Lump sums not so super fuel for the housing debate

23 February 2021
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

Taking superannuation lump sums still represents a significant factor for people when they enter retirement, but Parliamentary questioning by Liberal back-benchers has revealed it should not be counted as a significant factor in the debate over the use of superannuation in home ownership. 

When the chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, Tim Wilson late last year interrogated Hesta chief executive, Debbie Blakey on how many members who had reached retirement had used their superannuation savings to pay down their mortgages he may have been disappointed by the answer. 

According to Hesta, fewer than 2.5% of its members took such an option. 

Answering Wilson’s question on notice, Hesta said that in the 2018/19 financial year, “there were 274 members who withdrew their full retirement benefit as cash within 90 days of turning 65. This represents 2.41% of members who turned 65 during FY18/19”. 

While superannuation executives said the figure provided by Hesta appeared exceptionally low they acknowledged that the incidence of superannuation fund members taking lump sums at retirement had reduced substantially over the past decade or so. 

Deloitte superannuation partner, Russell Mason said that, in his experience, the per centage of members taking lump sums stood at around 35%, which was well down on what had been the case in previous years. 

He said that it was common for those near to or entering retirement to seek financial advice and that where a lump sum was taken it might often be used to reduce debt, including paying down a mortgage. 

“But what has to be remembered is that in many instances people who reach retirement age do not necessarily retire. They work on and retain their superannuation balances,” Mason said. 

During questioning of HESTA, Wilson asked Blakey whether she accepted “that it's logical that, if somebody, once they hit the first point where they can withdraw their money, withdraws it not for the purpose of moving it to another fund but to move to cash, they are probably likely to be using it to using it to pay off an asset like a home; is that correct?”    

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Recommended for you

sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

3 months 4 weeks ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

4 months ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

4 months ago

The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia has appointed a new director representing industry funds, among a number of other appointments in recent months....

23 hours ago

The asset manager is bolstering its investments in the global energy transition and climate opportunities....

1 day 23 hours hence

The ethical investment manager has reported record FUM as its growth trajectory continues apace....

1 day 22 hours ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND