The key test of a secure retirement is whether a person owns a home. Renting is a good choice for some Australians but I don’t want it to become a mandatory design feature of our retirement system.
More and more people will be retiring with decent super balances but will have to rent in retirement. The IGR states: “retiree renters face substantially higher housing cost pressures and poverty rates.”
Why should we live in a nation where big institutions own houses by virtue of government policy but people can’t use their own money to get a home or reduce their own mortgage?
If Australians can reorient some of their super savings early in life (for example, a loan from super for residence), they can optimise their objectives. In effect, rebalancing savings between the two objectives.
At retirement, Australians are best served by, in order of priority: 1. Owning a residence outright; and 2. owning financial assets from which they can draw an income to replace or supplement the Age Pension.
In 2024-25, some 32% of super lump sum payments were used to pay off mortgages. This is a giant amount of money which raises questions about the cohesion of our savings, housing and retirement policy.
In 1993 Paul Keating himself said “for most people, a debt free home is as important a part of retirement security as superannuation income.” In later years, Mr Keating has lost his imagination.