It's nurses, teachers and clerical staff, not billionaires, who use negative gearing, says The Property Council of Australia. In refuting claims that average Australian workers are not the main beneficiaries of negative gearing, the PCA cites the latest available data from the Australian Taxation Office which shows that some of Australia’s most valued, but lower paid workers are the primary beneficiaries of negative gearing.

In the 2012 Financial Year, ATO data shows 42,000 nurses, midwives and aged care workers, 62,000 teachers and child carers, 12,300 emergency service workers and 83,000 clerical staff, who all earned around or under $80,000 p.a. had negatively geared a property.

“The data clearly shows that negative gearing is something middle Australia uses to help build their household wealth, build for their future, and provide security for their families,” said Chief Executive Ken Morrison. “Negative gearing provides an opportunity for average working Australians to save to get ahead. Demonising negative gearing, or disregarding its substantial benefits - in terms of household and retirement savings, stimulating housing supply and rental affordability - willfully disadvantages some of the hardest working, lowest paid people in the country."

Morrison said negative gearing is predominantly used by young people and 91 per cent of people who declare a net rental loss own only one or two properties. “These people aren’t the rich and famous, nor are they property barons, but they do deserve a fair go and that’s why negative gearing must remain," he said.

A detailed analysis of the ATO Tax Statistics shows, for example, that 8,885 registered nurses, 3,120 primary school teachers, 2,880 secondary school teachers, 3,350 education aides, and 2,945 child care workers all declared a net rental loss and had a taxable income of between $6,001 and $37,000 p.a.

On Thursday, Treasurer Joe Hockey said he saw many negative outcomes to changing negative gearing. "If you change negative gearing then there are significant flow-on consequences from people that rent homes and that needs to be properly considered," he said. "A lot of Australians have invested their hard earned money in real estate, and in doing so, they have offset the losses of that real estate against their primary income, in order to give themselves and their children some financial security. At the same time, there is a very strong argument that if you were to abolish negative gearing, you would see a significant increase in rents."