New HECS Indexation

A little bit late to the budget party, but I was linked an article by a friend today, and I was curious where the media are pulling it's numbers from.
My main topic addresses the following quotes from the article

From June 2016, the Federal Government wants to change the rate at which all higher education loans are indexed, meaning the effective interest rate would go from CPI to as high as 6 per cent.

and

HELP debts will be indexed by the Treasury 10 year bond rate (to a maximum of 6.0 per cent per annum) rather than the Consumer Price Index (CPI)

It says as high as 6%, which would imply that it is capped at 6% right?
Then I kept looking, at the 10 year government bond which HECS will be pegged to.
Shock horror when I found the bond yields at 3.65%, compared to the current CPI of 2.9%. Which means at the moment, there is only a 0.75% increase in HECS fees. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.

Anyway, my HECS debt will be around $30k when I graduate.
I'm going to cut corners and make stupid assumptions like the 10 year government bond will always be 1% above CPI, and that I won't find a job which pays over average income for 5 years, and that I'll pay the HECS off all at once
Punching the numbers out,(30000 x 1.01^5) over the 5 years, I'll have to pay $1530 more than what I would've paid pre-budget. This comes down to $306/year.

Of course this isn't taking into account the stupid increase in Uni fees (which I agree is terrible and I'm hoping it won't pass the senate) and other factors, but I don't see the point of all this media puffery over the small HECS increase. Unless there's some point in this policy that I'm missing? I should probably point out I haven't read the actual budget :) This is just what I understand from the media

Yes yes, all the Labour die-hards will have a cow over this post. I should mention before I get negged into oblivion (on a forum post :D), I'm neither Liberal or Labor. I'm just trying to put things into perspective.

Tl;dr, Am I missing something from the new policy, and if not, why are people making such a big deal over a less-than-1% increase to HECS?

Comments

  • +9

    It is very unlikely you will pay the loan off in one go, and it is the compounding nature of paying the annual 4% or whatever the default is that is causing the drama.
    You could liken it to a credit card that said there is a permanent interest free period providing you make the minimum repayment changing its terms after you have made the balance transfer to up the interest rate.
    Many current students have debts over $30k, that they were reasonably expecting to pay off over 20 years or so. Changing the rules so it costs them quite a bit more for the same repayment schedule is a bit of a breach of trust.

    • +2

      Really surprising that some people don't understand compound interest

      • +9

        they are called arts students

        • +7

          Whats the difference between a BA and a large pizza?
          .
          .
          .
          .
          One can feed a family.

        • Haha wow rough.

        • Harsh!

        • Hey I have a bachelor of Jazz music and I resent that claim! haha

        • I too have a BA. Surely we can self deprecate :-)

  • +12

    Because it isn't a less-than-1% increase to HECS. The treasury bond rate is closely related to the cash rate, which is at an all time low of 2.5%. This makes sense for 10 year bond rates to sit at around 3.5%. However, as the economy recovers, it will increase. Treasury bond rates can increase past 6% and have for very long periods of time in the past.

    • +5

      ^THIS.. and mskeggs comment that you wont be paying it off in one hit.

      Redo your calculations for 10 years time when the bond rate is 6% and CPI is still 2-3%.
      And Compound the interest which your initial calculation doesn't do.

      Even if you do manage to pay it all off within 5 years, what about the students (who are only starting High School now and have no vote) to follow you.. Who will be enetering Uni and taking on HECS when the bond rate is at 6% or higher. Before they've even finished their degree, they'll have had 3 years of +3% accumulating on their debt!

      I'm well and truly out of Uni so it doesn't affect me, but we're selling our future short if we cost higher education out of reach of the population.

      • -2

        Hmm I supposed so. Like I said though, I cut lots of corners for simplicity's sake.

        Also, I should've included this link. It's all purely speculation and dependant on wayyyy too many variables, but there should be some truth in the numbers somewhere.

        I guess the compounding interest plus the fee hike from when you first start uni would be the killer.
        It doesn't really affect me either because I'll be done in 12 months, but I'm just curious what I missed because it seems to be such a big discussion point.

        • +2

          Speculation, yes just like anything to do with financial markets… but the probability is heavily skewed towards rates increasing from their current historic lows in the next 5 years..

        • +14

          You didn't cut corners, your maths is actually completely wrong.

          Firstly,

          30000 x 1.01^5 - 30000 does NOT equal 30000 x 1.039^5 - 30000 x 1.029^5. A 1% increase from 2.9% to 3.9% is given by the second expression. The first expression, which you used represents something else (i.e. how much interest is paid when the rate is 1%).

          You calculate the first one out to be 1,530.30. However, the second calculation comes to a much higher 1,714.72. That's over a 10% error. If you're going to provide us with mathematical arguments, please make sure they're correct.

          Secondly,

          Your assumption that the treasury bond rate will always be 1% higher than the CPI is nonsense. Specifically choosing a low treasury bond rate to support your argument is incorrect. Whilst long run averages are not really relevant (past performance is not an indicator of future performance) and forecasts are not always accurate, you've specifically picked the lowest treasury bond rates ever, they've never been lower historically.

        • +1

          you've specifically picked the lowest treasury bond rates ever, they've never been lower historically.

          I think this is one of the reasons they are trying to push it through now - because a lot of people will just look and think "well it's only about 1% difference"…forgetting (or not giving a crap) that in the long term it won't stay this low.

        • Dont bet on that.

          rates could easily head back up to 6%, then you will be paying that as well, unless you manage to pay off all your debt in the next 5 years or less

  • +4

    It's the new interest arrangements combined with the potential deregulation of fees that make it particularly worrisome. For students with existing HECS debt it's not that much of an impost - but it is a breech of faith and one also sold on this new "talking point" that funding university fees is somehow regressive. It isn't - on average tertiary educated students return any initial cost to the government many times over in the form of increased income tax revenue.

    With deregulated fees and interest at the 10yr government bond rate (averaging about 5% for the last decade) managing the interest alone on the loan could become a non-trivial component of each HECS contribution. And it begs the question, if they were happy to retrospectively change everyones agreement once, what's do we have to say they won't do so again? Keep in mind the US government profits (substantially) on student loans.

    • +2

      I think it is a very important point - that a lot of people (myself included) took out a loan under certain conditions and they are able to just change it, with no recourse on our part. I find it disturbing that they can do this. At the very least, there should be a line drawn and all new loans subject to the new conditions - if they should be implemented at all.

  • +2

    As you say, it is linked to the 10yr bond rate. It isn't a wise move to assume the bond rate will stay at the level it is now. In the past 20 years it has been as high as 9%, as low as 3%, and the long-term average (which is where one would expect it to be most of the time) is around 6-7%.

    The bond rate is a function of many things, one being how risky investors think the Australian government is. We currently have AAA credit ratings from the three major agencies, which is one of the reasons why the 10yr rate is currently so low.

    Under the Howard government, we didn't have AAA rating from all the agencies, which was one of the reasons why the bond rate was higher back then. If the current government's economic policies threaten that credit rating, or make investors believe that Australia is a bit more risky than it used to be, then that rate will rise and students will pay more interest on their loans.

    Another important note, for those of you who already have student debts, even if you have graduated, the new increased rates also apply to you. Confirmed on the government study website.

  • +1

    Thanks for the replies everyone. I was confusing the cash rate (which moves with the bonds) and the CPI (which doesn't), which incidently are similar figures at this point in time.
    And yes I fudged up the calculations, thanks for the clarification paulsterio.

    Anyway, the main reason I was asking (and I didn't want to post it initially because I wanted to see what everyone said and make my own decision) is that I'm thinking, whether or not to repay my HECS debt early with my savings after I graduate (because I was thinking of putting it towards a home deposit).
    I guess the answer I got is, pay it when the cash rate starts to rise again.

    Another question springs to mind; will the 5% discount be removed, or just subject to change whenever they feel like it too? (I can't find the answer on the government site)

    • +1

      As far as I'm aware, they are intending on removing this discount but haven't done it yet.

      The problem that I see is that if you earn close to the threshold, are only paying the minimum amount taken through tax, and the rate rises, you will be paying so little off the principal of the debt that you may never repay it. It would be a guaranteed stream of income for the government, which wouldn't actually benefit you in reducing the debt. You would be therefore forced to repay it quicker with more voluntary repayments if you want it to actually go away.

      • +2

        But that is one of the goals of the system. If you go and work as, for example, a community nurse earning below the threshold you never repay the debt. If you work as a merchant banker you do. When you die, your debt is wiped. So it doesn't preclude people from taking lower pay jobs, if that is what they want to do.

        I paid off my HECS when the up front discount was much better, 20% maybe? And, of course, my fees were much lower then. So I think it very likely they will remove the current discount. But I was able to pay it off after I had been working for several years and benefited from the CPI only indexation. It would have sucked to be paying 6% compound interest, as I really needed money when I first graduated, and didn't have spare cash to pay off HECS.

        • At least Abbot has now said that his government won't try to extract HECS debts from the dead, despite the all-in support for the idea from his own education minister and treasurer.

          Doing the maths though, there does seem to be a bit of a lifetime repayment thing going on here.

          2011 Australian median income: $64,168
          HELP-HECS repayment rate for $60,994 - $65,563: 5.5%

          Hence if an earlier poster's average cash rate of 6% is accurate, and you earn the median Australian income, you'd possibly have a higher debt when you die. Of course there is also a widely held belief that higher education puts you above the median income.

        • +2

          It's not a widely held belief, it's a statistic, there's a difference.

          The median income for a tertiary educated individual is higher than the median income for a non-tertiary educated individual.

        • Take out the Medicos and Mining Engineers/Scientists from that calculation and you're left with Graduates earning around the mean (median is the wrong terminology, cause I'm certain that there are people earning more than $128k).

        • +2

          Obviously…
          Take out the graduates who are earning around the mean and under, and then what are you left with?

          Lol you cant just 'take out' groups of graduates to skew the data. Your data wont be for tertiary educated individuals then would it, if you've effectively taken out anyone in that category who earns a high income

        • Is that right? Link the ABS source please.

        • While I well-and-truly missed the free education gig, I consider myself rather lucky:

          Firstly, I did a uni subject during Year 12 and was inadvertently grandfathered into the old rates when a budget-time announcement increased fees for my friends 'joining' the uni system the following year.

          Second, I worked substantial part-time hours and managed to get the now superseded 20% discount a majority of the time. I graduated with only 6-7k in debt that I've since serviced. I've therefore dodged two separate significant cost increases. Phew.

    • +2

      The 5% discount was proposed in 2013 however it didn't pass the senate in january and as such has been scraped (in its form at the time). This was a cheap tactic from the government to seemingly force people to accept the increase in indexation

      Each year you earn over the threshold you will be required to pay an amount from your income towards your HELP, starting around 4% for $53k (at the moment), when you lodge your tax return. This is a requirement and you can't escape it.

      However this is the only time that you are required to pay any amount towards your HELP debt. There are no requirements to voluntarily pay it.

      Given that then its worth remembering that this is the cheapest loan you will ever get in your life. If there are no requirements to pay it and it has no impact on your credit history common sense would suggest that you do the bare minimum to pay your debt.

      Everyone, including me who has $40k debt, has the feeling that we have to pay off our help debt as soon as possible. However consider the opportunity cost of the money you would put towards your HELP as a lump sum.

      • -6

        Its only good debt if you have other debts you have to pay off. Or you can better invest it elsewhere.

        Otherwise you should pay it off as soon as possible.

        • lol no you shouldn't

        • If you have no other debt and the HECS is at the bond rate, you probably should. The alternative is to invest the money and pay tax on the investment returns, which would be likely to give a lower return than paying off the HECS.
          While it was indexed to CPI only, there was no reason to pay it off early.

  • +5

    So you uncap uni & tafe fee's (have you seen what a tafe course will cost next year? its daylight robbery and its for TAFE! Its not even a REAL College…) so they go up a minim of the 20% they are defunding education but with NO max cap as to what will be charged and having gone to uni i can say its a shit education for the most part thats still in the 18th Century but i digress… Now the set interest rate is being uncapped but maxed (for now) at 6% which doubles your interest bill and thats interest on MONEY thats a complex illusion anyway. We could just as easily retask the money system and print money at say a -1.5 interest rate (so you spend it rather than horde it) and the GOV borrowing rate might be say 1.5% and inteest at the bank for a home loan never any more than 3%.

    No reason whatsoever, charging more for MONEY is URSERY and as any jew, muslium and christian knows its IMORAL to charge interest on something you can pick up on the beach (shells) or make from carved split wood (its where the english reinvented paper money from and was used to pay the kings taxes). its also the reason why china is PRINTING money to dig big holes in AU to build skyscrapers and complex infrastructure as fast as they can because they had printed money century's before and knows it always fails. they will have the infrastructure and we will have the big holes; lucky us we will have a 'balanced budget' thats worthless come the next crash, they will have a huge debt that will be 0… SMART

    But thats history for you, the mad hatter of gutter politics and hate/division is in charge, I'm sure he has a real plan and is just toying with us over this dumb ass direction he is heading, also known as the drain… Turns out he was as bought and paid for by the rich to do nothing but scam the poor, the rich are depending upon every cent just to get by in Switzerland.

    Education costs, but it should cost less. WAY LESS. With the internet, youtube ect all you need is a place to do PRAC and EXAMS. A little bit of marking and the ability to ask and get questions. My nieces almost never see a campus, the FINES, FUEL and work take care of that. True research needs infrastructure and therefore funding but why should student pay for something SOCIETY profits from? You know medical research, science research ect…?

    Come the REVOLUTION id put both sides up against the wall and start over as our country can make good rules, choices and changes and here is my list.

    • TAX religion (see min rule), jesus said "render under caesar what is caesar's so no man might have anything in me" so he is ok with it
    • TAX trusts (see min rule)
    • Remove exemptions on DIESEL excise makes for a better carbon tax IMO
    • Charge GST on all web purchases as the purchase was made in OZ where you clicked
    • Flat min tax that companies can't claim exemptions beyond like 15%
    • Redo the MRT so it covers all mining/land use for everything, its ripe for reform and its OUR WEALTH they are mining
    • for everything, granite, minerals, oil, gas, everything… Its a dogs breakfast of state and federal mishmash now
    • Remove fancy loopholes that apple and google use or SHUT THEM DOWN IN OZ. And go the missing back taxes too.

    Then come see me on EDU, PENSIONS ect…

    • +1

      Charge GST on all web purchases as the purchase was made in OZ where you clicked

      this.

      ebay, apple, google, etc

  • +2

    I don't like the idea of forking over a portion of my pay and it actually doing nothing to reduce my debt. The system was previously designed to get people to pay it off if they were over the threshold, just that it might take a while.

  • +10

    I don't understand why we're not extracting HECS debt from the dead? I still think it's a much better idea than punishing those who are working hard and paying their taxes.

    When people pass away with a mortgage, with personal loans, with any sort of loan, they are claimed against their assets, which is the fair and right thing to do. I don't know why HECS debts are not recovered from the dead when they are, in principle, very similar to mortgages or personal loans.

    Instead, the government (and other people) think it's a better idea to punish students who have a great working life ahead of them, paying taxes and contributing to society. I'm not saying this because I have a HECS debt, but I'm saying this because it seems unfair to pick on those who use their university education to earn a higher income and pay higher tax.

    • +4

      I think we should tax everyone like Abbot who has had a free education and are earning above a certain limit.

      You're a doctor, here's a 100-150k bill.

      At least this way they have to already be earning this amount.

      The baby boomers sucked all the money from their forefather, sucked the money from their generation and are now sucking money from the next generation.

      • That's a good point. Interest rates are being raised unexpectedly on the current rates which are essentially indexation against inflation. Had I known this would happen, it may have influenced my choice to go to uni.

        I'm sure telling the boomers that they need to pay for their education like everyone else will be of equal surprise. Is it really less unconscionable to raise the price on the people who pay their debts as opposed to chasing the freeloaders?

    • +1

      I think the death thing was initially just a sweetener to get it through, but now is due to political damage. People dying now with HECS debts aren't old decrepits, they are Mums of young kids tragically struck down! Imagine A Current Affair! eye roll.
      In 30 years when the earliest HECS debtors are hitting old age, don't be surprised if "we all must do our share".
      In other words, if you plan to die without paying back your HECS debt, do it soon!

    • +2

      That is of course the logical thing to do, from a rational standpoint where the aim is to collect money.
      But this way, tertiary education will become more expensive and thus increasingly unaffordable for many people - and will likely worsen over the years once the initial steps are taken.
      This will eventually leave us with a society where only those already with money may be educated, and those without money will not. Effectively allowing the rich to become richer and the poor to remain poor. It will increase the gap within social classes.

    • +1

      Uni education is not an asset like a house. It can't be sold off to repay the HECS debt. It is fundamentally different.

      • +1

        Well put . That along with the fact of how many graduates end-up in a average and potentially unrelated employment role makes it his policies extreme . Feels like Abbott's turned every educational/career decision into a life-changing gamble.

  • +6

    I'm long time out of Uni.

    What freaks me out is how will the majority of students pay it off. Not everyone is going to be earning 100k-200k

    There will be a significant portion of graduates who will be paying it off well into their 30s. The idea of a home loan is just fked.

    What if you don't graduate from uni or just get a low paid job that just passes the minimum repayment salary. Its not a sliding scaled, its the entire % on the entire income not just above.

    There will be people perpetually stuck with a 50-100k+ loan.

    This is the worse budget I've ever seen.

    • +3

      I've only ever earned 40K. I hope to be earning in the mid 50s next year. I also plan to pay off my HECS but I'd like it to be achievable, rather than a pipe-dream.

    • The only saving grace in this scenario is that can only put money on your HELP debt voluntarily or when you lodge a tax return. Other than that there is no requirement for you to pay any of your HELP. The government cannot send debt collectors out to get their money.
      So while it will continue to grow each year with indexation its not like a regular loan and will not impact on your credit history

  • -5

    To be honest, it's still better off by many other countries.
    I knew a lot of people outside Australia, they have to work to earn enough money then go to Uni, after Uni, you have to get married to get a house. (pays together). There is no HECS or HELP. They do not even have the chance of such sceheme.
    Having say that, Singapore max tax is 20%. (Parents have to support kids more)

    If you have no HECS/ HELP. you have to work at 30k per year for few years before you go to Uni.
    You have HECS/ HELP, you earn 75k after Uni. and Pay half into your debt, you still better off by 15k, after a few years, it's all yours to keep. (after tax of course - the keeping part)

    • +3

      Certainly no guarantees I'll be earning 75K any time soon, even with my Graduate Diploma.

      • -2

        yeah, when I graduated, I earn only 32-38k, but without the degree, I might be getting 20k or less.

        • -1

          I graduated uni 2 yrs ago and have been on 11-13k, degree doesn't seem to make any difference in landing a job

        • +8

          I love Singapore, but we need to stop looking at countries that have a poorer system. Instead, think of what the best system should be and lets work toward that.

        • -1

          World survey somehow doesn't mentioned Singapore is poorer system. Just different. So many people try to migrate there. Not that I like it there…..no offence to anyone that loves it

        • In america there is a degree on making fish ball. Right temp, water, flour, "bouncing effect". Where Asia has many old generation just make it…..

          In Australia without a degree, you won't even get a chance for an interview unfortunately.

          Some sort of " natural selection" kicks in

        • Its a much much poorer system.

          The poor stay poor.

          People migrate there for the tax benefits. Mostly people just work their for the tax benefits.

          Think of those movies of where its a dystopian future where the underclass is hidden and are stuck down there. Thats Singapore.

        • good luck not being smacked by singaporean….. i told "the truth" to them before and they boycott me…….

          try to go to the shopping mall, you can only see wealthy indonesian, overseas people spending money there, most "operator" type workers from phillipines, china, indonesia too, hardly see local singaporean nowadays…..

      • Hi, do you mind if I ask what field your Grad Dip is in?

        • If this is referring to myself, it's in teaching. I don't expect to ever be earning a huge income, but I'm hoping to be a teacher because that's what I've always wished to do. I don't think it's unworthy of university education just because I'm not that likely to earn much more than (or in fact even up to) the so-called "average wage".

        • in 1998, my teacher was earning whooping 100k ……..
          she always work for 3 years and tour till the last penny and go back to work again……. she's originated from England

    • Graduate veterinarian after 6 years of studying (Masters, coursework) starts around 45k. Not really going to work out well for me, I guess. :(

      • +1

        Join the club. I earn same salary as you and I'm 5 years out of uni.

        • i didn't manage to join your club :(
          after 5 years from Uni, i got only 32-38k

      • Yeah, vet is not known for its high rates, despite the amount of work it requires, and how hard it is to get into

  • I have talked to close relatives paying off their HECS debt.

    They conclude:
    * You won't even feel like you are making the payment.
    * It's such a small amount each year it will not affect you in any significant way

    Tips they gave me:
    * Don't actively try to pay it off, leave it to pay over 20-30 years.
    * They have done that and put it into super/paying off mortgage instead

    This makes sense due to super contributions being taxed at 15%/earnings within super at 15% (compared to higher marginal tax rate). Returns of 6-8% p.a in super too.

    If the long term bond rate increases, equity markets returns will also increase? fml finished finance degree and I can't even remember the exact r/l

    • -5

      It makes no sense to lose a portion of your pay each week/fortnight that isn't benefiting you at all. If it's going to continue forever, change it so you actually pay it off, and get that money back into your paypacket.

      • +3

        This is incorrect, if it's indexed against CPI, it's better to not pay it off because let's say you owe $10,000 in real dollars (not nominal dollars, so it's CPI adjusted already) and you pay off $1,000 real dollars every year. You'll pay it off in 10 years.

        On the other hand, you can pay it off instantly in one hit with $10,000. However, should you choose to delay payments and pay $1,000 every year, you can invest the amount you are not paying.

        SUMMARY - TLDR.

        Instead of paying it off in one go, chuck the amount in a term deposit and pay it off gradually. At the end, you'll have more.

        EXAMPLE.

        HECS DEBT - $10,000
        PAY IT OFF NOW - PAY $10,000
        PROFIT - NOTHING!


        HECS DEBT - $10,000
        CHUCK $10,000 IN BANK ACCOUNT
        WITHDRAW $1,000 EVERY YEAR TO PAY HECS
        PROFIT - INTEREST EARNED

        In both situations, you're singling out $10,000 in the present time.

        • Yes, but we're talking about the fact that it might actually go as high as 6% interest. If it was to do that, I'd be paying something like $200 off the principal each year going by the tax repayments, and never ever pay it back that way.

          I'm also talking as a person who might earn around the threshold, who may not be able to comfortably afford to pay voluntary repayments. The compulsory ones, at the new rate, would basically just be an additional payment to the government for fun. It wouldn't be benefitting me in repaying my debt at all.

        • +4

          Again, the original argument stands, if you can earn higher than 6%, then you are better off with my method than paying it off straight away.

          Guess what, bank term deposit rates are almost always higher than the treasury bond rate, thus, it'll almost always be better to do it the way I outlined, but of course, whether that's worth the effort for around a 1% interest saving is up to you.

        • -1

          I earn around 3% interest, or $150 or so a year. I think you may be a little out of touch for the average, lower paid person without much behind them.

        • +2

          I'm still studying :P So I probably earn less than you.

          http://compare.smh.com.au/savings-accounts

          You can get up to 4.60%, which is still higher than the current treasury bond rates.

          It's actually a function of the financial system, for treasury bond rates to be generally lower than term deposit rates.

          Btw, term deposit rates are higher than savings account rates.

          You're losing on interest :P

        • -1

          Also still studying, living on a single wage, supporting family of four. I have no personal income, just what I've scraped together after paying bills. We have no credit card, but use an ING account so that we can access our funds when needed for the big bills such as rates and rego. Term deposits are not suitable for us, we're doing okay in the situation we're in. I intend to begin paying HECS back as soon as possible. However, I feel for those who may feel it's impossible to get ahead when the changes come in.

        • Err you forgot to take into consideration the 5% discount that you get if you pay it off all at the same time.

          http://studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/news/pages/chang…

        • From your link:

          Subject to the passage of legislation, from 1 January 2014, the Australian Government will remove the upfront HECS-HELP discount of 10 per cent for eligible students that pay their student contributions upfront and the voluntary HELP repayment bonus of five per cent.

          edit: Also; I found this;

          The Government has announced its intentions to remove the HECS‑HELP discount. Until the relevant legislation is passed, the current arrangements apply.

        • So quickly go pay it off before they remove the 5% discount? lol.

        • -1

          I don't think there are that many people who can afford to pay their debt off all in one go to get that 5% on the total sum.

    • +1

      Nope, other way around :P

      If long term bond rates increase, it will make the firm's cost of capital higher (higher borrowing costs), thus, the discount rate used to evaluate projects with the NPV is higher, reducing the NPV.

      Thus, when the firm's borrowing rates are higher, the opportunity cost of capital is higher meaning that firms are less likely to undertake capital investments, thus, equity returns are not likely to grow.

      When debt is cheap, as it currently is, firms are more likely to undertake capital investments.

      But of course, there are other factors which affect all this as well.

      • +1

        makes sense

        also someone out there needs to make an excel sheets with variables to input the long term bond rate, repayment rates of HECS, expected equity capital return, hecs discount (if made) to NPV different scenarios haha

        that would make this a lot easier

    • +1

      Thats because their debt was only 10-20k and indexed at CPI

      It is noticeable if you're just making ends meet.

      They're assuming you have a healthy income

      • +1

        No, because the amount taken remains a small component of overall wages. Even if you earn $200k they don't take the whole of your HECS debt in one year, it is still spread over several.
        I would feel it if I hadn't been paying it, then did, but usually what happens is you get a new job or a pay rise to take you over the limit and your new salary is still higher than before, just not as high as it would be if you had no HECS debt.

        • 3-4% is a big deal for those living week to week

        • 3-4% is big in anyones books. Its just the matter of fact that the wealthier people politicians make an example of can make sacrifices/downgrades of their lifestyle. While those living on the near minimum have nothing to resort to but misery, last i checked a degree isn't life-support. Couple that with the increasing probability that government funded healthcare may disappear , what do such people do when something unprecedented occurs ? Oh I know ! we'll take the money from them when they die - Joe really had it all figured out…… if their money existed.

        • Yes, but it only collected from people earning over the average income. If you are living week to week on above average wages you have other financial issues.
          And I am ropable about the budget changes that impact the less well off.
          This isn't one of them, but this change is stupid because it provides a barrier to better education that will ultimately result in the whole country being worse off. I want lots of super well educated, high income earning people so they can have a great life, be appropriately taxed, and end up with a better country.

        • "Yes, but it only collected from people earning over the average income." - That defeats the purpose of increasing University prices. How well this country pay-off their debt and keep their A+ credit rating if the government is about to push themselves towards bankrupcy ? It simply does no-one a favour.

          "I want lots of super well educated, high income earning people so they can have a great life, be appropriately taxed, and end up with a better country."
          I'm not too sure how well informed you are , but many professional positions these days demand plenty of intellect but pay a very average amount in return. Many students who pursue extensive study generally have a passion for their field , its not always about the $ .

        • 50k is not average income

  • Ross Gittins has just written a piece that covers the main points you probably should know about.

    I already knew all this because i went to university.

    Anyway, relax, many will never need to repay it.

  • Has anybody seen anything in the budget about whether the indexation will fluctuate with the bond rate or whether it will stay at the highest point until it reaches 6% (If it ever does)

  • +1

    hmmm can't post graph.

    I just put some numbers together

    using low figures for a low cost course

    A current graduate ending uni with a $15000k debt, with an average 3% increase in over 20 years and no repayment will have $27,000k debt.

    A graduate under Abbot's proposal, ending with 30k debt and an avg 4% increase will end up with $65k debt

    A worse/like case scenario the course will cost 45k and 5% increase will end up with 119k debt.

    Do you think this is fair?

    If you currently have a 'free' degree or had paid hecs under the old/current regime. How would your life have changed if instead you had a $65-$119k debt?

    • this obviously relies on people not earning the minimum. Which leads to the question, why go to uni if you never plan on earning over 50k?

      • +2

        That's not always a choice.

      • +2

        The big dilemma is this is a big barrier for people moving out of poverty.

        Wham as soon as you start earning higher, you are whacked with and extra 4-6% tax.

        The success of the western capitalism is that it has relied on a progressive tax system. This allows social mobility, this allows the cream of society to rise to the top.

        Over the last 20 years we've been moving further and further from this. Added on top of this most people at the top have figured out ways to minimise their tax beyond those paid by the poor.

        The budget makes very little effort to tax the rich, but take big chunks out from the poor/middle class.

        • its not really 'whacked' when an additional $40 is withheld from your $1000 each week

        • That's $1000 before tax

          Take tax out medicare levy etc out.

          Its no big deal to some one who does not have a lot of expenses.

          But try telling that to someone/families living week to week…. $40-$50? chump change…
          .
          .
          .
          Lets add that 4-5% to high income earners who have the disposable income, tell me they wouldn't be grumbling.

        • $2500 p/year is huge for a person earning $50,000 before other deductions. There are far more unnecessary things our politicians spend our money on , and I believe what many are caught off-guard by is the fact they would rather compromise our education and future, just to keep a few firm handshakes and pricey cigars in their life.
          If a leader genuinely cared for his/her country and its people , the last thing they would do is excessively indulge at the expense of tax payers money.
          For example , paying every ex-PM such exorbitant amounts of money ? I would understand a reasonable amount , but I don't understand 8-10x the average income for an Australia. Leadership should be for honour , not wealth.
          The people are letting money go where it is NOT needed.

      • Don't know about you, but I went to uni to learn not to get a job.

        • keep telling yourself that

  • -2

    A HECS loan is the cheapest loan you will ever have. There is nothing wrong with paying the bond rate, which is still well under the rate you can get on any home loan. Just paying CPI interest on the loan is effectively a subsidy from tax payers.

    • +1

      As it should be, everyone benefits from a more educated population.

      People who are more educated earn higher incomes, pay more tax, make Australia a more educated nation, are more likely to have well educated children, reduce crime rates, tend to invest more and spend more resulting in a growing economy…etc.

      If everyone benefits from a more educated population, even those who are not well educated, then everyone should chip in and help out.

      • I completely agree with all that you said, which begs the exact question, if People who are more educated earn higher incomes, why shouldn't they borrow the lowest rate possible to borrow money by any corporate or individual?

        why do they need to borrow money at a EVEN lower rate?

        by the way, i can also argue that a business that employees an individual, that pays tax, take makes burgers that feeds people also has all the benefits you argue. Should they get a subsidy from the govt? No, they should pay tax!

        • +1

          Again, at the end of the day, it's all a moot point. Everything we do, to some extent, is subsidised by government. The degree to which they are subsidised is the contention of all arguments from both sides of politics.

          Let's step away from education for a second and look at healthcare. The government is going to introduce a $7 co-payment every time someone goes to a doctor. Is that a big deal? For people who can afford it, it's not, but for people who can't, yeah, it's a massive deal.

          It's the same with education. All education in Australia is subsidised, should the government subsidise it that one extra little step, well that's what we are discussing right?

          Also, your point about businesses not getting subsidies from the government is incorrect. Governments have been subsidising businesses to stay in Australia and keep jobs here for a very long time. The car industry has pretty much been paid to stay for the past two decades, so has many other industries. If it were not for government intervention, we would barely have any industries left.

        • Businesses do get subsidies, but not all, Infact only a select few do.

          But education is open to ALL who gets accepted into a university pretty much, people treat it as entitlement.

          Subsidies are treated in a special manner, you can't even compare the two in the same breath.

          But again, the end question is why is the lowest possible interest rate not good enough for students? Why must it be even lower? Why is it not fair enough? That seems to be the crux of the debate.

        • +3

          Education is a fundamental human right.

  • -1

    IMO, Although the government is justifying their actions by saying "We want the HECS paid off quicker", however it really is just about earning more money for them.

    Sadly with the Abutt government, they don't usually think over the consequences of their policies.

    Not every graduate is going to be able to get a job. Therefore for those people they are just sitting around racking up interest via Abutts new policy.

    If Abutt REALLY wanted to make people pay back their HECS quicker, they should have just adjusted the minimum contribution Rate. This would guarentee that people who can't seem to get a job doesn't get affected.

    Ahh well…. can't take advantage of the low CPI interest rates anymore, needa pay it all off before 2016. Another 2 yrs.

    • 20 grand left on mine. I still can't decide if I should try and pay it all off before it kicks in. Savings of about 15k at the moment.

Login or Join to leave a comment