- Parliamentary Business
- Senators and Members
- News & Events
- About Parliament
- Visit Parliament
Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
The Pension Loans Scheme: an old program attracts new interest
The Pension Loans Scheme: an old program attracts new
interest Posted 24/02/2015 by Don Arthur
The Australian Government’s Pension Loans Scheme (PLS) is a reverse mortgage scheme that
allows people of pension age to access an income stream by borrowing against their
housing equity. Currently it is only available people of pension age (or their partners) who
are unable to receive a full pension because of the income or assets test. Amidst recent
debates over the cost of aged care and the treatment of the family home in the pension
assets test, two think tanks, the Australia Institute and Per Capita, have suggested
expanding the scheme.
How it works
The PLS allows people to top up a part pension to the full rate or, for those not eligible for
any pension, receive fortnightly payments equivalent to the full rate. It is open to people of
pension age (or their partners) who have equity in Australian real estate that they can use as
security for the loan.To be eligible the person or their partner must receive no pension or a
reduced rate of pension due to the income or assets test (but not both). It is not available to
those receiving the full rate of pension. Compound interest is charged on the loan and it is
normally repaid if the home is sold or from the person’s estate after their death.
History of the scheme
The PLS was created in 1985 when the Hawke Government reintroduced an assets test for
pensions.The scheme was first proposed by the Panel of Review of Proposed Income and
Assets Test headed byProfessor Fred Gruen.
The panel recommended an assets test that included the pensioner’s home. In doing so it
recognised that an assets test could disadvantage people with assets that were difficult to
sell, either because there were few buyers or for ’social or psychological reasons’.
To deal with this problem the panel proposed setting up a scheme that would allow people
to receive a 'pension-sized' amount as a loan that could be recovered from their estate.
Despite the panel’s recommendation, the Government decided not to include the
pensioner’s home in the assets test but took up the proposal for a loans scheme. The
Opposition opposed the reintroduction of an assets test and was critical of the PLS. Senator
Messner, the Coalition spokesperson for social security, referred to it as the ‘pay as you die’
Poor take-up was a problem with the PLS from the beginning with only 13 applications for
loans in its first two months.
The Keating Government responded to poor take-up by broadening the scheme from 1996.
One of the major changes was to extend eligibility to people whose pension rate was
affected by the income test. Take up continued to be low. According to the Productivity
Commission, there were only 710 loans outstanding in 2010.
In a 2013 research paper on population ageing, the Productivity Commission looked at
some of the reasons for low take-up. These included the scheme’s exclusion of people
already receiving the full pension rate and the fact that it was restricted to an income stream
equal to the full pension rather than allowing access to larger lump sums. However, the
report concluded that ‘the scheme demonstrates it is practical to develop models in which
governments provide loans secured against housing equity for social welfare purposes’ (p.
Recent proposals for expanding the scheme
Recently there have been proposals for expanding the PLS to cover aged care costs or allow
the family home to be included in the pension means test.
In January this year Emily Millane of Per Capita argued that asset-rich Australians should be
obliged to use equity in their homes ‘to fund a portion of their aged care in the home. They
would do so by means of a loan, or a line of credit, secured against the family home and
payable once the home is sold’ (p. 20). Millane proposed modifying the PLS to support this.
In February this year The Australia Institute’s Richard Denniss has argued that the scheme
would allow the government to extend the assets test to pensioners’ homes without
depriving them of an income stream. In 2014 Richard Denniss and Tom Swann released a
If family homes above a value threshold were included in the assets means test,
affected retirees could still stay in their homes by drawing from their own equity,
rather than the government budget, through the PLS. The expanded PLS would
extend this option to all retirees (p. 10).
The report also argued access to the PLS should be expanded to all retirees, including those
already receiving the full rate of the pension.
Adam Creighton recently argued in The Australian that the family home should be included
in the pension assets test and that this would not force retirees to move because the PLS
would allow them to access an income stream.
As debate over tighter targeting of income support unfolds, interest in the Pension Loans
Scheme is likely to continue.