first-home buyers toward them could be transformative.
Technology offers another avenue. Open banking reforms could streamline the entire process—advisers could access a client's loan details instantly with consent, rather than waiting days for signed authority forms to make their way through lenders. But Patel is seeing reluctance from some suppliers to fully embrace the spirit of what open banking is meant to achieve. Gounder goes further: open banking needs to be designed with advisers in mind, not as a tool to bypass them. "If we can pull a client's verified financial data instantly with their consent, it eliminates the weeks of manual document chasing that bog down our pipelines," he says. That frees advisers to focus on strategy and advocacy rather than data entry.
What emerges from both advisers is a vision of housing policy that prioritizes consistency over drama. The settings currently in place are finally providing predictability after years of chaos. Rather than another round of reforms, the next government should focus on making the system easier to navigate, more consistent to operate within, and better equipped to help New Zealanders achieve sustainable home ownership. The goalposts have moved enough. Let them settle.
Citações Notáveis
Fewer planning rule changes and more certainty about what's actually possible would make a real difference.— Hamish Patel, MortgagesOnline.co.nz
What the housing market needs right now isn't another massive policy shake-up. Leaving the current tax and investment settings alone will give the market the stability it desperately needs.— Vijay Gounder, Loan Market Remuera
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why do advisers keep saying they want stability? Isn't that just code for "leave things as they are"?
Not quite. They're saying the constant changes themselves are the problem. When you adjust the bright-line test one year, then interest deductibility the next, then planning rules the year after, nobody can plan. Developers can't budget. Investors can't think long-term. Buyers can't figure out what's actually possible. The reforms themselves—the planning changes, the tax adjustments—some of those have actually worked. But the whiplash is the real damage.
So they're not against reform in principle?
No. Both Patel and Gounder actually point to specific things they'd like to see change. Review the income caps on first-home loans. Bring back the First Home Grants. Speed up open banking so advisers can access client data instantly instead of waiting days. These are targeted moves, not sweeping overhauls.
Why does open banking matter so much to them?
Right now, getting a client's loan details from a bank takes days. You send forms, they get signed, they come back. When interest rates are moving, that delay costs people money and opportunity. Open banking—with the client's consent—would let advisers pull that data instantly. It's not about cutting banks out. It's about removing friction so advisers can actually do their job instead of chasing paperwork.
And the regulatory side? They mention that too.
The financial advice sector has been reformed quite a bit in recent years, and much of it's been good—it's raised professional standards. But it keeps coming. New requirements, new fine-tuning, new compliance layers. Advisers spend time reviewing their processes instead of helping people. Patel's point is simple: let the current rules settle. Prove themselves. Then decide what's next.
What's the biggest thing they think would actually move the needle for first-home buyers?
Probably just awareness. Most people don't know they can get free advice from a mortgage adviser. If the government promoted that more—pointed people toward professional advisers before they started house hunting—it could change outcomes. But that requires consistency too. If the rules keep changing, advisers can't give confident guidance.