Australian Broker forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Accessing super funds to buy a home is a bad idea: AIST

Notify me of new replies via email
Julia Corderoy | 04 Aug 2014, 08:18 AM Agree 0
‚ÄčAllowing first home buyers to access their superannuation funds for house deposits could lead to financial stress in retirement, warns The Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST).
  • Wozza | 04 Aug 2014, 10:00 AM Agree 0
    One of the problems I foresee is drawing down super for a deposit, selling the home then using those funds for other purposes!
  • MCC | 04 Aug 2014, 10:07 AM Agree 0
    Definately an issue when looking at long term perspective & retirement , which Garcia is obviosuly concerned with. Notwithstanding the owner occupied family home (not Resi Investment) carries multiple usages & meaning which explores such areas as 'security, safety, memories, sense of belonging' etc etc. How do we measure those & weigh them against retirement savings?
  • John | 04 Aug 2014, 10:12 AM Agree 0
    "Please", Tom Garcia is looking after himself. I could be struck by lightning my super will be worth nothing to me.
    If I take out a deposit, at lease it will appreciate over the years and I will be able to enjoy it. How do I enjoy my super now? I believe it is a great idea, but in saying this there has to be some sort of agreement, that when the property is sold, those funds need to be returned to the super fund
  • Ray C | 04 Aug 2014, 10:14 AM Agree 0
    It's Not a Bad idea if it is a loan from your own Super and paid back over time at a low interest rate. Superannuation is one of the worst investments as far as fees and charges go which you have no control over.
  • Jon Colley | 04 Aug 2014, 10:18 AM Agree 0
    While I agree in part to your sentiment, those that retire and own their own home will require significantly less income than those that retire and are still renting, as I would hate to think what the rental costs will be in another 30 years. There are a lot of barriers to entry to the property market for first home owners these days, so why not allow them to access their retirement savings specifically for the purchase of one of their largest assets that will set them apart in their retirement.
  • Life isnt meant to be easy (or convenient!) | 04 Aug 2014, 10:52 AM Agree 0
    I still dont beleive this will ever happen....Dont forget the inequality of earning capacities between partners with kids turns super into a battle ground when (the majority) of relationships eventually break down & end up before the Family Law Courts.
    I agree that at my stage of life, access to my Super would go along way in supporting my dependant kids (especially as there dead beat father doesnt)....but no I must struggle now to fund a retirement I may never have.....unless of course I can prove significant hardship now.
  • Michael of Kambah | 04 Aug 2014, 11:46 AM Agree 0
    I'm not sure why the Hon Senator is advocating for use of super funds only for first home buyers. Why not make it available to everyone...for example a custodial parent on break-up of a marriage.
  • HEM | 04 Aug 2014, 03:04 PM Agree 0
    I don't agree with accessing Super for a deposit on a home. In most families there are 2 incomes and some or no children. Why is it that some can save for a deposit whilst others cannot. Some Lenders will do up to 97% lends. Deposit is the committment that the borrower is making to the purchase. Super was designed to maintain a lifestyle after retirement and to reduce or do away with pensions. I would imagine that the funds they are accessing are predominantly the employers contribution. Why should their employer fund a deposit for an employees home purchase. The only way I would see this working is if they are able to access their own contributions and after the home is sold reimburse the Super with the original draw.
  • Andrew Edwards | 05 Aug 2014, 08:51 AM Agree 0
    I think it's a great idea! Perhaps they could limit it to $30,000 only and it must be used as a deposit only. It is genuine savings when you think about it and it would most likely perform better than super currently is.

    The amount of additional business it would create is staggering.
Post a reply