Actuaries Institute suggests new age pension asset test for family homes over $2.1 million

The concept of the Australian dream has long been synonymous with owning a family home. It's a symbol of security, a place to raise a family, and, for many, a significant part of their retirement plan.

However, recent discussions have revealed a contentious issue that could impact retirees with high-value homes.



The Actuaries Institute suggested that the government consider including the value of family homes above $2.1 million in the age pension asset test.

This move would encourage retirees to downsize and release some of the estimated $1.3 trillion in housing equity held by Australian retirees, according to the Institute.


shutterstock_2073209768.jpg
Actuaries Institute suggested including the value of family homes over $2.1 million in the age pension asset test.


This proposal, detailed in a discussion paper, suggested that the value of the family home above the threshold should be included to assess the eligibility for a full or part age pension.

The Actuaries Institute's recommendation is an inflation-adjusted echo of the 2010 Henry tax review, which suggested that homes above $1.2 million owned by retirees should be included in asset testing.

With a 4 per cent annual indexation, today's threshold would be around $2.1 million, potentially varying by region or postcode to reflect the diverse property market across the country.

Currently, the family home is exempt from the asset test for the age pension, a policy that the Actuaries Institute believed should be reconsidered.



The inclusion of high-value homes in the asset test could lead to a reassessment of entitlements for a number of age pension recipients, similar to the estimated 10,000 affected if the policy had been implemented in 2010.

National Seniors Australia and the Combined Pensioners and Superannuants Association (CPSA) have both rejected the idea.

National Seniors Australia Chief Executive Chris Grice advocated for ‘a universal pension with appropriate tax reform’.

On the other hand, CPSA believes the current asset limits for the age pension were ‘sufficient’, stating, ‘the Australian government has plenty of other options to make homeownership more affordable for younger generations.’



Counting the family home in the age pension asset test has long been a taboo subject, and the government has previously dismissed the notion.

However, Andrew Boal, the report's author and Chairman of the Actuaries Institute’s Retirement Strategy Group, argued that Australia should not shy away from this debate, especially considering the recent tax changes for superannuation accounts exceeding $3 million.

‘One of the things we’ve seen recently is the introduction of the additional earnings tax for superannuation accounts of more than $3 million, so difficult changes can be made,’ Boal said.

The 2020 Retirement Income Review highlighted that retirees often avoid tapping into their housing wealth to fund retirement, even with limited income.

This is despite various incentives and home equity release schemes available to them. With data showing that over 60 per cent of retirees have less than $250,000 in superannuation, the report suggested additional measures to support asset-rich, cash-poor retirees.

Home ownership rate, by birth year_ (%).png
These measures include abolishing stamp duty for downsizers over 55 and allowing those who access equity in their home through schemes like reverse mortgages to make a 'downsizer contribution' to their superannuation.

Furthermore, the report recommended that the age pension asset test exempt amounts up to $300,000 for singles and $600,000 for couples when the family home is sold or equity is accessed.

Boal mentioned that every measure would enable asset-rich, cash-poor retirees to live more comfortably and reduce the risk of depleting their retirement savings.

Additionally, these measures would address the family housing shortage.
Key Takeaways

  • The Actuaries Institute has suggested that the Australian government include the value of family homes exceeding $2.1 million in the age pension asset test.
  • The institute believed that this change would contribute to releasing part of the estimated $1.3 trillion in housing equity held by retirees, encouraging them to downsize.
  • Senior groups, including National Seniors Australia and the Combined Pensioners and Superannuants Association, have rejected the proposal, arguing for other solutions.
  • The report also recommends abolishing stamp duty for downsizers over 55 and allowing contributions into superannuation from those utilising equity release schemes, in addition to exempting certain amounts from the age pension asset test when the family home is sold or its equity is accessed.
What are your thoughts on the proposed changes to the age pension asset test? Share your experiences and opinions in the comments below.
 
Last edited:
Sponsored
I find it unjust and unfair to do to the elderley thst have worked all their lives and to have some round table brain warped fools try and forcd elderlrry to down size, to start we cant even have enough housex now so wherd a re the elderley going to down size too,
The one big readon for shortage of housing in Australia is the amont of imigrants 560k coming in as this automatically causes shortages.
Plus just look at the homes 3 years ago in pricing , well in 100% of the time have up to a redicilous price now. Blame covid.
We have seen home purchased at 640k now selling for 1.3 m.
These radical ideas put forward by idiot bumbs on seats trying to justify their employmrny continious
 
  • Like
Reactions: Penny4
There has always been this insane jealousy of people who work hard and plan for their retirement well in advance and who accumulate wealth to enjoy in they twilight years. Too often on social media outlets we see posts by self entitled spoilt brat karens screaming with rage about old people who, in their eyes don't deserve a pension. Just because some people are savvy enough to provide for themselves in retirement, they shouldn't be punished for that. Just the fact that this topic rears its ugly head quite often is cause for concern. The biggest worry is what we were wisely warned in 2022 "liebour can't manage money so they will come after yours."
You may have to excuse my ignorance re this question but am curious. I get that people who prepared well in advance for retirement and have accumulated wealth have done well - what I don't understand is why you say they are being punished for it? I am no Karen or jealous, I applaud it. I am all about being responsible for one's own retirement - I just do not understand how you say they are being punished.
 
I find it unjust and unfair to do to the elderley thst have worked all their lives and to have some round table brain warped fools try and forcd elderlrry to down size, to start we cant even have enough housex now so wherd a re the elderley going to down size too,
The one big readon for shortage of housing in Australia is the amont of imigrants 560k coming in as this automatically causes shortages.
Plus just look at the homes 3 years ago in pricing , well in 100% of the time have up to a redicilous price now. Blame covid.
We have seen home purchased at 640k now selling for 1.3 m.
These radical ideas put forward by idiot bumbs on seats trying to justify their employmrny continious
Well said and the only way we can downsize is to move away from where we are and into unfamiliar territory
 
You may have to excuse my ignorance re this question but am curious. I get that people who prepared well in advance for retirement and have accumulated wealth have done well - what I don't understand is why you say they are being punished for it? I am no Karen or jealous, I applaud it. I am all about being responsible for one's own retirement - I just do not understand how you say they are being punished.
Again you are saying people need to be responsible for their own retirement.
So are you receiving a pension or any government support ?
 
You may have to excuse my ignorance re this question but am curious. I get that people who prepared well in advance for retirement and have accumulated wealth have done well - what I don't understand is why you say they are being punished for it? I am no Karen or jealous, I applaud it. I am all about being responsible for one's own retirement - I just do not understand how you say they are being punished.
Probably because those people have been heavily taxed by the government all their working life and want to continue living in their home while retired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Suzanne rose
Probably because those people have been heavily taxed by the government all their working life and want to continue living in their home while retired.
yes, but what is stopping them from doing that?
 
Isn't the government suggesting to change the asset test on people homes?
Yes, so it affects the pension payment to some degree...I get that. But if well prepared for retirement and accumulated wealth and paid so much tax, hence superannuation - why does one need the full pension?
 
Yes, so it affects the pension payment to some degree...I get that. But if well prepared for retirement and accumulated wealth and paid so much tax, hence superannuation - why does one need the full pension?
I don't work for the government to know those specific questions, plus if you personally receive superannuation, you would know how complicated it is.
 
I don't work for the government to know those specific questions, plus if you personally receive superannuation, you would know how complicated it is.
Ah, wasn't my question or my point, never mind.
 
Yes, I realise it was a sweeping question, but you still wanted an answer.
LOL. No, not really a sweeping question and I was asking IAmMal given the "Karen" and "jealous" rhetoric. Was not expecting a good answer though.
 
Downsize so young families can have a roof over their heads. What young families can afford to buy these expensive homes. They can hardly raise a deposit with the cost of living. Get real Govt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Suzanne rose
NZ and Uk pay all pensioners the same amount regardless of assets and income. Yet look at Australia looking at everything single thing you have have scrimped and saved for (if you have) so they can reduce uour pension by as much as they can. You do have to wonder. And now they want the family homes taken into account. what a cheek. Ours is not valued anywhere near what they are looking at but we have spent money to make it how we want it and to be safe and secure. Why would we sell because the government says we should and be where we no longer feel safe. They have rocks for brains. It may suit some people but definitely not all. Stop trying to force people to doing what they don't want to do!
What gets me is this extra money for pensioner apply online. Why apply on line when they already know who does and doesn't have extra money put aside
 
Stop hitting o pensioners. Start by taking away negative gearing on investment properties if you want to address the housing shortage for young home buyers. Then, build more low income/social housing for rental and put, say, 5+ year leases on them so they are regularly reviewed for the occupants' change in circumstanes (eg children growing up and either leaving the family home or earning an income). Rents should be based on income too.

If you start messing around with pensioners' homes that they worked and paid for all their lives you will introduce a "why should I bother buying a house" attitude by the younger generation and that won't help the ongoing situation ar all.

High time the governments started taking out all those things thar are in the "too hard basket" and began dealing with them, eg high flyers' tax avoidance, corporate tax avoidance, preventing criminals and bikie gangs from washing their dirty money by purchasing real estate, preventing non-residents buying real estate, taking over empty properties (there are plenty in and around Seaforth Balgowlah NSW etc bought bt Chinese, never lived in or rented out and just left there to deteriorate.
I agree why are we having foreign investors when they so desperately need our family home. I hope this is looked at as I like so many others have paid for my pension for working 40years. This is when you look at drug addicts any say why not drug test for the dole and leave our homes alone. You will get a load more than getting your hands on my house.
 

Join the conversation

News, deals, games, and bargains for Aussies over 60. From everyday expenses like groceries and eating out, to electronics, fashion and travel, the club is all about helping you make your money go further.

Seniors Discount Club

The SDC searches for the best deals, discounts, and bargains for Aussies over 60. From everyday expenses like groceries and eating out, to electronics, fashion and travel, the club is all about helping you make your money go further.
  1. New members
  2. Jokes & fun
  3. Photography
  4. Nostalgia / Yesterday's Australia
  5. Food and Lifestyle
  6. Money Saving Hacks
  7. Offtopic / Everything else

Latest Articles

  • We believe that retirement should be a time to relax and enjoy life, not worry about money. That's why we're here to help our members make the most of their retirement years. If you're over 60 and looking for ways to save money, connect with others, and have a laugh, we’d love to have you aboard.
  • Advertise with us

User Menu

Enjoyed Reading our Story?

  • Share this forum to your loved ones.
Change Weather Postcode×
Change Petrol Postcode×