What this article fails to recognise is that the money that is withdrawn and invested in the house will grow in line with the house value so that at retirement the individual's net worth will probably be in the same region. On top of that the residence is not taxed whereas super is,albeit concessionally. Furthermore the article does not recognise that the individual would almost certainly have other savings that would be used. Thirdly articles such as this fail to recognise the much improved mental health of someone entering the home market.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

I also have a few issues with this policy of using super to buy a home.

. If the scheme is successful there will be multiple people with the money to enter the property market at the one time. It will flood the market and put home prices up,

. If you find it too hard to cope (or things go wrong) you could lose your home and retirement nest egg.

(It's the number of people that will be ready to buy a home at the one time).

There are other alternatives to assist with home purchases - the 5% deposit scheme are available.

I also point out some people will not have enough funds in their super fund at retirement to buy a home.

I did note the ASFA comments - they are protecting their profits.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.