70k on Super or Offset and Sell or Not Sell The PPOR to Fund a New Home

We’re facing an unusual financial situation due to an unexpected increase in our income this financial year (FY 23/24), plus some ambitious expectations of a new house during the next 12 months.
Based on our calculations this FY, my wife’s taxable income has reached $135k, and my taxable income has reached $120k. This makes us liable for a Medicare Levy Surcharge (MLS) of approximately $3,200, as our combined family income is around $255k with two primary school-aged kids.

Both of us are in our early forties and have a super balance of around $110k each, which is considered low for our age bracket.

If we contribute $70k to super from our savings ($40k for my wife and $30k for myself), we can claim it as a concessional super contribution due to rolled-over unused concessional contributions from the past five years. Doing this would drop my wife’s taxable income to $95k and mine to $90k, resulting in a combined tax refund of approximately $25k. Additionally, we would avoid paying the MLS of $3,200 (Update: MLS cannot be avoided by contributing extra super).
The extra 70k in super will be taxed at 15% and will continue to grow at a long-term average of ~8% and will add a healthy balance to the super when we retire in 20 years.

And we will get private health coverage to avoid MLS next financial year. It will be like breakeven when the health insurance premium is compared to MLS.

Another issue is that my wife wants a new house within the next 12 months. The house price in the area we are considering is around $1.4 million. We have about $600k in savings and offset accounts. We could use $400k for the deposit, take out a $1 million loan, and allocate another $100k for purchase costs and new furniture. If we put $70k into super now and get a $25k tax refund, our emergency cash fund will drop to $55k ($100k - $70k + $25k) in the short term.

We currently have a principal place of residence (PPOR), a detached 3BR house built in 2015, with a current loan balance of $240,000, fully covered by an offset account included in the aforementioned $600k savings. This PPOR could be turned into a positively geared rental, generating around $5k per year after interest and expenses. The current value of the PPOR is around $850k-900k based on similar sales in the area, giving it an equity of around $600k.

Based on our expenses over the past two years, our annual expenses (groceries, entertainment, travel, utility bills, and council rates) are around $60k, excluding the mortgage of the current PPOR.
The repayment on a $1 million residential loan would be around $6,000 per month. This new house would certainly stretch our financial freedom, consuming 40% of our monthly income.

However, one of the most important factors in a married man’s life is to keep his wife happy (“happy wife, happy life”). She is very frugal and does not spend on designer clothing, jewelry, or other luxury items. I believe she deserves to live in a nice house while she can enjoy it. As she says, “What’s the point of living in a nice big house when you’re old, can’t take care of it, and the kids have already grown up and left?”

Two main questions.
Should we contribute 70k to super or not?
Should we sell the current PPOR or not?

Update:
Poll option 1 updated as it is now clear (thanks to ozbargainers for pointing it out) that we cannot avoid MLS by contributing extra Super.

Poll Options

  • 22
    Contribute 70k to super and get the 25k tax refund and pay 3200 MLS.
  • 4
    Keep 70k in savings to increase the emergency buffer and pay 3200MLS.
  • 7
    Sell the Current PPOR and use the funds to reduce the mortgage of the new PPOR.
  • 6
    Keep the PPOR as it is positively geared.

Comments

  • +1

    Once it’s in super it’s locked in there for a long time.

    So what happens next year when you are in the same position and used up all your roll over contributions?

    • Forgot to mention, we will get a private health cover to avoid MLS next financial year. It will be like breakeven when health insurance premium is compared to MLS.

      • +1

        On a $1M mortgage, $70K isn’t going to make a significant dent into it but would certainly come in handy.

        If you use an accountant, perhaps run it by him/her before EOFY

        • Actually, that's a good point there. If we put 70k in super we get back 25k, so essentially we lock out 45k which will grow within super account. If that 45k sits in an offset account of 1 million loan at 6% interest, It will shave few years of mortgage and online calculators show an interest saving of ~137k.

    • The roll over contributions expire anyway so might as well use them.

  • +3

    This contradicts all cost of living crisis stuff.

    • +2

      they're in a crisis (buying a new house in the next 12 months)

    • The cost of living crisis is not evenly spread across the population. To the bulk of people it doesn't affect them…BUT that doesn't sell newspapers or commercial TV air time. It's on the best interests of the media to continue to bang on about it as fear sells.

  • +9

    A few points:

    • Pretty sure you have to pay MLS regardless. It takes into account things like net investment property profit/loss, as well as superannuation contributions. It doesn't just look at your final taxable income. See:
      https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals-and-families/medicare-and…

    • I personally think the happy wife, happy life thing is stupid as (profanity). Just be an adult, communicate with your wife and find something that works for both of you.

    • As for the rest, it's purely personal. If you're happy to lock away your money for 20 years go for it. Makes good financial sense, but you may die before then and never use it. Up to you what your risk profile is. And if you're ready for an upgrade on PPOR go for it as well, nothing wrong with upgrading if you can afford it and have a strong reason to get it. If there's no strong reason then don't get it.

    • -1

      Thanks for the link. I will have a second look as if extra super contributions are included for the purpose of MLS calculation, it will have a big impact on the expected benefit.

      • +5

        Pretty sure DingoBIlly is right - you can't escape MLS through extra super contributions as they just get added back for your income calculation.

  • -4

    Time for a financial advisor.
    They would come up with inovative solutions like, refinance the current ppor to 70-80% , use funds to buy new house outright, now your old house will be negative geared enabling tax savings etc.

    • +1

      It doesnt work like that. The interest can only be claimed for the lowest balance of the mortgage, which is about 240k in our case. even if we use the refinance option to release funds, its another loan under a different setting that we cannot claim tax benefits. We think it is use the equity to borrow the residential loan as it has a slightly lower interest rate.

    • +3

      Refinancing your current PPOR to buy a new PPOR doesnt allow you to deduct that loan. You can only deduct the interest on a loan where the money is specifically used to purchase an investment; it doesnt matter that the loan is secured against an investment property.

      Also negative gearing is a loss, you are always better off with a positively geared property. Aiming to create a loss 'because its tax deductible' is flawed (although common) logic. There are situations where you can argue NG is beneficial eg it allows you to invest more because it reduces the cost of the investment (and the amount you need in order to fund the borrowings/investment) and you will therefore have a bigger capital gain (as you have invested more), but outside of that situation its not a smart idea.

      • Also negative gearing is a loss, you are always better off with a positively geared property.

        Positively geared properties result in taxable income though… If your IP is positively geared with 80% mortgage that's cool.

        But for OP this is not the case, he would need to sell that existing house and buy a different one to get the equity out.

        • +2

          Positively geared properties result in taxable income though…

          having a job results in taxable income…having more taxable income is a good thing. Having lower taxable income is a bad thing, even if your tax deduction is higher. The concept that paying more tax because you have more money is actually worse than paying less tax because you have less money is one that I just cant understand.

          • @dtc: The aim is to convert taxable income into another form of income that is either not taxable, such as reducing expenses, or taxed at a lower rate, like capital gains.

            The $500k equity in your investment property is essentially dead money, especially if you have other non-tax-deductible debts, such as a mortgage on your primary residence (PPOR).

            • @trapper: can you explain what you mean by that last sentence? Why is that considered dead money?

              • @911r: It's dead because it's stuck there when it could be working for you as a tax-deductible loan.

                For example; $500k is about $32k per year interest.

                So if you had this equity instead in your PPOR then it would save you $32k a year of interest on that mortgage.

                The IP would cost $32k more also though - but that is tax-deductible. So you could get up to 45% ~ $14.4k of this back.

                • @trapper: Oh right got you, I think I had misinterpreted it as 500k appreciation on the IP but get what you are saying now. Thanks for clarifying!

        • What are the methods to get equity out of an IP other than selling it?

          • @tooblue: You can borrow against the IP and use that money to invest into some other asset eg into shares or some other IP. The issue is that unless you sell that IP, you cannot use the money to put against your PPOR mortgage.

            So if you dont sell you can have 2 x large mortgages (one deductible and one non deductible) but if you sell, you can have 1x small mortgage (non deductible) and 1 x large mortgage (deductible)

  • +1

    This sounds a one's case that actually benefit from using an accountant. One note thougjh That 15% tax from super is a salary sacrifice, meaning your employer pay super prior putting your wages in the bank.

    • You can pay into super after tax too and get the same benefit. You get the tax back in your tax return.

  • Per @Dollar General, unused concessional contribution caps apply up to a balance of $500K so you don't have to do this all in one year. Financial advice is supposed to become more accessible after the Royal Commission. At you age and with those income numbers I'd suggest seeking professional advice to get some confidence in your direction going forward. Your private health insurance rebate will be based on your income plus the $25K tax return so ATO will assess this in the years ahead.

    • unused concessional contribution caps apply up to a balance of $500K so you don't have to do this all in one year.

      Unused concessional contribution's are only available going back five years though. So at EOFY the last one drops off and you lose it forever.

      • Good point. OP appears to have enough spare income to clear off the full unused cap and go with $30K from 1-July. But with both parties having decent incomes and somewhat below the $500K threshold an advisor may suggest ways of achieving better outcomes.

  • +7

    My experience is that holding an investment property, even if positively geared, isnt as beneficial mentally as paying off as much of your PPOR mortgage as possible and may not be as beneficial financially. In other words, selling your current home and reducing your mortgage to a much smaller level and then (if you want) borrowing to buy a new IP will make you a lot less stressed and gives you a lot more financial flexibility. Yes, perhaps in the long run you are slightly worse off financially (assuming house prices continue to increase etc) but finances are not just about $$, they are also about reducing stress.

    Plus if you do borrow for an IP in the future, while you end up paying stamp duty, you will have a larger deductible loan plus likely greater depreciation claims and so forth - you might end up ahead (although its impossible to tell without making some key assumptions). Of course, if you believe your net return from the IP (income + capital growth less tax) will exceed the interest you pay on your PPOR loan then technically you are better off keeping the IP and just paying a higher PPOR mortgage. As you are essentially breaking even on the house income wise (a few bad tenants or some broken appliances will quickly bring you below break even), then you are hoping for capital growth exceeding 5-6% (not 5% overall but growth equivalent to 5% of the amount you have invested) less eventual CGT.

    You could put $600k from selling your current home into the mortgage, put your $600k in savings into an offset and now your loan is $300 - $400k. Or even just put everything but the deposit into an offset.

    As to super, obviously super is not the only way to invest. But its by far the most tax effective way to invest in shares (and probably to invest overall, although there are cases where outside super investment can be more beneficial in specific circumstances). When you hit 10 years from retirement (as I am currently), I guarantee your super balance becomes very very important. Maybe by then you are in a position to start shoving money into super but anything you put in earlier is very useful.

    However, as mentioned above by @DingoBilly, super contributions do not reduce your MLS income. So you wont be saving money doing this which, based on the purpose of the contribution, probably means you shouldnt do it

  • Concessional super is taxed at 15 percent so I’m not sure your tax refund calculation is correct.

    • +1

      The 70k is already taxed at our top rate and currently sits in our bank accounts. When we put that money into super, we can claim it as a concessional super contribution. then it becomes eligible for tax deduction. The 70k get taxed at 15% within super and we get to reduce the 70k from our taxable income.
      I used the pay calculator with current and reduced incomes to get 25k tax reduction.

      • This is correct.

  • +4

    If I was you I'd buy the new house, sell the old to have a smaller loan, start salary sacrificing directly into super (it's easier when you never see the money to begin with) and enjoy life. Feels like you're overcomplicating it rather than looking at what you and your wife actually want in life.

    But actually talk to your wife. I'm sure she has more opinions here than just wanting a bigger house.

    • My wife is happy to give up our current PPOR to reduce the mortgage stress and improve the quality of life in the best time of our lives (growing kids, still having the energy to travel). Living within walking distance of a good school in the next 12 years will make life much easier for us (Hence the need for a new home).
      It is me who is having cold feet as the current PPOR can be positively geared and appreciate quetly.

      • +4

        Super can also appreciate quietly, so can a lot of investments. A rental tends to come with additional stress, so does maxing out your finances.

        I get that a previous PPOR is easier to turn into a rental, but you could also look at a lower priced property or other investments. $5k a year is a pitiful return on a $600k of equity so you're relying on unknown capital growth, whereas that $600k could reduce your interest payments on a new property by $36k a year tax free. Worth looking at the numbers as other investments come with different pros and cons, rather than being hung up on one investment opportunity.

        tl;dr, your investment strategy should align to your lifestyle and goals first, not the investment opportunity itself.

      • Your current PPOR doesn't make a good investment as your deductible loan interest is small, while your non-deductible interest on your new PPOR is large.

        Buy a more suitable investment property down the track if you still have too much money and want to invest outside of super. Get a 100% interest only investment loan as long as you still owe even a cent on your PPOR.

  • +1

    Just sell. One bad tenant is all it takes to go downhill

  • Given your income and savings, you should be maxing out your super contributions each year; it's essentially free money.

    The $240k loan is too small to justify converting your PPOR into an investment property. If you're looking to become a landlord, it's better to sell your current PPOR and purchase a new investment property with an 80% mortgage. Use the remaining equity to reduce the loan on your new PPOR.

  • +3

    Should we contribute 70k to super or not?

    Yes, but you don't have to do $70k.

    Should we sell the current PPOR or not?

    Yes. Upgrade the house with a small loan of $250-$300.

    Then if you want later on, purchase an investment property on 100% borrowings so the loan is fully tax deductible.

  • +1

    If it helps, consider “owning an investment property” as running a business on the side - even if you’re paying an agent to “manage” it. It takes effort, thought and adds some stress most of the time.

    Would you be willing to run a business on the side? Or would you prefer to distress by having less of a mortgage over your head?

    For my family, being debt free in my ppor just makes sense - remember that most of your monthly repayments of $6k are not tax deductible and if something unfortunate happens that impacts your income, things will be tough and stressful

    • Yes, If one of us lost the job for whatever reason, then it'll become a big burden and we'll have to sell the investment property anyway.

      • +1

        Super have Income Protection cover too in case that happens.

        • +2

          Thanks for the input, we as a family haven't had income protection insurance and my super does not cover job loss. it covers death, TPD only. for the past 10 years or so we maintained100k+ balance in the bank as an emergency fund. We would like to keep it that way even if we buy expensive property. Can keep it in the offset, so it does reduce the interest while sitting there.

        • If it is paid for by super then the beneficiary is probably super.

          It is no good meeting the threshold for an insurance payout but not for super payout.

  • +1

    You wont get off the Hook for MLS as They are based on ATI ( adjusted taxable income, which basically adds the deduction back to you taxable income).
    You are on on 32.5% and going into thee 37.5% bracket, once you factor in the 15% tax on the concessional contributions ( you are planning on using the carry forward for the past years) , and average out your tax bracket to maybe around 25% ( factoring in the stepped tax bracket), the savings are not very evident , especially considering locking the money for another 30 or so years , plus the MLS being applicable.
    The carry forward rule would benefit people on around 180k approaching $250k as being on the 45% bracket maximises savings due to the difference. Above $250k, div 293 is a buzzkill.
    Disclaimer , also discuss with accountant
    Rewash and top up your current PPOR to maximise gearing ( go up to the original debt amount and maybe add of slightly extra), this will increasing gearing down the line when you buy the new place . Also look at what long term prospects for current property .

  • -2

    Where’s your super gone? You should each have a lot more

  • Making the reportable contribution to super won't allow you to avoid MLS, if you're claiming a deduction it's added back to work out your income for the surcharge

  • +2

    Do super contributions reduce Medicare levy surcharge?

    While your taxable income will reduce to $95,000 (after the $15,000 salary sacrifice), your income for the Medicare Levy Surcharge (MLS) is still $110,000. This is because the definition of income for MLS is taxable income plus 'Reportable Employer Super

    https://www.smh.com.au/money/insurance/can-i-avoid-the-medic…

  • +1

    we are doing this. Wife just put 80k into her super. I will put 20k. We are looking at buying a commercial property in our smsf for our business. Good luck!

  • Geesus for a moment I forgot I'm on Ozbargain where everyone is hanging in by the skin of there teeth (joke)… I wish I had your problem OP… your loaded $$ coming out of your you know what and your worrying about saving $3200 medicare levy for the well off…..

    I would be more interested in saving the STAMP DUTY and AGENT FEES on your Million dollar purchase, $3200 is chicken feed compared to what your going to cough up with these fees.

    By the way hope your not living in Victoria LAND TAX is a bitch here.

    Now I have heard everything !!!

    • +1

      Thanks for the comment mate.
      15 years ago, there was a time where my wife and I only had less than $4000 in the bank, and both of us without Jobs (and no social security benefits) and our car at the time was a 1986 corolla which had only 3 cylinders working. It was a good experience for us to live with bare minimum.

      The savings was a result of many years of very frugal living as a true Ozbargainer.
      Packed lunches nearly everyday, fine dining is once a year or even less, no branded clothing or footwear (all Kmart and Big W). Grocery shopping based on 50% or 40% off deals etc.

  • +1

    Option 1 in the Poll is Wrong
    Super contribution will not help you escape the MLS, neither salary sacrifice, nor personal contribution. Check item 4 and 5 on this ATO page.

    • Thanks, I updated the poll option to reflect the correct MLS outcome

  • haven't read everyones comments so it may have been mentioned already

    i think it's a good idea to put money in super, it is a bit low. but there is no need to put 70k at once. why not put 10k each this year and see how you feel next june, and then put some more and so forth. 70k is a pretty intense decision

Login or Join to leave a comment