Big Super’s Conflicted Predictions

The superannuation lobby has one interest: funneling more workers’ money into its coffers.

Asking Big Super their opinion on super for housing is like asking Dracula about the blood bank.

The Bank of Mum and Dad is now the sixth largest lender in Australia. That bank is not available to all Australians, whereas superannuation is widely available.

Superannuation is becoming the largest pool of capital available to a worker in Australia. The cornerstone of retirement is a house; therefore, putting superannuation to use for housing makes sense—unless you are the super lobby.

Too many millennials and Gen Zs are on a trajectory to never own a house. Allowing them to use their own money for housing might be the only way to bridge the deposit gap.

The latest "independent" report from Big Super was commissioned by the same super funds that will be ‘institutional investors’ in Australian housing under Labor’s Housing Australia Future Fund.

While super funds want to be Australia’s corporate landlords, but they don’t want their members to use their own money to buy a home.

In Big Super and Labor’s warped universe, it is good if super funds invest in housing as an institution, but bad if the same money is used by an individual for housing. It makes no sense at all.

Independent economists, including Cameron Murray, the Grattan Institute, and Peter Tulip, have stated that super for housing would have a minuscule price impact on an $11 trillion housing market.

Super for housing should be an option for Australians. Labor wants to deny this choice because it only governs for special interests.

[Ends]