Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 478

Homeowner retirees should not ‘run out of money’

When an Australian couple becomes eligible for the full age pension, it's almost equivalent to the government handing them $1 million, plus other benefits. While top of the list of worries for many retirees is that they will ‘run out of money’, what many really mean is they will not have enough money for the lifestyle they want. A homeowner receiving a full pension and access to home equity should not literally ‘run out of money’.

The fear leads to underspending in retirement with most people dying with a substantial amount of their wealth intact. The Retirement Income Review Final Report in July 2020 reported (page 432):

"Data provided by a large superannuation fund found members who died left 90% of the balance they had at retirement. Another study found a similar result: at death, age pensioners leave around 90% of the assessable assets they had at the point of retirement."

A study by Allianz Retire+ claimed 61% of people fear running out of money more than they fear death. However, the age pension system, concessions on services, access to free or low-cost health care and home equity release schemes provide a significant backstop for retiree homeowners. These are not factored in sufficiently when they fear their own money dwindling.

But it remains a common concern. The Retirement Income Review included a survey of over 1,000 people over the age of 55, who identify “Assurance that I won’t run out of money before I die” as the main reason they may consider retirement income products.

In research by Investment Trends, ‘outliving retirement savings’ ranked fourth among retirement worries, nominated by about 35% of respondents in 2021, after medical issues and aged care.

The retirement income system

Australia has a complex retirement income system but it is commonly recognised as comprising three components:

  1. Age pension, means tested and funded by the Federal Government
  2. Superannuation, privately managed with mandated savings
  3. Voluntary savings

Given that well over 80% of people over the age of 65 own their home outright, access to the equity should be part of a retirement income discussion.

  1. Accessing equity in a family home.

A common mistake in thinking about the age pension is the belief that its purpose is to provide a minimum standard for Australians with limited financial resources. In fact, it is increasingly a supplement in retirement for middle-income earners, with most pension recipients expected to receive a part-pension rather than full pension in future. Furthermore, the majority of Australians will still receive an age pension by 2060 despite the growth of the superannuation system. 

What are the age pension limits and payments?

Full details of pension rates are on the Department of Social Security website.

Following the latest indexation of pensions in September 2022, the maximum rate rose to $1,026.50 a fortnight for singles and $1,547.60 for a pensioner couple, including pension and energy supplements. A couple receives an annual pension of over $40,000 a year.  

Most people enter retirement as a couple, and provided the value of their combined assets excluding their own home (see Services Australia for full definitions) is less than $419,000, they will be eligible for a full pension. 

Allowances are even more generous on some assets. For example, generally only 60% of the purchase price of a lifetime income stream (such as a lifetime annuity) counts as an asset until age 84, and then only 30% is assessable.

Asset levels for full age pension eligibility

To receive a part pension, their assets (excluding the family home) cannot exceed the levels shown below.

Asset levels cut offs for part age pension eligibility

Therefore, a retired couple meeting other age (between 65.5 and 67 years old depending on birth date) and income tests can hold up to $935,000 in assets in addition to their family home and still qualify for the age pension.

While it's not a formula for regular business class travel, a new car every couple of years and fine dining each week, owning a home of unlimited value and nearly a million of other assets and still receiving some pension and related benefits seems a decent deal from our social security system.

What is a full age pension worth?

The age pension is a fortnightly payment from the Federal Government, indexed to inflation for life: 

"Indexation occurs in line with increases in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), either yearly or twice yearly. The Pensioner and Beneficiary Living Cost Index (PBLCI) is used to adjust maximum basic rates of pension where movement in the PBLCI is greater than movement in the CPI for an indexation period."

The calculation of its value is potentially complex and I asked leading actuary, David Knox of Mercer, for a 'back of the envelope' estimate. David replied:

"Let’s keep it simple. The full age pension for a single person is now $26,781. As you know, the age pension will be payable from age 67 from 1 July next year. So for most people who are not yet 67, this is the relevant eligibility age. According to the latest UN data published this year, the current life expectancy for an Australian aged 67 is 20.1 years. It will continue to increase in future years.

The age pension is currently indexed to wages or prices so it keeps increasing and we also need a discount rate. Although we can debate the appropriate discount rate, a simple approach is to let the future increases cancel out the discount rate, so that in real terms the pension stays as its current value.

Therefore the current value of the future age pension for a single person now aged 67 is $26,781 times 20.1 which is $538,291; or to express in more general terms, the value of the full age pension for a single person is in the order of $540,000.”

Using the same logic, the pension for a couple of $40,237 is worth about $808,000, or over 30 years about $1.2 million. David's argument of not requiring a discount rate because the payment is indexed is a simple and elegant way to make the calculation.

Therefore, in financial terms, the age pension for a couple is akin to being handed about $1 million on eligibility date, plus other benefits. 

Maximising income in retirement

The Retirement Income Review, page 133, stresses the need to consider not only the age pension but:

"Retirees receive a broad range of non-monetary supports, including social transfers in kind, that reduce the level of income required to achieve a particular living standard. When assessing retiree poverty, these supports should be taken into account, including whether retirees are using their assets to fund their retirement. Otherwise, asset-rich households may be counted as ‘living in poverty’."

As Noel Whittaker advises in his tips on earning a pension, while the home is not assessable, furniture, fittings and vehicles are. However, many pensioners make the mistake of valuing them at cost or replacement value, when a ‘garage sale’ value is fine. As such sales achieve poor results, furniture might be worth only $5,000, nowhere near their cost.

Since every $10,000 of excess assets above the minimum above reduces the pension by $780 a year, the cost of reporting higher asset values than necessary can be significant.

In addition, age pensioners may receive other payments, such as:

  • Commonwealth Rent Assistance
  • Carer Allowance and Carer Supplement
  • Mobility Allowance
  • Pensioner Education Supplement
  • Family Tax Benefit, if they have dependent children in their care.

With a Pensioner Concession Card comes a range of other entitlements, including:

  • Gas rebate
  • Electricity rebate
  • Water rebate
  • Council rate discount
  • Drivers licence and registration concession

Free or subsidised health and aged care services support Australian retirees. Brendan Ryan of Later Life Advice writes an annual checklist in Firstlinks which documents the many benefits from holding a Pensioner Concession card or Commonwealth Seniors Health Card.

Outliving retirement savings

In further research by Investment Trends, about 50% of retirees expect to outlive their retirement savings, and the majority of those expect to become dependent on the age pension. While this is not something to aspire to, the social security system protects them.

Income from home equity access schemes

According to research by National Seniors and Challenger, 85% of retirees outright own their own home, while an additional 7% own a home with a mortgage. Ownership rises with age, as this chart from the report shows:

The home is usually the most valuable asset of the retiree and it needs to be considered in any discussion of retirement income.

The two major benefits of owning a home in retirement are avoiding:

  • eviction at the end of short leases, and
  • rental payments which can rise on landlord demands.

In addition, the equity in a home can be accessed as tax-free retirement income through reverse mortgage schemes, such as offered by the Federal Government in the Home Equity Access Scheme (HEAS). A feature of these schemes is that a lump sum or income stream can be arranged with payment of the loan deferred and paid from the estate after death of the retiree. HEAS is administered by the Department of Human Services through Centrelink.

Deborah Ralston, a member of the Retirement Income Review, wrote a detailed article in Firstlinks on accessing equity in the family home. We will not repeat her points here, but in addition to the Government scheme, private providers such as Household Capital and Heartland Finance offer access with different features such as higher limits on borrowing amounts.

Briefly on the HEAS scheme:

  • Borrowers must be of age pension age and own real estate in Australia
  • Borrowers can either be receiving a qualifying pension, or meet the age pension rules but not receive a pension due to assets or income over the threshold. In other words, a borrower does not need to be receiving the age pension
  • The combined loan and pension payment each fortnight cannot exceed 1.5 times the maximum pension rate
  • Lump sums can be drawn in advance
  • The current rate is 3.95%
  • Debt is recovered through the estate when the last borrower dies.

Terms from commercial lenders will differ. Investment Trends research suggests home equity access is low on the list for retirees looking for income if savings run out, nominated by only about 7% of retirees. If savings run out, more popular sources include accessing the age pension, reducing spending and downsizing their home. Home equity is on par with going back to work.

So 'running out of money' means 'running out of retirement savings', it does not allow for accessing the age pension and a regular annual income of $40,000.

How much income is needed in retirement?

While not everyone aspires to an extravagant lifestyle in retirement, nobody wants to be poor, especially in old age. The most frequently-used standard for retirement income comes from ASFA, which estimates a modest lifestyle for a homeowner couple at $43,250 or comfortable at $66,725. On this basis, a homeowner couple on a full age pension with no other assets almost achieves a modest lifestyle on the age pension alone, which can be supplemented by accessing home equity. 

This number has recently been challenged as too high by Super Consumers Australia (SCA), as reported in Firstlinks. Whereas ASFA sets a 'comfortable' level of assets required for a couple at $640,000 to give an annual income of $66,725, SCA says only $352,000 is required for its medium spenders requiring $56,000 a year. SCA has an income number of $42,000 as its lower bound for “you’d like to spend this much in retirement”.

Either way, for a homeowner with modest living needs, the age pension will go a long way to meeting their needs.

On 2 September 2022, the Government announced an increase to $11,800 in the amount a pensioner can earn before their pension is reduced:

“Age and Veterans Pensioners will be able to earn an additional $4,000 over this financial year without losing any of their pension due to the Albanese Labor Government providing a one-off income credit designed to give older Australians the option to work and keep more of their money.

Following the successful Jobs and Skills Summit in Canberra, an immediate $4,000 income credit will be added to the income banks of Age Pensioners from December to be used this financial year.

The temporary income bank top up will increase the amount pensioners can earn from $7,800 to $11,800 this year, before their pension is reduced.”

Although health, disability or other factors may inhibit a retiree returning to work, there are currently more job vacancies than unemployed people, and with the record-low unemployment rate, the opportunities to supplement income with part-time work are far better than in the past.

Homeowners not renters

This article assumes home ownership rather than renting, and the difficulties of living in retirement without owning a home is a major but separate issue. Clearly, a renter may 'run out of money' in covering rent. The Retirement Income Review states:

"Almost one-quarter of retirees who rent privately are in financial stress. High housing costs are likely to be the primary driver of the financial stress experienced by this group. Renters face higher housing costs than home owners in retirement: an additional $6,900 per year for the median single, and $12,200 per year for the median couple."

Providing for aged care

Aged care is a specialist and complex area, so Rachel Lane from Aged Care Gurus provided this explanation of the cost of aged care.

"If you are moving into an aged care home you will be asked to complete a combined income and asset assessment. This assessment is used to work out how much funding the government will provide to the facility for your accommodation and care.

The residential aged care means test is a complicated formula that uses a combination of an asset test and income test (with the outcome of each test added together), to calculate your cost of care.

Income test

50c per dollar of income above
$30,204/year single
$29,632/year member of a couple

Asset test

17.5% of $55,000–$186,331
1% of $186,331–$448,994
2% of above $448,994

People with a calculated amount below $63/day are considered financially disadvantaged, or ‘low means’. They have some or all of their accommodation cost subsidised by the government.

Most people have a calculated amount above $63/day, meaning that they need to pay the market price for their accommodation. The amount above $63/day is their contribution to their care, which is known as the means-tested care fee.

There is an annual limit of $30,574 that applies to the Means Tested Care Fee

There is a lifetime limit on means tested fees across Home Care and Residential Aged Care of $73,378.

Special rules apply to the assessment of your former home. As general rule, your home will be included in your aged care assets up to the capped value of $186,331 unless a protected person lives there in which case it is exempt.

A protected person includes: your partner or dependent child, a carer who is eligible for an Australian Income Support Payment who has been living in the home for at least 2 years or a close relative is eligible for an Australian Income Support Payment who has been living in the home for at least 5 years.

If the value of your home is less than the $186,331 cap then the market value of the home will be used in the assessment. In most cases the market value will be far greater than the cap.

Under the pension assets test the full value of your home is exempt for 2 years from the date you or your partner leave the home (whichever is later). When the 2-year exemption ends the home is included in your assessable assets at the market value but your pension assessment changes from a homeowner to a non-homeowner giving you an asset test threshold and cut off that is $224,500 higher.

While the asset value of the home receives special treatment for both pension and aged care means testing it is important to know that if you receive rent from the home it is assessable income for both pension and aged care means tests."

Planning for retirement

For many homeowning couples, $40,000 a year plus other benefits paid to concession holders, supplemented by a home equity access scheme, will finance an acceptable standard of living. While it is not much to aspire to for anyone with the ability to save more, the present system suggests homeowners are placing too much fear on ‘running out of money’.

For those who plan to run down their savings to qualify for a full pension, such as by spending money on holidays, increasing living expenses or renovating the family home (but not giving money away as that falls foul of the gifting rules), here is a warning from Noel Whittaker:

“Think about it. If you spend $100,000 renovating your home, your pension may increase by just $7,800 a year, but it would take almost 13 years of the increased pension to get the $100,000 back. Of course, the benefit of money spent should be taken into account too – money on improving your house or travelling could have huge benefits for you. The main thing is not to spend money with the sole purpose of getting a bigger age pension.”

While there is some risk that future age pension payments will be less generous, a change seems unlikely while the cohort of retirees represents such a large voting block. As the franking credit debate proved in 2019, it's not only older people who vote against change, but their children want their entitlements protected.

 

Graham Hand is Editor-At-Large for Firstlinks. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any person. Thanks to Rachel Lane, David Knox and Noel Whittaker for additional input.

 

56 Comments
Neil
October 12, 2022

Thanks for the comprehensive coverage.
I am an SFR about 10 years in and keep detailed budgets. The figures quoted for a modest lifestyle for a homeowner couple at $43,250 or comfortable at $66,725 are quite inaccurate. They include virtually nothing for major house repairs, and other irregular expenditures such as new white goods, major health issues, weddings/funerals etc. In a 20 plus year retirement there are going to be quite a few major expenses like these which could add significantly to annual spending. Those projections from ASFA are just a list of day to day costs and make little allowance for 'capital expenditure'. They also include nothing for gifts which is unrealistic for people with grand children!!
As a member of AIR (Association of Independent Retirees) I have seen some internal research which suggests that the Aged Pension is well targeted. For many retirees there is a transition. Firstly, retiring as an SFR then over time as capital diminishes moving to a part pension and then if life expectancy extends then perhaps the last phase of life as a full pensioner. Note that the claim that most retirees end up with as much as they started has been debunked. The research on this topic quoted in the Retirements Income Review has been discredited by the ASFA CEO Martin Fahey. The ASFA research shows that, contrary to the findings of the Retirement Income Review, retirees are running out of superannuation too early. The ASFA analysis found that in 2019 only $1 in every $18 was paid out in death benefits from super. This compares to the figure of $1 in $5 that was given to the Retirement Incomes Review by Actuaries Rice Warner.
Cheers
Neil


John
October 09, 2022

Would I be correct in this ?
Sorry if the answer was already there somewhere earlier.
For a home owning couple that are aged 84.
Have say approx. $1,257,000.
Put 2/3 into an annuity and then receive full aged pension.
??

James
October 09, 2022

On such an important decision, IMHO, strongly suggest you get expert financial advice. For some background factual information regarding such things, can highly recommend "Retirement Made Simple" by Noel Whittaker.

Aaron Minney
October 09, 2022

John, I would agree with James to seek financial advice. An adviser would be able to explain that the asset value for the means test is still 60% for at least five years and the asset test rules would apply. Even investing 2/3 of $1,257,000 of assessable assets will just reduce assets to just under the assets test cut-off of $935,000, allowing just a part age pension, not a full Age Pension (assessable assets would have to be under $419,000 for a full age pension). The annuity might provide financial security but won’t, in this case, deliver a full age pension.

Aaron Minney
October 09, 2022

To elaborate a little, there is a minimum of five years at 60% so if you purchase at 84, it doesn’t fall to 30% until age 89. This is why I mention ‘at least five years’. Also, if someone is trying to maximise the allocation to benefit from the 30% asset test inclusion they will probably be income tested and not get the full Age Pension.

John
October 12, 2022

Thanks; James and Aaron for spending the time to respond. Much Appreciated Was a thought that occured to me after reading various John

Trevor
October 08, 2022

How to get your own house. Words of Wisdom: ''By working faithfully eight hours a day you may eventually get to be boss and work twelve hours a day.'' ROBERT FROST . The "reward" is usually commensurate with the effort ! This lesson seems to be almost completely lost on the recent " I want generations" !

Barbara
October 08, 2022

Has anyone taken into account bond money if only one partner has health issues and needs aged care or to be placed in dementia care, and the other one still wants to live in their own home? That is our fear about our money running out - so one can take care of the other. Ten years ago, for our mother we were quoted a $600,000 bond for high care near our home on the Gold Coast. Recently, a friend in Sydney was quoted a $1M bond for dementia care for her husband. Those amounts would leave us with very little of our superannuation monies, so yes, we do fear we will run out of money. Reverse mortgage yes, but will there be sufficient remaining if the one at home has longevity?

Lyn
October 08, 2022

To add to Barbara's comment, if one of couple has paid Accommodation Deposit for nursing care and other partner lives in a purchased 'retirement apartment' how likely would reverse mortgage be granted on that apartment which already would have diminished value with regard to the retirement apartment's Manager's fees( in contract to purchase) on sale of that apartment? Thought I'd have to investigate for relative if second Accom Deposit required knowing the 2nd partner would not agree to sale of apartment (where there's life there's hope would have been that person's approach to a return home)but ultimately partner in care died so negated need to investigate but I did not look forward to the answer. Barbara's bang on re figures.

Alan
October 08, 2022

From my understanding if $419000 is the cut off for asset test for full pension, if you take out $50 000 for car and furniture etc, then this amount say $370 000 could be invested at say 6%, giving extra income above the deeming rate limits for the income test. It would be interesting to see how deeming rates change income projections under income test.

Dudley
October 08, 2022

"how deeming rates change income projections under income test":

No reduction in Age Pension for income:
= 26 * 336
= $8,736 / y

Max invested capital yielding less then $8,736 / y:
Yield% Capital
0% 419,000.00
1% 419,000.00
2% 419,000.00
3% 291,200.00
4% 218,400.00
5% 174,720.00
6% 145,600.00
7% 124,800.00
8% 109,200.00
9% 97,066.67
10% 87,360.00 [ =MIN(419000, (26 * 336) / MAX(0.000001%, 10%)) ]

Jon Kalkman
October 09, 2022

Alan, you are talking about the assets test cut-off for the full pension. The deeming rate applies to the income test.
If a couple had $419,000 and qualified for the full pension, the income deeming rate would only count $7,555 in assessable income (0.25% * 93600) + (2.25% * (419000 - 93600) and that is under the income test threshold. So that income does not reduce their pension.
Any income above that is not counted (because they only use the deemed amount)
Therefore this couple who are asset tested could earn any income they like and their pension is not affected.
So in your example, their total income would be Pension $40,237.60 + $22,200 (6% X $370,000) = $62,437.60

Jon Kalkman
October 09, 2022

This couple need to have $475,000 in assets before the deemed income reduces their pension (by $1.50 per fortnight). But with that level of assets, the assets test reduces their pension by $168.00 per fortnight. Since Centrelink applies the test which results in the lower pension, this couple's pension is set by the assets test.

Of course, when (not if) the deeming rate changes we need to do all these sums again, but as a general rule the income test applies to people where Centrelink assesses real income (from work) not deemed income from financial assets. And the government has recently announced that people will be able to earn more income from work before their pension is reduced.

Jon Kalkman
October 06, 2022

“When an Australian couple becomes eligible for the full age pension, it's almost equivalent to the government handing them $1 million, plus other benefits.” Moreover, they can have $419,000 in super and other assets before their pension is reduced. The combined income puts them well into the comfortable retirement category.
By contrast, the couple who save $1 million get no pension at all, in fact they need to save considerably more than $1 million to be as well off. In the light of the taxpayer’s generosity why are we surprised that so many people arrange their affairs to maintain their eligibility for the age pension?

Dudley
October 07, 2022

Full Age Pension:
=(26 * 1547.6) + (0.25% * 93600) + (2.25% * (419000 - 93600))
= $47,793.10
Cutoff Age Pension:
=(26 * 0) + (0.25% * 93600) + (2.25% * (935000 - 93600))
=$19,165.50

Capital to yield income equal Age Pension:
=$2,207,337.78
Yield:
=(26 * 0) + (0.25% * 93600) + (2.25% * (2207337.78 - 93600))
= $47,793.10

Deeming rate is close to government guaranteed retail rate and allows close comparison with government guaranteed Age Pension.

Tony Belcher
October 08, 2022

Dudley I love how you add some actual numbers to these conversations but I think sometimes you need a few words to explain what the inputs and formulae actually mean... I think I can parse that one but others of yours leave me a bit lost.

David
October 08, 2022

What Tony said... Dudley, help us all out here and write a few words explaining your sums please. It might be perfectly clear to you, but I'm obviously not the only person struggling to play along. And I'm not stupid.

If a message isn't understood, the problem is with the message, not the people receiving the message. Ask anyone in marketing.

Dudley
October 08, 2022

"a bit lost":

Much better when formulae are entered in a spreadsheet so that inputs can be altered to see how output is changed.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/5-free-alternatives-to-microsoft-excel/

Dudley
October 08, 2022

"the problem is with the message":
Help me out, what is unclear?
Origin of the input values 26, 0.25%, 93600, ..., or symbols (parenthesis, *, +, -, /)?
Description of result?

Dudley
October 08, 2022

Asset Test: https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/assets-test-for-pensions?context=22526

Full Age Pension plus deemed yield on Assessable Assets of $419,000:
=(26 * 1547.6) + (0.25% * 93600) + (2.25% * (419000 - 93600))
= $47,793.10 / y
Cutoff Age Pension ($0) plus deemed yield on Assessable Assets of $935,000:
=(26 * 0) + (0.25% * 93600) + (2.25% * (935000 - 93600))
=$19,165.50 / y

Capital to yield annual income equal Age Pension plus deemed yield on Assessable Assets of $419,000:
=$2,207,337.78
Yield:
=(26 * 0) + (0.25% * 93600) + (2.25% * (2207337.78 - 93600))
= $47,793.10 / y

Deeming rate is close to government guaranteed retail bank deposit rate and allows close comparison with government guaranteed Age Pension.

Clearer?

Tony Belcher
October 06, 2022

Thanks for the above calculator suggestions. For anybody else reading this thread the only other worthwhile one I've been able to find is at BT. The BT one allows more fine grained adjustment to your expected pension limits. https://www.bt.com.au/personal/superannuation/support/tools-calcs/super-retirement-calculator.html

Andrew Smith
October 05, 2022

Good overview of the system, very informative. One would agree that some mechanism has to be introduced on the pension means & assets test, regarding one's home; the retirement income system is in transition.

Property (prosperity gospel) has distorted the Australian economy in the past generation or two, backgrounded by low investment in public housing inc. for pensioners (significant emerging cohort of single women), and retirement income system has had to cater to this phenomenon; at least politically, when the above median age vote is 'crowded' and (their preferred media) difficult to deal with.

Two transitional dynamics in the background are occurring, one is the retirees with full working life superannuation or higher SCG, i.e. fully funded, will not start retiring for a decade or two, and demographic decline or balance, following the baby boomer 'bubble', i.e. a commensurately smaller working age population of PAYE tax payers (hopefully without more pressure to support budgets for more retirees/pensioners).

Apart from the housing issue, Australia with a hybrid system comes up with one of the most sustainable retirement income systems globally, especially vs. the old and often unfunded subscription or insurance type schemes (plus defined benefits) leading to budget stress, with an historical acceptance of permanent and temporary immigration (the latter 'churn over' are 'net financial budget contributors') to keep the population pyramid healthy.

Jenni
October 06, 2022

When the age pension was first introduced in Australia in the early 20th century it was designed to be a payment for those in real need. Over time this has become an “I pay my taxes so therefore I should get it” pension (I’ve seen this written/said so many times I’d be really wealthy if I got a dollar each time).

It seems to me that the fairest way to deal with the age pension is to include all assets at market value into the assets test, as well as keeping the income test, and exempt, say the first $600000 in assets (near the current non-homeowner assets limit for the full pension). Then allow people to choose to receive an age pension on a HECS like scheme, when the fortnightly payment is a loan against their assets (primarily the family home), but one which is repaid on death (and indexed like HECS). This means that those with more expensive houses will have the choice of either staying where they are or moving to something less expensive. This is much fairer as people who do not own their own house or who have lots of non-house assets are currently seriously discriminated against.

The system is so biased towards those who cash in all their other investments, buy a big house and then get an age pension. How stupid is that?

On aged care, the lifetime limit for an individual’s contribution is way too low. I mean, $70k odd is a ludicrously small amount. The annual limit of around $30k is pretty reasonable, but the lifetime limit should be more like 10 or 20 times this, especially as it includes contributions paid to in-home care.

Tom
October 06, 2022

Your obviously quite wealthy and someone who doesn’t have to worry about having enough money to retire or perhaps you’re already retired. In my opinion every person of retirement age without exception should have a level of income to live a comfortable life without fear of falling into poverty. The motive for introducing an aged pension 100 years ago has not changed that much. The aged pension should not be means tested which in and of itself would save millions in administration costs. How we treat our older Australian’s is a reflection of the society in which we live.

Jack
October 06, 2022

The age pension is a welfare payment directed to the neediest in our aged community. But as a result of the Jobs Summit, age pensioners are now allowed to earn more from work before their pension is reduced.
If they are able to work, how needy are they? If the pension is an entitlement because they paid tax all their life, why isn’t it paid to everyone?
The pension means test create perverse incentives and punishes those who work and save to be independent of the taxpayer in their old age. That’s what happens when politicians buy votes with taxpayer dollars.

Lyn
October 09, 2022

Jenni, the system is not biased toward those "who cash in all their investments, buy a big house and then get an age pension" & nor is '"70k odd is a ludricously small amount" when one reaches that time & finds one hasn't enough for standard one may wish. Have you visited a nursing home, whether 1 star or 5 star? 1 star depressingly awful ( worked in one once, left as so depressing) and 5 star ( worked one which was fabulous) at least renders semblance of today's expectation. Far more sensible to save as much as one can ( single or couple) & NOT receive age pension to have enough to pay Accommodation Deposit for decent nursing home if required & on today's figures in cities other than Sydney, one would need about $600,000 each so why deprive oneself by settling for $419,000 in assets for full age pension per quote in Comments by Jon K who knows the figures by his past articles? $419,000 doesn't cover one deposit let alone 2. People who save more than $419,000 save the taxpayer in many ways though I know those who haven't and heaven only knows the cost to Government of providing nursing home bed for them, so back to drawing board about such matters and then $70k odd lifetime limit won't seem a low figure to you when you live to 91 with 5yrs in nursing home at about $8000/mth--- almost $100,000p.a. and never received pension from age 64 to 91. On today's figures that pension saving is about $700,000 plus $5000/mth ongoing cost of providing care once above the 70K limit so for those without savings it is a bleak outlook. Someone with a million today is not a rich fat cat, they've just been careful. Qualified re N. Home cost as saw accounts. One reader, Tom, put it so well " how we treat older Australians is a reflection of the society in which we live".

Your quote re what happened 100 yrs ago doesn't fit today's needs when people live longer from medical breakthroughs & the person I speak of in above example made world-wide medical breakthrough in 1970's so a person could return to a full working life & very many after that. Even an ordinary someone with that background would find it hard to fund $8000/mth nursing home fees for 5 years, but should we treat anyone differently? No. Tom as right as all getout. It could be anyone under the nursing home sheets, someone who has saved your life or the local shopkeeper. I'm sure the young man who returned to work and full life in 1970's would agree. I recently saw press cuttings of the time when donated to a university for posterity to honour the person who facilitated that.

HECS system of repayment wouldn't work as HECS allows debt to die with the person though a final tax return on death allows HECS %age to be charged. Many low income earners (child carers/hospitality workers) never repay total HECS debt as never earn enough to repay debt per chargeable percentage & they can earn more on investing same dollars than to pay off the debt & what do we do with HECS debt incurred by re-trained mature students? Have friend qualified as teacher at 60, how will that debt ever be repaid? Back to my drawing board which should start with better education of children at school re financial matters to learn power of compounding for retirement & fear of costs in retirement for medical needs but that phases me as friend needed private Maths coaching to pass teaching practicals.

Shiraz
October 05, 2022

An Excellent Article. Retirement a phase in life requires a lot of planning and many a times Health can be the centre point of discussion.

Brian
October 05, 2022

Loved the article - you really did draw in a lot of important components. Just today I had a potential client asking about his next steps..he wants to keep his $10m+ home (with $1m mortgage attached), but his super is below $100k. He and his wife are eligible for the full age pension. They also need $100k a year to live on (their numbers). I suggested he try reverse mortgage and see what they could come up with before talking to me. Next tricky question is of course, what do I charge for the advice, and what are the rules around the advice - I cannot advise on debt - but what about the HEAS? All very interesting - keep up the good work.

Jeff Oughton
October 06, 2022

As noted above, the govt's pension loan scheme - HEAS - has a loan rate of 3.95% with a previous govt Budget promise to develop an offering with lump sum/capital drawdowns too. Apart from scope for much larger capital release and some other features noted above, both Heartland & Household Capital sell variable rate offerings at about 7.5% - with a disclaimer to seek financial advice!!!!
Many older Australians will need the "best" debt and financial advice to over come their behavioural biases, manage longevity and other risks, so to unlock some of their main source of private savings to boost "retirement" incomes.
Any wonder that less than 15% and 10% of Australians report that they would seek financial advice or use home equity if they ran out of retirement income! A major need for govt policy to overcome the failure of home, super and advice markets.
Inadequately addressed by Retirement Income Review and subsequent minor policy change....and here comes the Quality of Advice Review. Fingers crossed.....

Paul Dwyer
October 06, 2022

Brian,
Thanks for your comments and the unusual example of retirees wanting to release equity.
Average borrowers have a home valued at $800,000 and only have age pension income to support their cost of living.
In 18 years of reverse mortgage advice, I find your example far from the normal.
If your clients are eligible for the full age pension of $40,000, they would also be eligible for the Government's reverse mortgage income stream of $5,005 per month - thus the $100,000 p/a
Unfortunately, it does not allow them to access lump sums greater than $60,000 p/a (which is only available if they do not take the income stream).
Long term growth on a $10.0m property will exceed the principle and compounding interest on your clients' drawdown.
Jeff Oughton reply mentioned 2 lenders that I rarely use - higher interest rates, no internet access and extremely difficult lending policies.
Age pension eligibility, or reduction to entitlements, is always included in any of our reverse mortgage advice.

Darhma
June 27, 2023

Paul,
Unfortunately your assumptions for HEAS withdrawals are not quite right.
They can only withdraw up to 150% of the full age pension, minus any pension they already receive.
ie: Full Pension +50% (~$60,000)

.

Aussie HIFIRE
October 05, 2022

It is absolutely ridiculous that the taxpayer is paying a couple of thousand dollars a year to a couple that own their own home and have up to $900,000 in investments (allowing $35,000 for contents and a car). And a couple with their own home and say $400,000 in investments can get roughly $40,000 a year from the age pension, plus another $16,000 a year from their investments using a 4% withdrawal rate which means that they have an excellent chance of never running out of money and are in fact far more likely to end up with a lot more money than they started with. So $56,000 a year to live off tax free with no mortgage and no one to support other than themselves. If you can’t cover your costs on that then I don’t know what you’re doing, but if you do then you can also draw down on your investments. Where it does get a bit trickier is for single people with their own home who with $250,000 in investments and a full pension get roughly $27k from the age pension and another $10k from their investments, because a lot of their costs are going to be fixed (rates, house and car insurance etc) so that they have less money for discretionary spending, but they should still be able to lead a pretty comfortable life on $37k a year, again with no mortgage or kids. I do have more sympathy for those who don’t own their own home at retirement though (assuming this is through no fault of their own) because rent is going to take up much of their pension and rent assistance is inadequate at best, and this is an area where I would be happy to see a higher allowance. In general though I think the assets test limits should be cut dramatically. People should take some responsibility for saving for their own retirement rather than relying on the taxpayer to fund most of it for them. And all those claiming “I paid taxes all my life” suddenly go very quiet when you point out that those who paid a lot more tax because they earned more and saved some of it for their own retirement aren’t entitled to a pension at all.

Dudley
October 05, 2022

The Taper: "$10,000 of excess assets above the minimum above reduces the pension by $780 a year".

What investment pays a government guaranteed 7.8% / y CPI indexed, plus additional potential 7% tax free capital gain?

Out of Age Pensioner Assessable Assets and into the Pensioner's Owned Home - capital gains tax free, presuming capital value efficient investment.

Age Pension for all Age Eligible would eliminate the taper caper.

Aussie HIFIRE
October 05, 2022

There is typically only so much that people can spend on their current home, and most people don't really want to move house to a larger/more expensive one when they retire, if anything it's the reverse. So although I acknowledge that there is some of this that goes on, it's likely very much a minority.

An alternative to giving everyone the age pension (likely at ruinous cost to the nation's finances) would be to include the value of the house above some set flat amount. This would unfortunately make the system far more complex and result in even more issues with Centrelink, but would likely result in considerable cost savings in the amount paid out each year.

Or as I've suggested previously, drastically reduce the assets test threshold so that people do have to spend more of their own money in retirement rather than having the majority of it come from the taxpayer.

Dudley
October 05, 2022

"ruinous cost to the nation's finances":

Adjust tax to tax neutral. Plenty do it.

James
October 05, 2022

'People should take some responsibility for saving for their own retirement rather than relying on the taxpayer to fund most of it for them."

Many do, but there is little public recognition of this. Rather envy and almost demonisation of those that are deemed to be "rich fat cats" and ripe for a fleecing! No doubt further changes to superannuation will be made, it's always been an easy target for lazy governments!

But constant change erodes and destroys what little trust and respect that is left for politicians and government. It encourages proselytiser's to encourage asset reduction by investing their assets in their PPOR or spending it down, to claim a part or full pension for protection and security from government stupidity and greed risk! It's a complex contentious issue!

Aussie HIFIRE
October 05, 2022

Roughly speaking 40% of those who are old enough to get the age pension get the full age pension, another 20% get a part pension, and the other 40%are self funded. So yes, I agree that many do take responsibility for this themselves which is good obviously, but it still leaves the majority of the over 67 population who are relying on the taxpayer for a very large portion of their income.

I agree that superannuation has been an easy target for governments, although some of the recent changes such as extending the timeframe for contributions to super have actually been helpful to people rather than a hindrance. But there have certainly been plenty of decisions in the past which have gone the other way.

Tony Belcher
October 05, 2022

What I would love to find is a comprehensive visualization tool that allows me to see the retirement "glide path" -- where I can see the expected income from super and the pension and understand the implications of spending more now for that future income. Part of the fear of spending one's super now is the impossibility of determining a reasonable spending rate *now* due to the fact that the maths of projecting that forward are so dammed difficult. I don't ask for a tool that predicts the future, merely a tool that shows me what, on reasonable probabilities, the future will look like if I spend x% of my super this year. Otherwise it's back to the 4% rule, or more likely, back to underspending this year and every other year on the "just in case s**t happens" rule. That second rule is what most retirees really use, I suspect.

Dudley
October 05, 2022

Try this from Mercer: The Retirement Income Projector is an industry-leading retirement income calculator, which enables you to estimate your projected super balance and how long it may last in retirement.


https://supercalcs.com.au/ris9/telstra

Tony Belcher
October 06, 2022

Thanks for that. That one is better than any of the others I've been able to find.

David Toohey
October 07, 2022

That is an outstanding calculator, simple to get started, simple to tweak, quick to recalc, and visually appealing.

The only comparable calculator was the old My Telos calculator.

Mercer's includes the suite of government tax and benefits, and a probability of outliving the savings.

But it doesn't include a cashflow analysis like paydown of mortgage nor school fees, nor accelerated savings in the later years before retirement, so as to equilibrate net income after savings and tax before and after retirement.

Also, more critically, it doesn't include a 1 year scenario analysis, like My Telos, which is a proxy for the point where the next decisions are made, for example:
"Dear adviser, my portfolio lost 20% this year, what do I do?"
"Dear client, Look at the Stress Test Report from My Telos that I gave you last time, what does it tell you?
- Retire 1.6 years later
- OR save $67 more per week
- OR just accept the new Expected Retirement Income is $45 per week lower than expected
- OR a combination
...so, what do you want to do?"

Just wondering, did anyone ever see that calculator?
and are those 3 options (plus combination) a useful set of metrics to actually manage the outcomes one year at a time, and to set and re-set client expectations realistically as the experience evolves.

I'm a little perplexed that retirement calculators give a very useful Number of how much you can expect to live on in retirement,
but have no consideration for the impact of the key decision now...
"How much risk should I have in my current portfolio?
Because this time next year I know my Number will be different, and if that Number is a gut-churning disappointment then I'm going to sack my financial planner and bail out of the market and..."
...be worse off than if that client chose steadier portfolio risk settings.

Dudley
October 07, 2022

Missing function in: https://supercalcs.com.au/ris9/telstra
amounts not spent are not added to non-super balance. Assumes withdrawals and earnings are all spent.


Aussie HIFIRE
October 05, 2022

Vanguard have a retirement calculator which offers a lot of options.

https://www3.vanguard.com.au/rib/welcome

Tony Belcher
October 06, 2022

Thanks for that. It's better than what I've been able to find.

b0b555
October 08, 2022

I would love to see an Australian version of Income Lab's Dynamic Retirement Planning product:

https://incomelaboratory.com/

Aaron
October 05, 2022

The underlying assumption here is that current situation and regulations around age pension will not change. That's a hard call to make if you are looking at 30 years of retirement, with demographic changes to come. As a migrant from Africa, I don't trust governments.

Peter Brock
October 05, 2022

As an Australian from Australia, I don’t really trust government either. . .

Kevin
October 05, 2022

How do we change the way people think is the problem.They constantly refer to the rort of negative gearing.I think of it as the fertiliser for the money tree. The simplicity of it is amazing.
I buy CBA shares in 1991.Dividend is 40 cents a share @ 39% franking level. Interest rates are 20%.For a period of time I am losing money ( negative).

Suppose my rebate averages $1000 a year for 10 years,then I am positively geared so I pay more tax for the rest of my life.

Things go well so there is no pension.For the outlay of $10K ,fertiliser for the money tree,the govt may save themselves anywhere from $1 to 2 million,depending how long we live .Also reducing the money my children have to forego to pay for my retirement through their higher taxes.

Once people have denied that then we come to something even easier,the franking credits system when the investments are kept outside of super.They convince themselves that my income isn't taxed exactly as if I was working ,a rort that should be stopped.

You can't make people see reality when they don't want to see it .

Manly Chris
October 05, 2022

Excellent overview - I hope it takes the panic out of many older Australians on longevity and assets.

The October Federal mini-Budget is likely to address income levels for Age pensioners before reducing benefits.
I hope the Treasurer is helpful to retirees and raises the allowed income levels sharply to counter the effects of inflation on costs of living for fixed income people.

Guy
October 05, 2022

These “reverse mortgage” schemes are being improved all the time. Have you ever written, or do you know where to find, any articles that compare the different schemes? I am one of the people that has no intention of leaving a single red cent behind so I would be very interested in when to “sell out”.

Warren Bird
October 05, 2022

Graham, I was only talking with the CEO of HOPE Housing about this very topic this morning. Home ownership is definitely overlooked far too much in discussions about retirement, wealth and income, but it's a vital piece.

And of course I absolutely agree with you about the timing of monetary policy tightening, which started a full 12 months too late. (You mentioned this in your comment in response to Mart.)
The RBA isn't alone in this, of course. Every Central Bank in the world has completely forgotten Monetary Economics 1.01 and still ignores money supply growth in their analysis.
Interesting, though, that the RBA has slowed the pace of its cash rate increases just as the August money data has come out. There is some early evidence of money supply growth easing back to a more sustainable level during our winter months, coming in for July and August at an annualised rate of just under 3%, down from around 9-10%. Hopefully that will continue and we may be near the peak of this rate cycle.

Russell (a veteran adviser)
October 08, 2022

The economic quote of the month - and probably the decade - is that #MiltonFriedman now admits: 'The use of the quantity of money as a target has not been a success.' He added: 'I'm not sure I would as of today push it as hard as I once did.' (FT, 7 June 2003).

Monty
October 05, 2022

When considering assets as part of the pension means test would my SMSF be included? It isn't mentioned here so it must be a dumb question!

Graham Hand
October 05, 2022

Hi Monty, superannuation balances including in SMSFs are included in the pension assets test (this is not personal advice).

Mart
October 05, 2022

Graham - spot on in comprehensively covering everything that should matter (you can't legislate for personal preference / 'taste' in financial matters mind !). Your article draws together the threads of several recent threads into one single place, thank you. So at risk of going out on a limb: does this article effectively point to the fact that, for most, the goal should be to have a paid off primary residence at / in retirement as 'the rest' will be taken care of by the Age pension ? And if so, we are back to the thorny issue of housing affordability as a major determinant of enjoying a decent retirement..... cue next article !

Graham Hand
October 05, 2022

Hi Mart, appreciate the comments. Yes, the retirement debate needs far more emphasis on owning a home. A retiree who rents is vulnerable on many fronts, and I think a primary goal should be home security in later years. So the prices rises of 2020 and 2021 making affordability worse were bad for this aspiration, and central banks are culpable for making money so cheap that house prices were rampant. There should have been a tap on the cash rate brake in early 2021 and instead, the Reserve Bank continued to stimulate the economy.

 

Leave a Comment:


RELATED ARTICLES

Yes, ‘millionaires’ can qualify for the age pension

What I know now about retirement income

Should I maximise my pension by investing in the family home?

banner

Sponsors

© 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.