The aged care sector is grappling with intensifying challenges as the population grows older. It's estimated that aged care costs will rise by $29 billion over the next decade alone.

But here’s the big question: who will foot the bill for improving standards of care? A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors start contributing more.

This proposal suggests a shift in financial responsibility from the general taxpayer to those more financially capable.

The government currently allocates over $30 billion annually to assist senior citizens with aged care expenses. However, with the Parliamentary Budget Office anticipating a sharp rise in these costs, the task force recommended revising the means-testing for aged care services.

A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors should contribute more to the aged care sector. Source: Shutterstock

The aim is to require wealthier individuals to shoulder a larger portion of the expenses, thus easing the fiscal strain on government resources.

The task force's report, expected to be published by the end of January, will likely recommend that consumers increase their contributions to maintain the high quality of services without overburdening taxpayers.

The federal government is expected to respond to these recommendations later in the year, possibly during the May budget.

One of the significant changes proposed is an increase in daily living fees for residential care residents, currently set at $61 a day. This could be lifted for those with greater wealth.

Ninety-six per cent of the total cost of residential aged care is covered by taxpayers, with only 4 per cent paid in consumer contributions. This is mostly due to existing means tests capping payments at $33,000 annually or $78,500 over a lifetime.

The task force also suggested changing how the family home contributes to means tests. The current system requires the home's maximum value to be below $198,000. This could also be set to change under the new recommendations.

Aged Care Minister Anika Wells had already hinted at such changes during a National Press Club speech in June, stating that aged care contributions would need to increase to keep up with quality improvements.

'You have to say that if we’re not prepared to accept that cinder-block, linoleum-floor, four-bedroom any more, then we need to work out how we’re going to pay for it,' she said.

‘Plenty of people have said: “I am prepared to pay for an innovative, excellent model of care—I just can’t find it”,’ Ms Wells added.

Ms Wells is expected to give a formal response to the task force report when it is published in a few weeks.

There were also intense discussions earlier on ways to improve aged care, particularly with the idea of imposing a levy on younger Australians.

Last year, Opposition health spokeswoman Anne Ruston said that the Coalition would consider ‘any sensible policy solutions put forward by the Aged Care Taskforce and the government in good faith’.

She stated: ‘Ensuring the sustainability of Australia’s aged-care sector is absolutely critical to ensuring future generations have access to the care they need and the care they deserve as they age.’

You can watch Sky News Australia’s report here:

​

The proposed changes have sparked mixed reactions from social media users. One commenter wrote: ‘Fair enough, we've done well. Didn't we say we were [saving] for retirement and now it's time for us to spend it and not be a burden?’

‘I have to agree. Aged care is very important but a lot of people are able to pay a little more to maintain the structure of the system,’ another said.

While another commented: ‘I thought having worked, paid taxes, raised tax paying children and generally making the country better was why we looked after elderly people. I must be wrong.’

‘If the national budget will not support the aged who have maintained the budget funding all their lives, then maybe everyone should stop paying into the national finances and fend for themselves,’ a fourth social media user suggested.

The aged care sector in Australia is facing numerous challenges, including a rapidly ageing population, increasing costs, and high expectations for quality care. The proposed changes are part of a broader effort to ensure the sustainability of the sector.

However, these changes also raise important questions about balancing individual and government responsibility for funding aged care. As the debate continues, it's clear that the future of aged care will be a key issue for both policymakers and the public.

Key Takeaways

• Wealthy seniors in Australia might be required to pay more for aged care due to government task force advice.
  
• The move aims to reduce taxpayer contributions to the country's aged care costs, which are expected to climb significantly over the next decade.
  
• The task force is set to recommend changes to means-testing, potentially increasing daily living fees and altering how the family home is valued in such tests.
  
• The federal government is expected to respond to the recommendations, which also suggest an increased consumer contribution later in the year, likely during the May budget.
  

What are your thoughts on these proposed changes, members? Do you believe wealthier individuals should contribute more to their aged care costs? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

 

[MaccaMan]

Is this really true? Thousands upon thousands of our elderly died during the COVID period. I would argue we have less elderly in our population than we have had in many, many years... Could this be another money grab from the grubberment?

 

[MaggieMay1948]

Every single service the government has sold off/outsourced/privatised ends up costing the public more and more money. And, why? Because those private companies treat them as cash cows and are outright profiteers, pocketing hige salaries, bonuses etc while slashing services to the bone.

The government should stop privatisation and bring all services back under government responsibility with set standards the should raise our taxes if necessary but stop the plundering by the profiteers, the pirk barrelling by politicians and the palming off of government responsibility. It's getting to the point where we don't need public servants. They are just freeloaders. Because when we see services sokd off, we do not see a reduction in the public servants who were responsible for that service.

 

[Bill Mcl]

We could save millions every year if the perks and lurks that all the pollies get had to be paid out of their own pockets like ours do. Education should be about co-existing in a moderate/friendly society with comfortable needs, not about the massive greed we see everywhere today. This crap about giving every child a ribbon for participating teaches them nothing about what is going to happen in their future life, they have to learn that you have to put in some effort to get what you want out of life and that not every one will be a superstar. Someone has to do the less important but absolutely critical jobs. Some one has to take out the garbage that we voted for.

 

[LeahI]

Ninety-six per cent of the total cost of residential aged care is covered by taxpayers, with only 4 per cent paid in consumer contributions.

This surprises me. My mum was in care a few years ago and a huge chunk of her pension went to the care facility.
All the private sector does for this service is put their hand into the govt pocket. If it's a private enterprise then why should it be propped up by govt. Like any business.

 

[80YO]

This is similar to anything that the Albuneasy Govt touches. It becomes unmanageable ! They gave large salary increases, so, of course costs went up. Has the quality of service gone up ?
They have NO REAL FINANCIAL EXPERIENCE. MOST OF THEM HAVE NOT EVEN HAD A REAL JOB, LET ALONE RUN A BUSINESS ! Bryan.

 

[Luckyus]

The aged care sector is grappling with intensifying challenges as the population grows older. It's estimated that aged care costs will rise by $29 billion over the next decade alone.

But here’s the big question: who will foot the bill for improving standards of care? A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors start contributing more.

This proposal suggests a shift in financial responsibility from the general taxpayer to those more financially capable.

The government currently allocates over $30 billion annually to assist senior citizens with aged care expenses. However, with the Parliamentary Budget Office anticipating a sharp rise in these costs, the task force recommended revising the means-testing for aged care services.

View attachment 38611

A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors should contribute more to the aged care sector. Source: Shutterstock

The aim is to require wealthier individuals to shoulder a larger portion of the expenses, thus easing the fiscal strain on government resources.

The task force's report, expected to be published by the end of January, will likely recommend that consumers increase their contributions to maintain the high quality of services without overburdening taxpayers.

The federal government is expected to respond to these recommendations later in the year, possibly during the May budget.

One of the significant changes proposed is an increase in daily living fees for residential care residents, currently set at $61 a day. This could be lifted for those with greater wealth.

Ninety-six per cent of the total cost of residential aged care is covered by taxpayers, with only 4 per cent paid in consumer contributions. This is mostly due to existing means tests capping payments at $33,000 annually or $78,500 over a lifetime.

The task force also suggested changing how the family home contributes to means tests. The current system requires the home's maximum value to be below $198,000. This could also be set to change under the new recommendations.

Aged Care Minister Anika Wells had already hinted at such changes during a National Press Club speech in June, stating that aged care contributions would need to increase to keep up with quality improvements.

'You have to say that if we’re not prepared to accept that cinder-block, linoleum-floor, four-bedroom any more, then we need to work out how we’re going to pay for it,' she said.

‘Plenty of people have said: “I am prepared to pay for an innovative, excellent model of care—I just can’t find it”,’ Ms Wells added.

Ms Wells is expected to give a formal response to the task force report when it is published in a few weeks.

There were also intense discussions earlier on ways to improve aged care, particularly with the idea of imposing a levy on younger Australians.

Last year, Opposition health spokeswoman Anne Ruston said that the Coalition would consider ‘any sensible policy solutions put forward by the Aged Care Taskforce and the government in good faith’.

She stated: ‘Ensuring the sustainability of Australia’s aged-care sector is absolutely critical to ensuring future generations have access to the care they need and the care they deserve as they age.’

You can watch Sky News Australia’s report here:

​

The proposed changes have sparked mixed reactions from social media users. One commenter wrote: ‘Fair enough, we've done well. Didn't we say we were [saving] for retirement and now it's time for us to spend it and not be a burden?’

‘I have to agree. Aged care is very important but a lot of people are able to pay a little more to maintain the structure of the system,’ another said.

While another commented: ‘I thought having worked, paid taxes, raised tax paying children and generally making the country better was why we looked after elderly people. I must be wrong.’

‘If the national budget will not support the aged who have maintained the budget funding all their lives, then maybe everyone should stop paying into the national finances and fend for themselves,’ a fourth social media user suggested.

The aged care sector in Australia is facing numerous challenges, including a rapidly ageing population, increasing costs, and high expectations for quality care. The proposed changes are part of a broader effort to ensure the sustainability of the sector.

However, these changes also raise important questions about balancing individual and government responsibility for funding aged care. As the debate continues, it's clear that the future of aged care will be a key issue for both policymakers and the public.

Key Takeaways

• Wealthy seniors in Australia might be required to pay more for aged care due to government task force advice.
• The move aims to reduce taxpayer contributions to the country's aged care costs, which are expected to climb significantly over the next decade.
• The task force is set to recommend changes to means-testing, potentially increasing daily living fees and altering how the family home is valued in such tests.
• The federal government is expected to respond to the recommendations, which also suggest an increased consumer contribution later in the year, likely during the May budget.

What are your thoughts on these proposed changes, members? Do you believe wealthier individuals should contribute more to their aged care costs? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

One way or another the government will get their filthy paws on the funds locked away in super.

 

[GreenEyes]

The aged care sector is grappling with intensifying challenges as the population grows older. It's estimated that aged care costs will rise by $29 billion over the next decade alone.

But here’s the big question: who will foot the bill for improving standards of care? A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors start contributing more.

This proposal suggests a shift in financial responsibility from the general taxpayer to those more financially capable.

The government currently allocates over $30 billion annually to assist senior citizens with aged care expenses. However, with the Parliamentary Budget Office anticipating a sharp rise in these costs, the task force recommended revising the means-testing for aged care services.

View attachment 38611

A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors should contribute more to the aged care sector. Source: Shutterstock

The aim is to require wealthier individuals to shoulder a larger portion of the expenses, thus easing the fiscal strain on government resources.

The task force's report, expected to be published by the end of January, will likely recommend that consumers increase their contributions to maintain the high quality of services without overburdening taxpayers.

The federal government is expected to respond to these recommendations later in the year, possibly during the May budget.

One of the significant changes proposed is an increase in daily living fees for residential care residents, currently set at $61 a day. This could be lifted for those with greater wealth.

Ninety-six per cent of the total cost of residential aged care is covered by taxpayers, with only 4 per cent paid in consumer contributions. This is mostly due to existing means tests capping payments at $33,000 annually or $78,500 over a lifetime.

The task force also suggested changing how the family home contributes to means tests. The current system requires the home's maximum value to be below $198,000. This could also be set to change under the new recommendations.

Aged Care Minister Anika Wells had already hinted at such changes during a National Press Club speech in June, stating that aged care contributions would need to increase to keep up with quality improvements.

'You have to say that if we’re not prepared to accept that cinder-block, linoleum-floor, four-bedroom any more, then we need to work out how we’re going to pay for it,' she said.

‘Plenty of people have said: “I am prepared to pay for an innovative, excellent model of care—I just can’t find it”,’ Ms Wells added.

Ms Wells is expected to give a formal response to the task force report when it is published in a few weeks.

There were also intense discussions earlier on ways to improve aged care, particularly with the idea of imposing a levy on younger Australians.

Last year, Opposition health spokeswoman Anne Ruston said that the Coalition would consider ‘any sensible policy solutions put forward by the Aged Care Taskforce and the government in good faith’.

She stated: ‘Ensuring the sustainability of Australia’s aged-care sector is absolutely critical to ensuring future generations have access to the care they need and the care they deserve as they age.’

You can watch Sky News Australia’s report here:

​

The proposed changes have sparked mixed reactions from social media users. One commenter wrote: ‘Fair enough, we've done well. Didn't we say we were [saving] for retirement and now it's time for us to spend it and not be a burden?’

‘I have to agree. Aged care is very important but a lot of people are able to pay a little more to maintain the structure of the system,’ another said.

While another commented: ‘I thought having worked, paid taxes, raised tax paying children and generally making the country better was why we looked after elderly people. I must be wrong.’

‘If the national budget will not support the aged who have maintained the budget funding all their lives, then maybe everyone should stop paying into the national finances and fend for themselves,’ a fourth social media user suggested.

The aged care sector in Australia is facing numerous challenges, including a rapidly ageing population, increasing costs, and high expectations for quality care. The proposed changes are part of a broader effort to ensure the sustainability of the sector.

However, these changes also raise important questions about balancing individual and government responsibility for funding aged care. As the debate continues, it's clear that the future of aged care will be a key issue for both policymakers and the public.

Key Takeaways

• Wealthy seniors in Australia might be required to pay more for aged care due to government task force advice.
• The move aims to reduce taxpayer contributions to the country's aged care costs, which are expected to climb significantly over the next decade.
• The task force is set to recommend changes to means-testing, potentially increasing daily living fees and altering how the family home is valued in such tests.
• The federal government is expected to respond to the recommendations, which also suggest an increased consumer contribution later in the year, likely during the May budget.

What are your thoughts on these proposed changes, members? Do you believe wealthier individuals should contribute more to their aged care costs? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

As previous response from Elder re "supported Country via paying Tax, raising kids, working, tax tax tax! However, we & those before us built this Country, paid & still pay for Policy Makers to decide what, when who gets what. Considering there is "No Mention Ever" of same money paid toward Aged, goes back into Community, Keeps Services paid, Providers & staff, Pollies have pockets lined (big time) for Playing God with Taxpayers money. It's a Merry-go-round of unseen Dollars. "Made round to go round"! It's Pollies way of yet again moving the Goalpost. Give with the Right hand & take back by the Left. The Aged are Entitled to the assistance, & to now decide/suggest to use the Aged home as assets to Rob them of more is Criminal. "Trust Politicians Decisions"?? Mmmmmmhhh!!

 

[Trina G]

This is similar to anything that the Albuneasy Govt touches. It becomes unmanageable ! They gave large salary increases, so, of course costs went up. Has the quality of service gone up ?
They have NO REAL FINANCIAL EXPERIENCE. MOST OF THEM HAVE NOT EVEN HAD A REAL JOB, LET ALONE RUN A BUSINESS ! Bryan.

LNP VOTER BY ANY CHANCE. offer something constructive rather than a political rant.

 

[LeahI]

Is this really true? Thousands upon thousands of our elderly died during the COVID period. I would argue we have less elderly in our population than we have had in many, many years... Could this be another money grab from the grubberment?

Yes a lot of elderly people did die during Covid. . But in a population of over 65's around 4.2m and 14,500 of those died this only makes up 0.34%.
Hardly enough to make the aging population decrease significantly. And there are an increasing number becoming older who will need the services soon enough, who are the ones these idiots want to tax more.

 

[LeahI]

This is similar to anything that the Albuneasy Govt touches. It becomes unmanageable ! They gave large salary increases, so, of course costs went up. Has the quality of service gone up ?
They have NO REAL FINANCIAL EXPERIENCE. MOST OF THEM HAVE NOT EVEN HAD A REAL JOB, LET ALONE RUN A BUSINESS ! Bryan.

Hardly think it's the current govt fault. This problem has been around for years and no one fixes it.

 

[Rambo10]

Personally I think if aged people can live in their home for as long as they can with little outside assistance so be it, another way to live in granny flats with their family where space allows and again have assistance from government systems, that way the so called four bedroom house is out there for bigger family’s to purchase and live in or the government to purchase for homing such people. The media talk about aged people like they are a boil on their body that they would like to lance, and get rid of. It’s sad that these older people many baby boomers are the ones that built this country back up after the war, their seems to be a lot of selfishness out there, very sad

 

[marni]

If you have managed to have a better job to make sure you have enough put aside or your later years you can bet you were also in a higher tax bracket and paid more all your working life. So again tax upon a tax. There are people who have been in the government pockets all their lives and still get more benefits than those that have contributed to keep this country going

 

[Lizzie1149]

The aged care sector is grappling with intensifying challenges as the population grows older. It's estimated that aged care costs will rise by $29 billion over the next decade alone.

But here’s the big question: who will foot the bill for improving standards of care? A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors start contributing more.

This proposal suggests a shift in financial responsibility from the general taxpayer to those more financially capable.

The government currently allocates over $30 billion annually to assist senior citizens with aged care expenses. However, with the Parliamentary Budget Office anticipating a sharp rise in these costs, the task force recommended revising the means-testing for aged care services.

View attachment 38611

A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors should contribute more to the aged care sector. Source: Shutterstock

The aim is to require wealthier individuals to shoulder a larger portion of the expenses, thus easing the fiscal strain on government resources.

The task force's report, expected to be published by the end of January, will likely recommend that consumers increase their contributions to maintain the high quality of services without overburdening taxpayers.

The federal government is expected to respond to these recommendations later in the year, possibly during the May budget.

One of the significant changes proposed is an increase in daily living fees for residential care residents, currently set at $61 a day. This could be lifted for those with greater wealth.

Ninety-six per cent of the total cost of residential aged care is covered by taxpayers, with only 4 per cent paid in consumer contributions. This is mostly due to existing means tests capping payments at $33,000 annually or $78,500 over a lifetime.

The task force also suggested changing how the family home contributes to means tests. The current system requires the home's maximum value to be below $198,000. This could also be set to change under the new recommendations.

Aged Care Minister Anika Wells had already hinted at such changes during a National Press Club speech in June, stating that aged care contributions would need to increase to keep up with quality improvements.

'You have to say that if we’re not prepared to accept that cinder-block, linoleum-floor, four-bedroom any more, then we need to work out how we’re going to pay for it,' she said.

‘Plenty of people have said: “I am prepared to pay for an innovative, excellent model of care—I just can’t find it”,’ Ms Wells added.

Ms Wells is expected to give a formal response to the task force report when it is published in a few weeks.

There were also intense discussions earlier on ways to improve aged care, particularly with the idea of imposing a levy on younger Australians.

Last year, Opposition health spokeswoman Anne Ruston said that the Coalition would consider ‘any sensible policy solutions put forward by the Aged Care Taskforce and the government in good faith’.

She stated: ‘Ensuring the sustainability of Australia’s aged-care sector is absolutely critical to ensuring future generations have access to the care they need and the care they deserve as they age.’

You can watch Sky News Australia’s report here:

​

The proposed changes have sparked mixed reactions from social media users. One commenter wrote: ‘Fair enough, we've done well. Didn't we say we were [saving] for retirement and now it's time for us to spend it and not be a burden?’

‘I have to agree. Aged care is very important but a lot of people are able to pay a little more to maintain the structure of the system,’ another said.

While another commented: ‘I thought having worked, paid taxes, raised tax paying children and generally making the country better was why we looked after elderly people. I must be wrong.’

‘If the national budget will not support the aged who have maintained the budget funding all their lives, then maybe everyone should stop paying into the national finances and fend for themselves,’ a fourth social media user suggested.

The aged care sector in Australia is facing numerous challenges, including a rapidly ageing population, increasing costs, and high expectations for quality care. The proposed changes are part of a broader effort to ensure the sustainability of the sector.

However, these changes also raise important questions about balancing individual and government responsibility for funding aged care. As the debate continues, it's clear that the future of aged care will be a key issue for both policymakers and the public.

Key Takeaways

• Wealthy seniors in Australia might be required to pay more for aged care due to government task force advice.
• The move aims to reduce taxpayer contributions to the country's aged care costs, which are expected to climb significantly over the next decade.
• The task force is set to recommend changes to means-testing, potentially increasing daily living fees and altering how the family home is valued in such tests.
• The federal government is expected to respond to the recommendations, which also suggest an increased consumer contribution later in the year, likely during the May budget.

What are your thoughts on these proposed changes, members? Do you believe wealthier individuals should contribute more to their aged care costs? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Probably just like shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic. We need a much better system but how about we start by stopping selling all the rubbish in the supermarkets that is making people sick and needing aged care. Our grand and great grand parents didn't need aged care and if they really did the family looked after them. Successive governments have given in the the medical and pharmaceutical industries and no we have a pandemic of sickness. And we don't have health care we have sick care. Most people have no idea that most modern illnesses are a direct result of what they put into their mouths for the most part. Cancers are raging, diabetes is hitting people at younger and younger ages and no one is batting an eye lid. Just, oh it's okay we have a pill for that or a treatment for that. No preventative medicine, just curative and it doesn't cure for the most part

 

[marni]

Probably just like shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic. We need a much better system but how about we start by stopping selling all the rubbish in the supermarkets that is making people sick and needing aged care. Our grand and great grand parents didn't need aged care and if they really did the family looked after them. Successive governments have given in the the medical and pharmaceutical industries and no we have a pandemic of sickness. And we don't have health care we have sick care. Most people have no idea that most modern illnesses are a direct result of what they put into their mouths for the most part. Cancers are raging, diabetes is hitting people at younger and younger ages and no one is batting an eye lid. Just, oh it's okay we have a pill for that or a treatment for that. No preventative medicine, just curative and it doesn't cure for the most part

I think you are forgetting that people died a lot younger, and daughters were stay at home wives which meant they could care for elderly parents. Many pensioners still have parents who need care these days - I call it the sandwich generation - taking care of parents whilst minding grandchildren

 

[Margew]

LNP VOTER BY ANY CHANCE. offer something constructive rather than a political rant.

they are entitled to their Opinium regardless of who they may vote for !!

 

[AlanQ]

Ninety-six per cent of the total cost of residential aged care is covered by taxpayers, with only 4 per cent paid in consumer contributions.

This surprises me. My mum was in care a few years ago and a huge chunk of her pension went to the care facility.
All the private sector does for this service is put their hand into the govt pocket. If it's a private enterprise then why should it be propped up by govt. Like any business.

does the pension not also come from taxpayer funds?

 

[AlanQ]

This is similar to anything that the Albuneasy Govt touches. It becomes unmanageable ! They gave large salary increases, so, of course costs went up. Has the quality of service gone up ?
They have NO REAL FINANCIAL EXPERIENCE. MOST OF THEM HAVE NOT EVEN HAD A REAL JOB, LET ALONE RUN A BUSINESS ! Bryan.

Do keep in mind what political party left this country with a TRILLION dollar debt. No politician has had real experience, look at the previous liberal PM that was kicked out by the voters. He was sacked by a conservative govt minister for failure in the job of tourism head honcho. Still won't leave the tough as he knows he is unemployable. Then there's the senator for Vic that was voted out by the electorate only to be handed a more cushy job on a silver plater. Another 'representative' that hasn't had a real job in her entire working life. Fronted a TV news show and then failed in the world of elected representative as an MP.

 

[Nana Zorak]

According to my wonderful granddaughter, the quality of aged care in Australia is appealing to no one. She has cause to complain every working day in the unit she works in from unsupported or stupid helpers who would rather sleep on the job than support the person doing the bulk of the work to cockroaches running rampant around the rooms of the aged ones I am sure that the cost to the government is not as high as each resident has to pay to get in the aged care home from the start then has to contribute most of their pension to keep them in substandard conditions every day with substandard food as well. I am never going to one myself I will leave this earth before I do.

 

[bidza]

The aged care sector is grappling with intensifying challenges as the population grows older. It's estimated that aged care costs will rise by $29 billion over the next decade alone.

But here’s the big question: who will foot the bill for improving standards of care? A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors start contributing more.

This proposal suggests a shift in financial responsibility from the general taxpayer to those more financially capable.

The government currently allocates over $30 billion annually to assist senior citizens with aged care expenses. However, with the Parliamentary Budget Office anticipating a sharp rise in these costs, the task force recommended revising the means-testing for aged care services.

View attachment 38611

A federal government task force has recommended that wealthier seniors should contribute more to the aged care sector. Source: Shutterstock

The aim is to require wealthier individuals to shoulder a larger portion of the expenses, thus easing the fiscal strain on government resources.

The task force's report, expected to be published by the end of January, will likely recommend that consumers increase their contributions to maintain the high quality of services without overburdening taxpayers.

The federal government is expected to respond to these recommendations later in the year, possibly during the May budget.

One of the significant changes proposed is an increase in daily living fees for residential care residents, currently set at $61 a day. This could be lifted for those with greater wealth.

Ninety-six per cent of the total cost of residential aged care is covered by taxpayers, with only 4 per cent paid in consumer contributions. This is mostly due to existing means tests capping payments at $33,000 annually or $78,500 over a lifetime.

The task force also suggested changing how the family home contributes to means tests. The current system requires the home's maximum value to be below $198,000. This could also be set to change under the new recommendations.

Aged Care Minister Anika Wells had already hinted at such changes during a National Press Club speech in June, stating that aged care contributions would need to increase to keep up with quality improvements.

'You have to say that if we’re not prepared to accept that cinder-block, linoleum-floor, four-bedroom any more, then we need to work out how we’re going to pay for it,' she said.

‘Plenty of people have said: “I am prepared to pay for an innovative, excellent model of care—I just can’t find it”,’ Ms Wells added.

Ms Wells is expected to give a formal response to the task force report when it is published in a few weeks.

There were also intense discussions earlier on ways to improve aged care, particularly with the idea of imposing a levy on younger Australians.

Last year, Opposition health spokeswoman Anne Ruston said that the Coalition would consider ‘any sensible policy solutions put forward by the Aged Care Taskforce and the government in good faith’.

She stated: ‘Ensuring the sustainability of Australia’s aged-care sector is absolutely critical to ensuring future generations have access to the care they need and the care they deserve as they age.’

You can watch Sky News Australia’s report here:

​

The proposed changes have sparked mixed reactions from social media users. One commenter wrote: ‘Fair enough, we've done well. Didn't we say we were [saving] for retirement and now it's time for us to spend it and not be a burden?’

‘I have to agree. Aged care is very important but a lot of people are able to pay a little more to maintain the structure of the system,’ another said.

While another commented: ‘I thought having worked, paid taxes, raised tax paying children and generally making the country better was why we looked after elderly people. I must be wrong.’

‘If the national budget will not support the aged who have maintained the budget funding all their lives, then maybe everyone should stop paying into the national finances and fend for themselves,’ a fourth social media user suggested.

The aged care sector in Australia is facing numerous challenges, including a rapidly ageing population, increasing costs, and high expectations for quality care. The proposed changes are part of a broader effort to ensure the sustainability of the sector.

However, these changes also raise important questions about balancing individual and government responsibility for funding aged care. As the debate continues, it's clear that the future of aged care will be a key issue for both policymakers and the public.

Key Takeaways

• Wealthy seniors in Australia might be required to pay more for aged care due to government task force advice.
• The move aims to reduce taxpayer contributions to the country's aged care costs, which are expected to climb significantly over the next decade.
• The task force is set to recommend changes to means-testing, potentially increasing daily living fees and altering how the family home is valued in such tests.
• The federal government is expected to respond to the recommendations, which also suggest an increased consumer contribution later in the year, likely during the May budget.

What are your thoughts on these proposed changes, members? Do you believe wealthier individuals should contribute more to their aged care costs? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Another example of decision making by ignorant politicians promoting policy of envoy ,poor v rich .
How about we base decisions on positive ,logic,factual facts.