Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS
Supported Independent Living (SIL)
(d) Any Related Issues
A fully implemented NDIS will bring with it unprecedented demand for accommodation. As funding for support is now a right and no longer a privilege, all levels of accommodation from group homes to independent living with support will be in demand.
With the knowledge that this will bring increased pressure to an already failing Public Housing Sector, many parents will be planning ahead to make private provision for their family member.
Of those who will be able to live independently some will be capable of managing their own affairs, i.e. they are able to read, understand monitory values and enter into legal contracts. However, many whom are capable of living independently with support will, due to their disability be incapable of managing their own affairs.
If a property is to be purchased to achieve independent living, unfortunately as
Commonwealth and State Laws currently stand those unable to manage their own affairs will be financially disadvantaged in many situations.
As their disability may make it illegal or unwise (due to their vulnerability) to title THEIR OWN HOME in their own name, parents and carers may elect to hold the property in their names or use a Special Disability Trust (SDT) for this purpose.
Contributing financially to the purchase of THEIR OWN HOME. It is not uncommon for a family member with a disability living at home for many years to have substantial personal savings, it would be a natural pathway to follow for them to wish to utalise those savings towards the purchase of THEIR OWN HOME.
However, if the property is not titled in the name of that family member any monitory
contribution they make will be treated as money they have given away and if it exceeds the Centrelink Gifting Limits they will be penalised under the Gifting Rules.
The outcome will be that for five years that monitory amount gifted will be treated as savings they still hold and their Disability Support Pension assessed accordingly.
If on the other hand, if that Disability Support Pensioner had been able to have their name on the property title any savings they put towards the purchase would not be treated as an asset gifted, therefore reducing their assessable assets and their Pension would immediately be adjusted upwards accordingly.
I know of no others in receipt of Social Security Benefits who are treated in this way if they wish to contribute to the purchase of their principal place of residence.
This injustice will occur because they are unable to manage their own affairs. To treat them in this way can only make me think of the discrimination word.
As regulations currently stand the beneficiary of a SDT is prohibited from contributing to that Trust, this is understandable as it would allow them to move their savings to a non assessable area. However I strongly believe that if a SDT is purchasing a property as a place of residence for the beneficiary, that beneficiary should be allowed to contribute their personal savings to the SDT towards the cost of THEIR OWN HOME.
Contributing to the SDT towards the purchase of their place of residence should not be seen as them moving their savings to a non assessable area. I believe it is totally different to them contributing to the SDT if their contribution is to be used for their care needs
Recommendations:
-
If it can be clearly demonstrated that a property is being purchased for someone with a disability who is in receipt of NDIS support and due to their disability are unable to have that property titled in their name, their personal savings can be utalised towards the purchase of that property without incurring Centrelink Gifting penalties.
-
That if a Special Disability Trust is purchasing a property in which the Beneficiary is to reside the Beneficiary be given the right to contribute their personal savings to the Trust towards the purchase of that property. This contribution would be made without incurring Centrelink Gifting penalties.
First Home Owner Grant and Stamp Duty. If the property is not titled in the name of the person with a disability, entitlement to First Home Owner Grant and relief of payment of Stamp Duty may be denied. They may be achievable if it can be demonstrated that the property has been purchased in trust for the family member but there is no straight forward easy path.
If the property purchase is made by a SDT, First Home Owner Grant is denied, this is despite a recommendation from a 2008 Senate Community Affairs Committee enquiry into Special Disability Trusts that the Grant should apply. (In Western Australia the benefit may apply).
Recommendations:
-
If a property is being purchased for someone who is in receipt of NDIS support funding and that that person is due to their disability unable to have the property titled in their name, payment of First Home Owner Grant and relief of Stamp Duty payment should apply to that purchase.
-
That a property purchased by a Special Disability Trust as a place of residence for the Beneficiary of that Special Disability Trust, payment of First Home Owner Grant and relief of payment of Stamp Duty should apply to that purchase.
I can assure you that the issues raised in this submission are no figment of the imagination, my family lived the whole experience in 2011 when we chose to purchase a place of residence for our family member. Due to their inability to manage their own affairs we had no choice but to title the property in our (the parents) names.
We were unable to obtain First Home Owner Grant and Stamp Duty was paid, a total loss of around twenty thousand dollars.
Our family member made a contribution to the purchase cost from their personal savings that exceeded the Centrelink Gifting limit and was penalised for five years under the Gifting Rules. I ask, do you believe it is fair, just and reasonable to treat someone in this way simply because they chose to save and contribute towards the purchase of THEIR OWN HOME?
I have been calling for many years for reform of all of the above (my submission to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Bill 2012, appearance before the Senate Hearings at that time and on other occasions). Perhaps then I was ahead of the game but if the time has not now arrived for these injustices to be corrected I may need to concede it never will be.
I agree for my Submission to be made public.
Regards Ray Walter.
Contact details