Any serious conversation about the long-term economic sustainability of our country must confront the design of Australia's retirement income and care systems - particularly how they interact with housing, income support, and aged care.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
As policymakers, captains of industry and economists prepare for this month's economic reform roundtable, much of the attention will focus on productivity, tax reform, and workforce participation.
But there are three areas that require immediate policy attention: the age pension assets test, Commonwealth ent assistance (CRA), and the growing backlog in the home care package system.
New research provides compelling evidence for reform across each of these domains.
First, the age pension assets test has no alignment with modern asset distributions.
It fails to account for the reality that many older Australians are "asset rich, cash poor" with significant equity tied up in the family home.
Under the current system, these individuals can access the pension while those with modest superannuation savings are penalised.
This creates two major inefficiencies. It discourages prudent saving and disincentivises "rightsizing" into more suitable housing.
Research shows the pension means test is a key structural barrier preventing seniors from moving into safer, more manageable homes.
Reforming the test to treat housing wealth more equitably - without unfairly penalising homeowners - could free up 60,000 homes nationally, increase mobility, and reduce long-term pension costs.
It's important to understand that over the past 30 years, capital city median house prices have increased by 600 per cent but over the same period the allowable assets to receive a full age pension have increased by only 178 per cent for a single home owner and 193 per cent for a couple.
This tells us that housing markets have evolved in recent years, yet the age pension practically remains frozen in time, meaning older Australians are left disadvantaged.
Second, CRA is no longer fit for purpose. Originally designed as a modest supplement, it has failed to keep pace with rent inflation or housing market changes - particularly in the private rental market and retirement villages. Older Australians who do not own their home are increasingly vulnerable to rental stress and homelessness, especially women over 55.
As Australia's aged population swells, demand for income support that truly reflects housing costs will only grow. So, reforming CRA isn't optional - it's essential if we're to stop it lingering as the policy relic it has become and restore fairness to our retirement system.
Finally, the backlog in home care packages continues to leave almost 100,000 older Australians without timely access to basic care.
Research shows that delayed access not only worsens health outcomes but also drives higher system costs through avoidable hospital admissions and premature entry into taxpayer-funded residential care.
This means accelerating access to home care is not merely a social good - it is fiscally prudent.
Australia's retirement systems were built for a bygone era. Reform isn't about slashing support - it's about re-targeting assistance to make it fairer, more efficient and sustainably fit for today's needs.
These are not fringe issues - they are core to Australia's economic future and Treasurer Jim Chalmers' roundtable must ensure they are on the agenda.
- Daniel Gannon is the executive director of the Retirement Living Council.
