News location:

Sunday, October 11, 2026 | Digital Edition | Crossword & Sudoku

Self-interest widening wealth gap between old and young

A dysfunctional housing system is largely to blame for generational inequality, Saul Eslake says. (Mick Tsikas/AAP PHOTOS)

By Callum Godde

Is the wealth gap between old and young Australians becoming a gulf?

Former federal Treasury secretary Ken Henry has declared young workers are being “robbed” by the tax system, while ex-Victorian treasurer Tim Pallas calls the intergenerational wealth gap a “national tragedy”.

The “dramatic increase” in wealth inequality between generations is a by-product of Australia’s increasingly dysfunctional housing system, independent economist Saul Eslake says.

“The problem is a very large number of voters do not want that problem to be solved,” the former ANZ chief economist told AAP.

Housing Minister Clare O’Neil caused a stir in late 2024 when she said the Albanese government was not trying to bring down house prices and was instead seeking sustainable growth while boosting supply.

Mr Eslake suggested the stance was a matter of political arithmetic: until sufficient numbers of baby boomers and members of generation X became altruistic or “pissed off” enough about living with their children or being the bank of mum and dad.

“At any point in time there are 11 million voters who own their own home … and less than one million aspiring first-home buyers,” he said.

“Even the dumbest of our politicians can do that math.

“While publicly shedding tears for the difficulties faced by first-home buyers, they nonetheless prompt and implement policies which make it worse not better.”

Australian Bureau of Statistics data, featured in a presentation by Mr Eslake in May, demonstrates the growing divide in the distribution of household wealth between generations.

The distribution of household wealth in the 65 and over demographic lifted 10.8 per cent from 2003/04 to 2019/20, and comparatively fell 1.7 per cent for 15- to 34-year-olds and 5.9 per cent for 35 to 44-year-olds.

Some of that was explained by 65 and overs making up a greater share of households as Australia’s population aged but not all of it, Mr Eslake said.

Real estate makes up almost two-thirds of household assets in Australia.

Home ownership for Australians aged 25 to 34 ticked below 45 per cent in 2021, a level not seen since the 1947 census, while rates for 65 and overs hovered between 75 and 85 per cent from 1961 to 2021.

A more up-to-date picture of the divide was blurred when the bureau cancelled the release of statistics from its 2023/24 income and housing survey, citing data collection issues.

“You can assume with what we know has happened to house prices, that it’s gotten worse,” Mr Eslake said.

Mr Eslake floated solutions such as replacing stamp duty with a broad land tax, lowering tax concessions on super, ending first-home buyer grants, removing tax breaks for investors who buy established homes and reforming planning and zoning rules.

His biggest call would be to reintroduce inheritance taxes, also known as death duties, although he acknowledged it would be politically fraught.

Australia has not had inheritance taxes since the late 1970s but they exist in 25 of 38 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, including the UK and US.

Wrapping up the three-day economic roundtable in August, Treasurer Jim Chalmers said attendees took their intergenerational responsibilities “very seriously”.

Mr Eslake understood Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s reluctance to tackle structural economic reform this term out of fear of breaching public trust.

But he hoped the federal government would spend some of its political capital arguing for a more ambitious policy platform to take to the next election, as then prime minister John Howard did with GST in 1998.

News all day, every day at CityNews.com.au.

Who can be trusted?

In a world of spin and confusion, there’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in Canberra.

If you trust our work online and want to enforce the power of independent voices, I invite you to make a small contribution.

Every dollar of support is invested back into our journalism to help keep citynews.com.au strong and free.

Become a supporter

Thank you,

Ian Meikle, editor

Australian Associated Press

Australian Associated Press

Share this

2 Responses to Self-interest widening wealth gap between old and young

cbrapsycho says: 28 December 2025 at 10:23 am

There are some problems with some of the ‘solutions’ to the wealth disparity by Saul Eslake.

1) Introducing inheritance taxes will tax the young when their parents die even though it’s likely the parents have been supporting them or helping them financially for years.

2) The results in the ACT show the problem of getting rid of stamp duty and introducing land tax instead. People who’ve already paid stamp duty now have to pay land tax as well, adding to the cost of owning a property and pushing up rental costs for those without homes. The price of houses continue increasing to make up the gap from not having stamp duty costs, whilst the ongoing cost of owning a property and renting increases. How does this help the young?

At the same time there are solutions.

1) Getting rid of first home buyer grants is one of those, as vendors immediately push up the asking price for their property to take advantage of the boom in first home buyers seeking properties.

2) Capital gains tax reduction after only one year of ownership are ridiculous, encouraging property speculation. It would be better if a discount was applied after 10 years ownership instead, where the owner has actually invested quite a lot in maintenance, repairs and taxes in that property.

3) And then there’s negative gearing. This is the craziest of all policies as it makes the cost of buying properties minimal, nil or beneficial for high income earners by reducing income tax paid to the ATO, demolishing the costs of borrowing. It’s great for the banks though, so they would oppose getting rid of this, as it is the basis of many highly lucrative loans for them and ongoing income to keep boosting their massive profits.

Reply
Vic cherikoff says: 2 January 2026 at 6:43 am

I am pleased some arithmetic is being taught to our leaders. Now it should also be used to explain that sustained growrh of housing is mathematically impossible. The concept of perpetual growth of anything has no validity. Even the growth in wages and corruption of politicians or the influence of party politics are limited.

A basic principle of maths is that numbers can pretend that linear, algebraic or exponential progressions of totals can be predicted on paper but in reality, it cannot happen. There are always limits. Resources, space, population pressures, ecologies, biodiversity and living standards are some.

We do have many dumb and self-interest driven politicians who are not ever held personally accountable for dumb or corrupt decisions while in a position of power.

My view is that we need a whole new system of government with no politicians, no self-interest driven lobby groups that ignore ecologic sustainability and biodiversity enhancement. Basic concepts of carrying capacity and societal considerations of earned wealth from value delivery, not unproductive speculation or opportunism must be law. Science and biocentric paradigms should be the guiding principles, not accounting and taxation avoidance because we are simply not happy with how the taxes are being spent the make the rich richer and the rest of us be damned.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

*

Related Posts

Follow us on Instagram @canberracitynews