The study by RedBridge Group found participants thought the proposal was inconsistent with the purpose of superannuation and worried it would artificially inflate house prices.
In its budget reply last week, the opposition recommitted to its policy of allowing people to use $50,000 from their super for a home deposit.
The study, which consisted of all generational cohorts — millennials, generation X, and baby boomers — found that younger renters were actually the most opposed to the proposal.
“The proposition that elicited the strongest qualitative support across all cohorts is the counter-argument that Australians shouldn’t have to choose between a house and a nest egg,” the report stated.
It stated that arguments about the proposal pushing up prices were “highly persuasive” and there was also great concern it would lead to lower retirement savings, which would then put more pressure on the taxpayer-funded pension.
Previous research by Industry Super Australia found opening super for housing would lead to median prices surging between 8 to 16 per cent in the nation’s five major capital cities.
The ISA research found that allowing couples to take just $40,000 from super would send prices “skyrocketing” in all state capitals, but the impact would be most severe in Sydney, where the median property price could lift by more than $100,000.
Industry Super Australia chief executive Bernie Dean said throwing super into the housing market would be like throwing petrol on a bonfire.
“It will jack up prices, inflate young people’s mortgages and add to the aged pension, which taxpayers will have to pay for.”
“Australians know what super is for – their retirement – and they know tapping into it early robs from their future and should only be done if current circumstances are dire.
“Young Australians reject having to choose between saving for retirement and owning a home, it’s an unfair choice their parents were never expected to make.
“We need sensible solutions to address house prices – like boosting the supply of affordable housing which will bring prices down and get young people into a home.”
When will government learn that the way to help with the housing problems is to increase supply of housing, not increasing the capital to buy it. Just another ridiculous idea along FHB etc and all the other failed schemes of handing out money to would be buyers.
The only credible system that any remote sense on the supply of capital was the FHSS. Far better to have more land releases, infrastructure to support it. You know….long term planning. Not policy on the run and press releases by twitter.
How about an exemption under Section 71: A loan to a member to purchase a first home will not be an in-hose asset upto $50 K