Older Australians Are Not The Problem Here

There's a new culprit being blamed for Australia's housing crisis, older Australians living in their own homes.

Apparently, people who have worked for decades, paid off their mortgage, and chose to remain in the family home in their later years are now the problem because they haven't downsized.

Now, it's an absurd argument, but became a major issue because Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke told the National Press Club that Australians choosing to live with fewer people per household was the major cause of the housing crisis.

Now, there have been howls of outrage at Burke trying to blame retirees for a problem caused by his government and indeed made progressively worse by his government, notably with the federal budget in May.

Now, beyond that, here is the fundamental principle that's being overlooked.

People actually have a right to stay in their own homes.

They also have a right to decide whether one person, two people, four people, or whatever number lives there.

Governments do not get to decide that your home is too big for you.

But there is another glaring flaw in this spurious argument.

Downsizing does not create more homes.

If an older couple sells a four-bedroom house and buys a two-bedroom apartment, Australia does not suddenly have another extra dwelling.

The four-bedroom house already existed, and the apartment they're moving to already existed.

All that has happened is that households have moved around amongst the existing housing stock.

Now, that may change the way existing homes are occupied, but it does nothing to increase housing supply, which is a fundamental issue in the housing crisis.

Australia's shortage is ultimately a shortage of actual dwellings.

The National Housing Supply and Affordability Council's 2026 report continues to focus heavily on increasing housing supply and getting more homes built.

But there's another reason why blaming older Australians is particularly ridiculous.

Governments actively penalize people who want to downsize.

Personal finance author Noel Whittaker points out that the costs can include preparing the home for sale, agent's commissions, removal costs, and then stamp duty, which can exceed $50,000 on the replacement property.

Now, I can confirm this because a few years ago, I downsized, and the total cost of the relocation was over $100,000, with stamp duty on the new home the biggest single component.

AMP Chief Economist Shane Oliver has similarly identified stamp duty as a major barrier to older Australians leaving the family home.

ABC News reported on 21 September that older Australians interested in downsizing are being discouraged by those substantial stamp duty bills, alongside a shortage of suitable smaller homes in the areas where they already live.

So governments cannot seriously complain that older people aren't moving while simultaneously imposing massive financial penalties on them for doing so.

If governments genuinely want to encourage downsizing, there's an obvious policy response.

Provide meaningful stamp duty concessions for downsizers.