![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
|
|
Circumstances of the customer |
Threshold |
Ceiling |
|---|---|---|
|
Single home owner |
$125 750 |
$244 000 |
|
Single non-home owner |
$215 750 |
$334 000 |
|
Homeowner couple (combined) |
$178 500 |
$374 000 |
|
Non-home owner couple (combined) |
$268 500 |
$464 000 |
The allowable income limits are:
|
Circumstances of the customer |
Free area (pa) |
Cut-out point (pa) |
|---|---|---|
|
Single |
$2600 |
$21 008 |
|
Couple (combined) |
$4576 |
$35 048 |
If a person disposes of an asset for less than it is worth (for example, by giving it away or selling it at an undervalue), then for the purposes of the assets test the amount by which the value of the asset (or the difference between what it was worth and what the person received for it) exceeds $10 000 is included in the value of the person's assets for a period of five years after the disposition.(2) Clearly this is to prevent people giving away assets to children and other relatives so as to make themselves eligible for the age pension. This provision of the Social Security Act 1991 and its associated provisions are often referred to as the 'gifting provisions'.
Payment can be made under the pension assets hardship provisions if it is considered that the claimant would suffer 'sever financial hardship' if payment was not granted. 'Severe financial hardship' is not legislatively defined. For administrative purposes, where a customer's total income is less than the maximum rate of Social Security payment that applies to them, and they have liquid assets less than the limit ($6000 for singles and $10,000 for couples), then they are considered to be in 'severe financial hardship'.
Some customers with substantial assets claim a pension under the assets test hardship provisions because they are unable or unwilling to sell or draw upon their assets to support themselves. A test of reasonableness is applied in each case. If a farmer has their property on the market at a realistic price and is unable to find a buyer, the test is satisfied relatively easily. However, some farmers want to keep their property and still get a pension. Although it is recognised that some farmers have a long term attachment to their properties or wish to keep the property and pass it to their heirs, an unwillingness to rearrange assets does not mean in itself that an asset is considered 'unrealisable' under the pensions assets test.
The Social Security Act 1991 defines an unrealisable asset as one that a person could not be reasonably expected to sell or use as security for borrowing. Existing policy is that if a person has a long term attachment to a property (for example, has lived there for 20 years or more), it is unreasonable to expect them to sell the property unless they can subdivide and keep the portion on which they live.
A number of concessions have been introduced to assist those suffering hardship and who are not entitled to payment because they have high levels of assets. Some exclusions relevant to farmers claiming pensions are:
Where a pensioner farmer legally transfers their property to an immediate family member, Social Security will deduct the value of some contributions, e.g. wages forgone and capital contributions, made in the past by the family member, from the value of the property transferred.
Report of the Special Rural Task Force
The Task Force completed its report in January 1997.(3) Recommendation 15 provided:
to facilitate the inter-generational transfer of farm assets, a short term (e.g. two year) moratorium on the five year gifting provisions be applied for farmers planning retirement (from 63 years) or of pension age to give individual families a one off 'window of opportunity' to plan and transfer the family farm. Qualification would be conditional upon:
The gifting provisions mean that if a farmer wishes to retire and give the farm to the next generation, they could be precluded from receiving a pension for five years. In such situations, two or more generations could be dependent on one farm enterprise that can only realistically support one generation.
The Task Force stated:
Agriculture - Advancing Australia
On 14 September 1997 the Prime Minister and the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy announced the government's rural policy package, entitled 'Agriculture - Advancing Australia'.
That package includes the government's response to recommendation 15 of the Task Force in the form of the Retirement Assistance for Farmers Scheme. Farmers who qualify for retirement assistance (see the conditions below) will be able to transfer their interest in their farm to a younger generation without affecting their eligibility for the age pension. The transfer will not be regarded as a disposition of assets for the purposes of assessing whether a social security payment is payable to the farmer. The essential elements of the scheme are:
Item 14 of Schedule 1 inserts proposed new Part 3.14A into the Social Security Act 1991. That part is entitled 'Retirement assistance for farmers'. Item 11 of Schedule 2 inserts proposed new Division 8 into the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. Those provisions mirror the proposed new sections in the Social Security Act 1991 because the retirement assistance scheme is to apply equally to Veterans' Affairs support payments.
What transfers will the retirement assistance apply to?
Retirement assistance will available to a person where all of the following conditions are satisfied (proposed new section 1185B):
Retirement assistance will also be available where a person who is an eligible former partner of a qualifying farmer transfers his or her interest in the farm and all farm assets to an eligible descendant. A person is an eligible former partner of a qualifying farmer where at the time of ceasing to be the partner of another person, the other person was a qualifying farmer and the first person had a legal interest in a farm or farm assets.
What does the retirement assistance consist of?
If the conditions for obtaining retirement assistance are satisfied (under proposed new section 1185B), proposed new section 1185D will operate to deem the transfer of the farm and farms asset not to be a disposal. It will similarly deem any transfer by the person's partner not to be a disposal. Clearly the intended consequence is that a farmer and his or her partner will be able to transfer their farm to their children or grandchildren and immediately following the transfer they may be eligible for the pension (the eligibility will, of course, be determined in the ordinary manner apart from disregarding the disposition of the farm).
This concession has been granted exclusively to the farming community. No similar concession exists for the non-farming small businessperson, who are owner operators, to allow him or her to transfer their business to a younger generation and become eligible for the age pension.
Lee Jones
19 March 1998
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared for general distribution to Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament. While great care is taken to ensure that the paper is accurate and balanced, the paper is written using information publicly available at the time of production. The views expressed are those of the author and should not be attributed to the Information and Research Services (IRS). Advice on legislation or legal policy issues contained in this paper is provided for use in parliamentary debate and for related parliamentary purposes. This paper is not professional legal opinion. Readers are reminded that the paper is not an official parliamentary or Australian government document.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 1997
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary Library, other than by Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official duties.
Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library, 1997.