Liberal Tim Wilson just another superannuation rent-seeker

Liberal MP Tim Wilson has called for first-home buyers (FHB) to be able to access their superannuation to help them pay for a deposit.

However, Labor MP Julian Hill claims this would make it harder for them to get into the housing market because it would push up prices, which would benefit existing homeowners.

Hill also notes that Wilson and his husband stand to gain immensely from the policy given they collectively own five properties between them. Hence, they are acting out of pure self-interest by advocating for a policy that would inflate property values and boost their wealth.

From The New Daily:

“I do accept that [Mr Wilson is] interested in increasing home ownership,” Mr Hill said in a speech to Parliament on Thursday.

“But the Liberal MPs who are pushing this idea should be honest. The only people who benefit are home owners.

“He and his husband between them own five properties; it’s on his parliamentary declaration.

“He’d stand to benefit from this policy, but first-home buyers would not”…

“You don’t make housing more affordable by making it more expensive. It’s a ridiculous policy to pour more cash into people’s pockets as house prices are already rising – [it’s] petrol on the fire,” Mr Hill said.

Regular readers will know that I do not support Labor’s position of lifting the superannuation guarantee to 12%. Doing so would lower take-home pay, worsen the long-term sustainability of the federal budget and increase inequality.

In fact, the only winners from this policy would be the superannuation industry itself (including Labor-aligned industry funds), which would earn fatter fees from having more funds under management.

Nor do I support Tim Wilson’s idea of letting FHBs accessing their super to buy a home.

Like all demand-side stimulus, the extra purchasing power would merely be capitalised into higher home prices, resulting in no ‘affordability’ gain and the downside of having less savings available in retirement. It would be beneficial to owners of multiple properties, like Tim Wilson, who would experience a large increase in wealth, but detrimental to the broader community.

The last thing Australia needs is to pour superannuation fuel on the Australian housing bonfire, in turn making affordability worse and reducing retirement outcomes.

Unconventional Economist

Comments

  1. Could it be that we are in a goldilocks phase when it comes to Super – the settings might just be about right? (At least for accumulation phase).

    • Parliamentary registerMEMBER

      From the parliamentary register, Tim Wilson is the proud owner of 1 residence and 4 investment properties.
      So that’s 4 properties not available for FHBs/ owners. Good investment decisions there.

    • happy valleyMEMBER

      +1000 Just another LNPer throwing people under the bus in the name of national interest, but totally self-interest.

      He pulled a swifty with his disgraceful “excess franking credit refund for zero taypayers” campaign in the last election and genuine taxpayers will be subsidising the “refund” leaners to the tune of $6bn + a year until the cows come home.

  2. How can these MPs be even allowed to vote on these issues in parliament? shouldn’t they declare themselves to be having a massive vested interest in the outcome to which they will gain financially? Any why hasn’t the public cottoned onto this and made a big noise? rhetorical question, cause I know the Murdoch, IPA, LNP media answer which more than half of voting Australia subscribes to. They are on par with a banana republic.