On 1 January 2016, the government changed the aged care means test for people who choose to keep and rent out their former home, such that the rent is now included. However, the home, and any rent received, are still exempt from the calculation of pension entitlement where the resident is paying a Daily Accommodation Contribution (DAC) or a Daily Accommodation Payment (DAP) … for now.
An example of home and rent assessment
Among our clients, we have already seen the impact of the change. The most interesting was a couple where the husband had been living in care for some time and his wife moved into the same facility this year. They decided to keep and rent out their home to assist in meeting the cost of care.
The husband is paying a DAP and moved into care prior to 1 January 2016. He meets the rent exemption criteria so his half of the rent was not included when calculating the means-tested care fee. Paying a DAP also meant that the rent and the asset value of the house remain exempt when calculating pension entitlement. Because his wife is no longer living in the home, he has $159,423 of the house asset value included in the calculation of his means-tested care fee.
The wife entered care in 2016 and so her half of the rent is included in the calculation of her means-tested care fee together with the capped asset value of $159,423 for the house. As she is also paying a DAP, the asset and rent will still be exempt for pension purposes.
This is certainly different to the way in which assets and income of a couple have been assessed historically, but changing means tests is something we can expect to see more of as the government tries to manage the expense of an ageing population.
Further changes are coming
In fact, the next round of changes could be less than a year away. The government’s Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO) included a policy decision to include rent from the former home in the calculation of pension entitlement from 1 January 2017. The current asset test exemption on the value of the home where the home is rented and aged care accommodation costs are paid on a periodic basis would also be removed.
Beyond this we are only a hop, skip and a jump away from having some or all of the family home included in the pension assets test. Of course that’s easy to say but hard to do.
The difficulty lies in two issues:
- the fact that house prices across the country vary widely, both from one capital city to another and between cities and regional areas, and
- how people will get access to the capital tied up in the family home to provide themselves with the cash flow they need.
Let’s say the government included the value of the home in the pension assets but increased the asset test thresholds by $500,000.
In Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth where the median house price is above $500,000 pensioners would see a reduction to their entitlement, with the most significant reduction being in Sydney where the median price is currently around $885,000.
In Adelaide and Hobart where the median price is below $500,000 some people would be able to exempt the full value of their house and some of the assets outside, potentially receiving more pension than they do now. The median house price in Hobart is only $350,000.
Accessing capital in the home
From the point of view of accessing the capital in the home, most people naturally think of reverse mortgages. But many reverse mortgage products are not available to people under the age of 70. The few products that enable people to borrow from the age of 60 typically set the amount someone can borrow between 15% to 20% with an increase of 1% each year thereafter. Let’s say the person was 65 with a $750,000 house.
The current Pension Loan Scheme (where people can ‘top up’ their pension to the maximum entitlement by creating a debt with the government secured by the home) may prove to be much more popular. The current interest rate for the Pension Loan Scheme is 5.25% with interest compounding fortnightly.
It is not an easy problem to solve, but a solution will be found and as always there will be winners and losers.
From an aged care perspective, removing the exemptions that apply to the family home and any rent is likely to encourage residents to pay for their cost of aged care accommodation by lump sum. In fact, beds that have a higher price Refundable Accommodation Deposit (RAD) may become the bed of choice as residents try to preserve capital and maintain their pension entitlement. Unfortunately for the rest, this is likely to create upward pressure on prices.
Rachel Lane is the Principal of Aged Care Gurus and oversees a national network of financial advisers specialising in aged care. This article is for general educational purposes and does not address anyone’s specific needs.