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
Makes you wonder what they are going to do next, Why don't we do what they do in the UK and New Zealand a retired people can still work and get the FULL age pension, you don't have to ring Centrelink every fortnight to let them know exactly how much you are earning.
 
Absolutely ridiculous 🙄 the family home needs to be left alone.

I have lived in my home since 1988.

I live in a Sydney suburb which consist of middle and low incomes .

My house is valued at around $2.3 million which in Sydney .
Average house prices in Sydney are now around $1.2 to $1.4 . My house is on large land .

You can't buy groceries or pay bills with your house.

I totally agree that other assets be included eg personal assets, money in the bank ect .

If they want pensioners to down size then they need to put in place exempt stamp duty and fees for seniors who downsize.

Why should I or any other people be forced to sell their family home all because it becomes part of the asset test.

A friend of mine could never save for a deposit for a house due to her luxury life style of expensive cars and holidays.
I did without so I could save and pay off my mortgage.

Now I own my house and she is still renting and doing it tuff as she was a huge spender.

At least the government do not have to pay those who own their own home rent assistance.

SO LEAVE PEOPLES PROPERTY THEY LIVE IN ALONE
The politicians and "advisers" are to stupid to understand that if stamp duty was waived for over say 55/60yo who want to downsize they would achieve much greater success in moving the housing market. Stupid is as stupid does!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Suzanne rose
How long will it be before the day you retire the government post you a little white pill? instead of paying you an age pension. Once posted via snail you have a maximum fortnight so phuckin enjoy yourself, it's coming sooner than you think?
That sounds like a true horror story but in reality it could happen.
On the news tonight it was saying how many age care centres are closing.
What happens if the government runs out of money and pensions stop !

Pensions haven't been around that long
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gsr and relljube
My question would be, who in this cost of living crisis would have the deposit and or be able to afford the mortgage on a $2.1 million dollar house. Only the very wealthy or non Australians, both who would be buying the house for investment purposes. I doubt there would be many renters who could afford to rent such houses, so under both these scenarios there would be less available housing for people struggling with the cost of living because the pensioners who sold their high cost home would be cashed up and they would buy up houses that younger struggling people would likely maybe be able to afford, and the pensioners would live in them, not rent them out.end result, less affordable housing still, but empty high cost houses very few could afford to rent, let alone buy.
 
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.
Just the fact that those who do take seriously their responsibility in retirement are seen as somehow less entitled than those who serially expect and rely on handouts without having any sense of responsibility. Add that the topic of this thread. Is not that being punished?
 
It sounds like long-term strategy to include the family home in the assets test.
In 20 years time every home may be worth over $2.1 million , then the value will be added in for all retirees et voila, target achieved.
 
That sounds like a true horror story but in reality it could happen.
On the news tonight it was saying how many age care centres are closing.
What happens if the government runs out of money and pensions stop !

Pensions haven't been around that long
Governments will never run out of your money? Governments don't have any money, it's yours the taxpayer.
 
So, if you own your own home you are in the 30% apparently, and if you own your own home priced over $2.3M - a much lower percentage of our population. That leaves the majority of people a lot worse off. The majority of people have worked hard all their lives and have been responsible but have not been able to gather wealth. Easy-peasy for high income earners with creative accountants. Yes, there are a minority that perhaps has not worked, for one reason or another, but our society works best when we allow for this. Many issues; aging population, world economics, generational wealth…something has to give to balance the books. I see both sides but…don’t care to close my eyes.
 
So, if you own your own home you are in the 30% apparently, and if you own your own home priced over $2.3M - a much lower percentage of our population. That leaves the majority of people a lot worse off. The majority of people have worked hard all their lives and have been responsible but have not been able to gather wealth. Easy-peasy for high income earners with creative accountants. Yes, there are a minority that perhaps has not worked, for one reason or another, but our society works best when we allow for this. Many issues; aging population, world economics, generational wealth…something has to give to balance the books. I see both sides but…don’t care to close my eyes.
We worked very hard, hubby did shift work as a shunter on the railway. I also worked .
We did not buy luxury items nor go on overseas holidays.
We skimped and saved for our deposit then skimped and saved to pay it off.

We compromised, instead of restaurants We had picnics, instead on expensive holidays we went on a beach holiday either down or up the coast and my kids had fun.

I could have received a huge centrelink payment every fortnight with having 13 kids but I chose to work. I had the kids so we had to support them.

We have lived in our house since 1988. This was our 2nd home and we only moved because we did need more bedrooms.

Then as our family grew we needed to add a second level.

We live in an average area in Sydney , nothing special but if we sold today we would get around $2.3 million .
As for money in the bank , we have a little .
Now why should I have to sell my home and move, to be able to get the pension.
I believe the huge taxes we paid during our working life which helps to pay pensions , should also be for us .

I definitely believe in asset testing but your home that you have lived in for many years should be left alone.

The majority who have mansions and live in upper-class areas would most likely not be receiving a pension
 
We worked very hard, hubby did shift work as a shunter on the railway. I also worked .
We did not buy luxury items nor go on overseas holidays.
We skimped and saved for our deposit then skimped and saved to pay it off.

We compromised, instead of restaurants We had picnics, instead on expensive holidays we went on a beach holiday either down or up the coast and my kids had fun.

I could have received a huge centrelink payment every fortnight with having 13 kids but I chose to work. I had the kids so we had to support them.

We have lived in our house since 1988. This was our 2nd home and we only moved because we did need more bedrooms.

Then as our family grew we needed to add a second level.

We live in an average area in Sydney , nothing special but if we sold today we would get around $2.3 million .
As for money in the bank , we have a little .
Now why should I have to sell my home and move, to be able to get the pension.
I believe the huge taxes we paid during our working life which helps to pay pensions , should also be for us .

I definitely believe in asset testing but your home that you have lived in for many years should be left alone.

The majority who have mansions and live in upper-class areas would most likely not be receiving a pension
Suzanne, my comments were not personal, not trying to take your bone away - not advocating, just making an observation around how many would be in this position.
 
THE BEST ONE IS GETTING RID OF STAMP DUTY FOR PENSIONER WHEN DOWNZISING AS THAT IS HOLDING ME UP THEY ARE USING THE FUNDS FOR FIRST NATION PEOPLE (WHICH I AM A DECENDANT OF ONE) BUT HAVE NEVER CLAIMED AS ONE WE ARE ONE NATION AND SHOULD BE ONE NO 3 FLAGS GET RID OF ALL 3 AND HAVE ONE AUSSIE ONE
 
THE BEST ONE IS GETTING RID OF STAMP DUTY FOR PENSIONER WHEN DOWNZISING AS THAT IS HOLDING ME UP THEY ARE USING THE FUNDS FOR FIRST NATION PEOPLE (WHICH I AM A DECENDANT OF ONE) BUT HAVE NEVER CLAIMED AS ONE WE ARE ONE NATION AND SHOULD BE ONE NO 3 FLAGS GET RID OF ALL 3 AND HAVE ONE AUSSIE ONE
The black red and yellow one????
 
I believe everyone should receive an age pension regardless of how much they have saved and invested in their own home. In Germany and other European countries the age pension is a given to all.
I feel that those of us who have saved, worked and bought a home, and in most cases paid the majority of tax should not then be penalised.
 
I doubt very much that this would ease the housing market for the target bracket. Most young people I know would never be able to afford a 2.3 million dollar house!!
 
Absolutely ridiculous 🙄 the family home needs to be left alone.

I have lived in my home since 1988.

I live in a Sydney suburb which consist of middle and low incomes .

My house is valued at around $2.3 million which in Sydney .
Average house prices in Sydney are now around $1.2 to $1.4 . My house is on large land .

You can't buy groceries or pay bills with your house.

I totally agree that other assets be included eg personal assets, money in the bank ect .

If they want pensioners to down size then they need to put in place exempt stamp duty and fees for seniors who downsize.

Why should I or any other people be forced to sell their family home all because it becomes part of the asset test.

A friend of mine could never save for a deposit for a house due to her luxury life style of expensive cars and holidays.
I did without so I could save and pay off my mortgage.

Now I own my house and she is still renting and doing it tuff as she was a huge spender.

At least the government do not have to pay those who own their own home rent assistance.

SO LEAVE PEOPLES PROPERTY THEY LIVE IN ALONE
well said good one.
 
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.
Alas Maggie, that would be great, it'll never happen. On the subject of negative gearing, every federal politician has it. They certainly won't get rid of that. The tax system should change, everyone should pay 10% of their personal income. All businesses should pay 20% and, in both cases, there should be no deductions whatsoever.

It's bloody funny really, we had to have the GST to make up for those not paying income tax. All good except that's still the case and some people pay twice! It's our fault, we vote for these idiots who make or won't modify the laws involved.

What you want is a Utopian system, it just WON'T happen.
 

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×