16 corrections
What we have got wrong
Nothing here is quietly edited. Each row says what changed; open it for what the page said before, what it says now, and how the error surfaced.
The strata page described New South Wales rules as if they applied everywhere
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- It said every levy notice splits into two funds, that the body corporate owns the common property, and that outside NSW, Victoria and Queensland the states use other words, so check your state’s consumer body. It called comparing a unit and a house on gross yield “meaningless”, and gave a WA strata seller’s documents as Forms 28 and 29 alone.
- It says now
- Two funds are the rule in NSW and Queensland; Tasmania requires one, Victoria makes a maintenance fund compulsory only above 50 lots, SA strata corporations need no sinking fund and the NT sets none. Who owns the common property depends on each state’s law. A table now gives every jurisdiction’s name for the body — the ACT says owners corporation too, Tasmania and the NT body corporate — and notes that SA has no government agency for strata. WA names both official descriptions of the seller’s disclosure.
- How it was caught
- Writing the dedicated strata research note that had been an open item since 5 October: every claim on the page was read against each state’s strata Act or official page and the ATO.
Victoria’s 3- and 6-month rego totals were 5 cents low
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The rego calculator added a $2.70 service fee to each Victorian 3- or 6-month registration, the figure VicRoads’ fee pages print, giving $242.41 for three months and $482.10 for six on a Melbourne car.
- It says now
- VicRoads’ own renewal fee calculator charges a $2.75 service fee, and returns $242.46 and $482.15 for the same car. Every other part of the bill matched to the cent, which also confirms how the shorter terms are split. The page now uses $2.75 and says that the fee pages still print $2.70.
- How it was caught
- Running VicRoads’ renewal fee calculator for a Melbourne postcode, an open check from the 5 October review that waited for the owner’s go-ahead because it meant submitting a form on a government site.
A review of the 9 October usability changes found eleven errors
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- Several pages said the Northern Territory’s house-and-land exemption was open to any buyer. The extra repayments page said $200 a month for ten years saves about $113,000, but worked it out with the $200 paid every month to the end of the loan. The investment and negative gearing pages said a quarantined loss "carries forward", skipping the step where it is first set against capital gains. The Victorian investor option described a flat 5.5% from $960,000 with no upper limit. The stamp duty guide said Queensland’s home concession applies to every owner-occupier. The upfront costs page charged full NT duty on a new house-and-land package. The six-year rule page linked a sale after 30 June 2027 to a calculation using the 50% discount. Six loan calculators computed a mistyped figure in a shared link as $0. The South Australian car page repeated the retired claim that NSW stamps any ute for less. The methodology summary said every duty engine is tested against worked examples, and the deposit bond page said it never fills in a fee beside a field showing $900.
- It says now
- The NT exemption needs a detached new home bought with its land from a builder in one contract, and a buyer who moves in within 12 months of completion and stays six months — first home or not, but not an investor. Ten years of $200 saves about $82,000 and 2 years 4 months, and the lump sum does better on both. The loss is set against residential capital gains first, then carried forward. The 5.5% band runs to $2 million. The Queensland concession needs citizenship, permanent residence or specified-resident status from 1 August 2026. Upfront costs offers the NT package as its own choice for a buyer who will live there. A sale after 30 June 2027 gets no link and a plain explanation. A mistyped shared figure is flagged, not used. The SA page names a goods ute. The methodology names the three states with worked examples and the published schedules elsewhere, and the bond fee is labelled as an example.
- How it was caught
- Five independent read-only reviewers checked the day’s changes from five sides — every new figure at its boundaries, every rewritten sentence against the research notes, the page code in a browser, the layout at phone widths, and the build machinery. The NT rule was then re-read from the NT Government’s own page. About thirty lesser layout and wording issues were fixed with them.
We said every ute pays the lower NSW car duty rate. The Act does not say that.
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The NSW car duty page priced a “$60,000 dual-cab ute” as “not a passenger vehicle — flat 3% all the way up”, said a $90,000 ute is cheaper to stamp than a $90,000 SUV because “the ute is not” a passenger vehicle, and the hub said utes, motorcycles and buses stay at 3% at any value.
- It says now
- The Duties Act 1997 (NSW) s 265(2) lists station wagons and four-wheel drives with seats and windows as passenger vehicles and never mentions utes, so a four-wheel-drive dual-cab may pay the passenger rate above $45,000. The page now uses a single-cab work ute built to carry goods, gives the Act’s categories in plain words, and tells a buyer with a borderline vehicle to ask Revenue NSW before relying on 3%.
- How it was caught
- Rewriting the vehicle-type picker during a usability review: giving the categories their official definitions meant reading s 265 and the Revenue NSW and Service NSW pages, and none of them named utes.
A review of the September pages found fifteen errors before launch
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The depreciation calculator showed a live 4% deduction for homes started in 1985–87, whose 25 years have run out, told owners who bought before 9 May 2017 that their fittings could not be claimed, and counted 40 years of capital works however many were already used. The Victorian off-the-plan reduction was applied to any buyer and any home. Several pages gave South Australian first home buyers no duty on an established home, and said every state has a first home concession. The statistics page missed the two biggest duty cliffs in the country, both in the NT. Queensland duty was said to be due within 30 days of settlement. South Australia was called the highest land tax threshold. The ACT car duty table left out the band above $80,000. The rentvesting page printed its duty gap the wrong way round and gave land tax advice that moved the answer the wrong way. The capital gains tax page said a long-held asset may do better under indexation. A selling-costs page asserted an average of 3–4%. The foreign buyer page called the federal ban law and got several states’ tests for a foreign person wrong. Seven Queensland price redirects lost the price, and the investor and loan calculators froze after one mistyped entry.
- It says now
- Capital works stop when their period from completion runs out, pre-May 2017 fittings stay claimable, and only what is left is counted. The off-the-plan reduction needs a strata lot, or the owner-occupier or first home caps. South Australia’s relief is shown for new homes only, and Tasmania and the NT are said to have none. The NT’s $24,000 step at $3 million now heads the cliffs. Queensland duty is due 30 days after the liability arises, usually the contract. NSW has the highest threshold. The ACT table has its top band. The rentvesting page names who pays more duty and charges land tax to the investment only, and models the 2027 loss rules. Growth to 30 June 2027 keeps the discount through a deemed sale; only later growth is indexed. The average is gone. The ban is described as policy, with its exceptions, and each state’s test as its Act sets it. Redirects keep the price, and a corrected field unfreezes.
- How it was caught
- A review of the 82 commits from 2 September to 3 October, which had never had a completed independent review: engines probed at boundaries, every claim read against the research notes, the rate files re-checked against their sources (no rate was wrong), and the page code tested in a browser. About two hundred lesser wordings were tightened.
We said a NSW conveyancer cannot sign the cooling-off waiver. They can.
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The page said a buyer giving up the NSW cooling-off period needs a certificate “signed by a solicitor or barrister” under section 66W, and that the NSW Government’s web page saying a conveyancer can sign it was wrong because the Act governs. A later wording stopped calling the government page wrong but still left the question open.
- It says now
- Section 66P, which defines the words used in that part of the Conveyancing Act, says “solicitor” includes a licensed conveyancer. So the buyer’s own conveyancer can sign the certificate, as the government page says, though nobody acting for the seller can. The cooling-off guide on the building and pest inspection page says the same.
- How it was caught
- Following up an open item from the review of 4 October: the first research pass had searched only the Conveyancers Licensing Act for 66W, not the definitions in the Conveyancing Act itself.
A review of the day’s new pages found nine errors before launch
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The First Home Owner Grant calculator showed a stamp duty saving to buyers it had just ruled out of the grant, though in WA the first home owner rate needs the grant’s criteria, and it refused New Zealand citizens, who can qualify in Victoria, South Australia and Queensland. The inherited property calculator taxed a home whose owner died before 20 September 1985. The capital gains tax pages said a property bought before that date is outside CGT altogether. The First Home Super Saver calculator could date the ATO’s determination in the past, which applied the old $30,000 limit. The LMI page gave single parents the first home buyer tests. The rent calculator said a South Australian or Tasmanian lease must state the new amount for a mid-term rise. The stamp duty comparison said no state charges its foreign buyer surcharge on commercial land. And a shared link to the rent or rego calculator turned $2,800 into $2.80.
- It says now
- The grant calculator leaves the duty saving out when the buyer fails the grant on a personal test, and asks about New Zealand citizenship. A death before 20 September 1985 leaves an inherited home exempt. A pre-1985 property is outside CGT only for a sale before 1 July 2027, when the law treats it as bought again at market value. The super saver calculator dates the determination no earlier than this financial year. The single-parent stream is described on its own terms: you borrow alone and need not be a first home buyer. South Australia needs the lease to allow an increase and Tasmania needs a written lease to allow one. Land bought to convert to housing can attract the surcharge. Shared links keep the amount.
- How it was caught
- A review of every page and engine built that day: checkers read each claim against the research notes, probed the engines with boundary dates and amounts, and tested the share links. It also tightened about a hundred lesser wordings that said more than their sources.
We said Transport for NSW’s motor vehicle tax table was out of date. It is current.
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The rego calculator left NSW out of its totals. It said Transport for NSW’s table still priced the tax unit at last year’s $1, giving $391 for a private car of 1,151 to 1,500 kg, and that the regulation’s own indexing gave $402.73, so the 2026–27 amount was "being confirmed".
- It says now
- $391 is the figure Transport for NSW publishes for 2026–27. An amending regulation, 2026 No 305, replaced the whole tax table from 1 July 2026 with counts already raised by inflation: the band that was 380 units became 391. Read literally, the regulation’s separate indexing rule would apply again, to about $403; no official source charges that. NSW is now in the calculator, everything but the green slip, which insurers price on the driver and which you add from your own quote.
- How it was caught
- A second search for primary evidence. The regulation’s legislative history showed a version from 1 July 2026, and the archived text as first made gave 380 units for the band the current table gives 391.
We said the government guarantees "the rest" of a 5% deposit loan. It guarantees up to 15%.
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The LMI calculator said that under the Home Guarantee Scheme "the federal government guarantees the rest — no LMI". It also said many lenders waive LMI "to 90–95% LVR for doctors", that some run "LMI-free offers at 85% LVR", and named the professions; the rent vs buy calculator said "the scheme waives" LMI.
- It says now
- The scheme, renamed the Australian Government 5% Deposit Scheme in October 2025, guarantees only the part of the loan above 80% of the property's value — up to 15% of the value on a 5% deposit — which is the slice LMI would insure. It protects the lender, the buyer still owes all of it, and if the guarantee ends while the loan is above 80% the lender may charge LMI then. The waiver claims had no source and have been removed.
- How it was caught
- Researching the scheme from its Investment Mandate for a new section on the LMI page: s 29H(2) caps what the guarantee pays at the loan less 80% of the value.
Three prices with no source, and two lines about a consultation that had closed
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The negative gearing calculator said property management fees are "typically 6–8% of rent" and that a depreciation schedule costs "a few hundred dollars". The car stamp duty calculators, all nine, said rego transfer fees are "typically $20–$50". None of the three had a source; all are market prices. The capital gains tax calculator said the second tranche of the 2027 legislation was "in consultation now" and that further exceptions to the discount were "under consultation".
- It says now
- The three prices are gone. This site does not assert a market price it cannot source, and where a cost is a quote the calculator takes yours. The consultation closed on 21 August 2026: part of it became law in Act No. 71, the property gain-splitting method is still a draft instrument, and affordable housing already keeps the discount under the Act.
- How it was caught
- Building the rego calculator and the gearing definitions section, each read against this site's own rule that market prices are inputs, never assertions.
The reform page said a second Act had not passed, and promised too much to existing owners
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The reform page told anyone who owned before Budget night that nothing changes "not now, not in 2027, not when you sell". It said nothing from Treasury's August consultation had been enacted. Both pages said a quarantined loss can be applied against "your capital gains", and so did our own entry of 8 September below. The calculator told an established-home buyer that using a carried loss against a capital gain was still in consultation, and the evidence that no new-build definition exists was a search of the wrong Act's instruments.
- It says now
- Grandfathering covers negative gearing only: a pre-Budget owner who sells after 1 July 2027 still meets the new capital gains rules. Act No. 71 of 2026 was assented on 26 August and its Schedule 4 has been in force since 1 October: the old rules now pass to a surviving spouse, a surviving co-owner who also bought before Budget night, and a former spouse under a family-law order, and renting out your former home is not a new purchase. A quarantined loss reaches only gains on residential property — section 102-5 says so — and the Act already applies it, no consultation pending. The new-build definition is still not law, now checked against instruments authorised by the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 itself. The consultation opened on 4 August, not 3 August.
- How it was caught
- Research for the six-year rule page turned up a 1 October 2026 amendment to section 26-155 that the reform page did not mention. That prompted a full re-read of both Acts against the live page, which found the rest.
We said every comparison leaves the CGT exemption out. They do not.
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The page opened by claiming that every comparison of rentvesting "leaves out the capital gains tax exemption you are giving up", and an FAQ called it "the catch nobody mentions". That was a claim about other people's pages, made without checking them.
- It says now
- The nearest competitor was opened and read on 2026-09-10. It does mention the exemption, in prose, and it makes a fair counter-argument this page had not: across those same years the rentvester collected deductions an owner-occupier never could. The claim is now the narrower and true one — the exemption is usually described rather than counted, and putting a figure on it is the difference between knowing a cost exists and knowing whether it changes your answer. The counterweight is now part of the argument rather than absent.
- How it was caught
- Reading the competitors instead of assuming what they say. The page had been live for two days making a claim about other sites that a single visit disproved.
The 2027 quarantining rule was described with a step missing
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- Both pages said a quarantined rental loss is held against your residential rental income and carried forward. That is what almost every account of the reform says, and it skips a step the Act puts in the middle.
- It says now
- Section 26-155(1) sends the excess three places in order: it is not deductible, it then becomes a quarantined amount that can be applied against your CAPITAL GAINS for the same year through the section 102-5 method statement, and only what survives both is carried forward. A year in which you sell something at a gain is a year in which a quarantined loss can still do work. The calculator also said the multi-property rules 'have not been published'; section 26-155(6) publishes the ordering.
- How it was caught
- By reading the Act itself rather than summaries of it, while building the reform explainer. The banked research this site had relied on was assembled from law-firm briefings and had inherited the same gap.
Every table disappeared from four pages
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The reform page, the investment property calculator, the rental yield calculator and the rentvesting page each shipped without any of their tables. The key-dates table, the worked example from the Act and the yield comparisons were simply absent from the HTML.
- It says now
- All tables are present. The cause was a layout component that carries behaviour but renders no slot, so everything placed inside it was discarded silently at build time.
- How it was caught
- Not by any test — the build and every content check passed, and a test asserting the dates were on the page passed too, because those dates also appear in the prose. It surfaced only when a script threw an error reaching for an element inside a table that was no longer there. The build now fails if a component is given children it cannot render.
Study loan repayments were 35 cents too high above $129,717
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The engine computed the repayment from the marginal reading of the ATO's scale — 15c above the first threshold plus 17c above the second — and capped the top rate with a minimum. On a repayment income of $137,064 it returned $10,277.34.
- It says now
- It follows the ATO's published table, which gives $10,276.99 on the same income. The ATO rounds its own base constant down to $9,028 where 15% of the band below is $9,028.35, and its final 10% row is a band rather than a ceiling, so the real scale steps up about 49c at $186,050.
- How it was caught
- By checking the engine against the ATO's own worked Example 2 instead of against the arithmetic we had derived. Both worked examples are now pinned by tests.
One state’s cooling-off deadline was drawn for the whole country
What it said, what it says now, how it was caught
- It said
- The page argued about when an inspection has to happen and then drew a single jurisdiction's timeline, leaving readers everywhere else to go and look their own rules up.
- It says now
- All eight jurisdictions are read from the Act, the regulation or the state consumer body and drawn from a selector. Three differences made the old single figure dangerous: Western Australia and Tasmania have no statutory cooling-off period at all, the forfeit is four different rules rather than one percentage, and the clock starts somewhere different almost everywhere.
- How it was caught
- A content review asking, of each page that gives a deadline, whose deadline it actually is.
Why the log started full
This log was not empty on the day it was published, which is deliberate. Every entry above is a real defect, read back out of this site’s own history. They surfaced in different ways — among them reviews of new pages against their sources, reading an Act instead of a summary of it, reading a competitor’s page, and once a script error — and each entry says how. Every one is now guarded on every build, by a check on the wording it retired or a test on the figure it got wrong, so the same mistake cannot quietly come back.
Found something wrong?
Tell us and it gets fixed and logged. Every calculator built on an official schedule names that source and the date it was checked, which should make an error easy to point at — start from contact. Where we know a calculator does not model something, that calculator’s own page says so rather than leaving it for you to discover. How the figures are checked in the first place is set out on the methodology page.