Search

Are older adults more vulnerable to scams? What psychologists have learned about who’s most susceptible, and when

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/natalie-c-ebner-1527554">Natalie C. Ebner</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-florida-1392">University of Florida</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/didem-pehlivanoglu-1527551">Didem Pehlivanoglu</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-florida-1392">University of Florida</a> About 1 in 6 Americans <a href="https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2023/05/2020-census-united-states-older-population-grew.html">are age 65 or older</a>, and that percentage <a href="https://www.ncoa.org/article/get-the-facts-on-older-americans">is projected to grow</a>. Older adults often hold positions of power, have retirement savings accumulated over the course of their lifetimes, and make important financial and health-related decisions – all of which makes them attractive targets for financial exploitation. In 2021, there were more than 90,000 older victims of fraud, according to the FBI. These cases resulted in <a href="https://www.ic3.gov/Media/PDF/AnnualReport/2021_IC3ElderFraudReport.pdf">US$1.7 billion in losses</a>, a 74% increase compared with 2020. Even so, that may be a significant undercount, since embarrassment or lack of awareness <a href="https://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/econ/fraud-victims-11.pdf">keeps some victims from reporting</a>. <a href="https://ncea.acl.gov/elder-abuse#gsc.tab=0">Financial exploitation</a> represents one of the most common forms of elder abuse. Perpetrators are often individuals in the victims’ inner social circles – family members, caregivers or friends – but can also be strangers. When older adults experience financial fraud, they typically <a href="https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/federal.trade.commission/viz/AgeandFraud/Infographic">lose more money</a> than younger victims. Those losses can have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2012.11">devastating consequences</a>, especially since older adults have limited time to recoup – dramatically reducing their independence, health and well-being. But older adults have been largely neglected in research on this burgeoning type of crime. We are <a href="https://ebnerlab.psych.ufl.edu/natalie-c-ebner-phd/">psychologists who study social cognition</a> and <a href="https://ebnerlab.psych.ufl.edu/didem-pehlivanoglu/">decision-making</a>, and <a href="https://ebnerlab.psych.ufl.edu/">our research lab</a> at the University of Florida is aimed at understanding the factors that shape vulnerability to deception in adulthood and aging. <h2>Defining vulnerability</h2> Financial exploitation involves a variety of exploitative tactics, such as coercion, manipulation, undue influence and, frequently, some sort of deception. The majority of current research focuses on <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3052">people’s ability to distinguish between truth and lies</a> during interpersonal communication. However, deception occurs in many contexts – increasingly, over the internet. Our lab conducts laboratory experiments and real-world studies to measure susceptibility under various conditions: investment games, lie/truth scenarios, phishing emails, text messages, fake news and deepfakes – fabricated videos or images that are created by artificial intelligence technology. To study how people respond to deception, we use measures like surveys, brain imaging, behavior, eye movement and heart rate. We also collect health-related biomarkers, such as being a carrier of <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8346443/">gene variants</a> that increase risk for Alzheimer’s disease, to identify individuals with particular vulnerability. And <a href="https://doi.org/10.20900/agmr20230007">our work</a> shows that an older adult’s ability to detect deception is not just about their individual characteristics. It also depends on how they are being targeted. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/593784/original/file-20240513-16-j9zy1i.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/593784/original/file-20240513-16-j9zy1i.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/593784/original/file-20240513-16-j9zy1i.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/593784/original/file-20240513-16-j9zy1i.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/593784/original/file-20240513-16-j9zy1i.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/593784/original/file-20240513-16-j9zy1i.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/593784/original/file-20240513-16-j9zy1i.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/593784/original/file-20240513-16-j9zy1i.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A figure with two circles and an arrow between them. One circle shows icons that symbolize individual susceptibility to deception -- like a brain, and a walking cane -- while the other has icons of types of deception, like mail or a text message." /></a><figcaption>Vulnerability depends not only on the person, but also the type of fraud being used. Natalie Ebner and Didem Pehlivanoglu</figcaption></figure> <h2>Individual risk factors</h2> Better cognition, social and emotional capacities, and brain health are all associated with less susceptibility to deception. Cognitive functions, such as how quickly our brain processes information and how well we remember it, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619827511">decline with age</a> and impact decision-making. For example, among people around 70 years of age or older, declines in analytical thinking are associated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000426">reduced ability to detect false news stories</a>. Additionally, low memory function in aging is associated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gby036">greater susceptibility to email phishing</a>. Further, according to recent <a href="https://osf.io/preprints/osf/6f2y9">research</a>, this correlation is specifically pronounced among older adults who carry a gene variant that is a genetic risk factor for developing Alzheimer’s disease later in life. Indeed, some research suggests that greater financial exploitability may serve as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104773">an early marker</a> of disease-related cognitive decline. Social and emotional influences are also crucial. Negative mood can enhance somebody’s ability to detect lies, while <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000426">positive mood in very old</a> age can impair a person’s ability to detect fake news. Lack of support and loneliness exacerbate susceptibility to deception. Social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic has led to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glaa077">increased reliance on online platforms</a>, and older adults with lower digital literacy are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnac188">more vulnerable to fraudulent emails and robocalls</a>. Finally, an individual’s brain and body responses play a critical role in susceptibility to deception. One important factor is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2020.10.007">interoceptive awareness</a>: the ability to accurately read our own body’s signals, like a “gut feeling.” This awareness is correlated with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igad104.3714">better lie detection</a> in older adults. According to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glx051">a first study</a>, financially exploited older adults had a significantly smaller size of insula – a brain region key to integrating bodily signals with environmental cues – than older adults who had been exposed to the same threat but avoided it. Reduced insula activity is also related to greater difficulty <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218518109">picking up on cues</a> that make someone appear less trustworthy. <h2>Types of effective fraud</h2> Not all deception is equally effective on everyone. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1145/3336141">Our findings</a> show that email phishing that relies on reciprocation – people’s tendency to repay what another person has provided them – was more effective on older adults. Younger adults, on the other hand, were more likely to fall for phishing emails that employed scarcity: people’s tendency to perceive an opportunity as more valuable if they are told its availability is limited. For example, an email might alert you that a coin collection from the 1950s has become available for a special reduced price if purchased within the next 24 hours. There is also evidence that as we age, we have greater difficulty detecting the “wolf in sheep’s clothing”: someone who appears trustworthy, but is not acting in a trustworthy way. In <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50500-x">a card-based gambling game</a>, we found that compared with their younger counterparts, older adults are more likely to select decks presented with trustworthy-looking faces, even though those decks consistently resulted in negative payouts. Even after learning about untrustworthy behavior, older adults showed greater difficulty overcoming their initial impressions. <h2>Reducing vulnerability</h2> Identifying who is especially at risk for financial exploitation in aging is crucial for preventing victimization. We believe interventions should be tailored, instead of a one-size-fits-all approach. For example, perhaps machine learning algorithms could someday determine the most dangerous types of deceptive messages that certain groups encounter – such as in text messages, emails or social media platforms – and provide on-the-spot warnings. Black and Hispanic consumers are <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/combating-fraud-african-american-latino-communities-ftcs-comprehensive-strategic-plan-federal-trade/160615fraudreport.pdf">more likely to be victimized</a>, so there is also a dire need for interventions that resonate with their communities. Prevention efforts would benefit from taking a holistic approach to help older adults reduce their vulnerability to scams. Training in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-019-01259-7">financial, health</a> and <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-08437-0.pdf">digital literacy</a> are important, but so are programs to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-10363-1">address loneliness</a>. People of all ages need to keep these lessons in mind when interacting with online content or strangers – but not only then. Unfortunately, financial exploitation often comes from individuals close to the victim.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/227991/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/natalie-c-ebner-1527554">Natalie C. Ebner</a>, Professor of Psychology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-florida-1392">University of Florida</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/didem-pehlivanoglu-1527551">Didem Pehlivanoglu</a>, Postdoctoral Researcher, Psychology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-florida-1392">University of Florida</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-older-adults-more-vulnerable-to-scams-what-psychologists-have-learned-about-whos-most-susceptible-and-when-227991">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Could a recent ruling change the game for scam victims? Here’s why the banks will be watching closely

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jeannie-marie-paterson-6367">Jeannie Marie Paterson</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicola-howell-1160247">Nicola Howell</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a> In Australia, it’s scam victims who foot the bill for the overwhelming majority of the money lost to scams each year. A 2023 <a href="https://download.asic.gov.au/media/mbhoz0pc/rep761-published-20-april-2023.pdf">review</a> by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) found banks detected and stopped only a small proportion of scams. The total amount banks paid in compensation paled in comparison to total losses. So, it was a strong statement this week when it was revealed the Australian Financial Conduct Authority (AFCA) had <a href="https://my.afca.org.au/searchpublisheddecisions/kb-article/?id=f9f8941f-7379-ef11-ac20-000d3a6acbb4">ordered</a> a bank – HSBC – to compensate a customer who lost more than $47,000 through a sophisticated bank impersonation or “spoofing” scam. This decision was significant. An AFCA determination is binding on the relevant bank or other financial institution, which has <a href="https://www.afca.org.au/make-a-complaint#:%7E:text=Any%20determinations%20we%20make%20are,service%20is%20free%20to%20access">no direct right of appeal</a>. It could have implications for the way similar cases are treated in future. The ruling comes amid a broader push for sector-wide reforms to give banks more responsibility for <a href="https://www.fico.com/blogs/detection-prevention-tackling-scams-every-angle">detecting</a>, deterring and responding to scams, as opposed to simply telling customers to be “more careful”. Here’s what you should know about this landmark ruling, and what it might mean for consumers. <h2>A highly sophisticated ‘spoofing’ scam</h2> You might be familiar with “push payment” scams that trick the victim into paying money to a dummy account. These include the “<a href="https://www.acma.gov.au/articles/2024-01/scam-alert-re-emergence-hi-mum-scam">mum I’ve lost my phone</a>” scam and some <a href="https://www.scamwatch.gov.au/types-of-scams/online-dating-and-romance-scams">romance</a> scams. The <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/dragged-kicking-and-screaming-banking-giant-loses-battle-against-scam-victim-20241015-p5kide.html">recent case</a> concerned an equally noxious “bank impersonation” or “spoofing” scam. The complainant – referred to as “Mr T” – was tricked into giving the scammer access to his HSBC account, from which an unauthorised payment was made. The scammer sent Mr T a text message, purportedly asking him to investigate an attempted Amazon transaction. In an effort to respond to the (fake) unauthorised Amazon purchase, Mr T revealed security passcodes to the scammer, enabling them to transfer $47,178.54 from his account and disappear with it. The fact Mr T was dealing with scammers was far from obvious – scammers had information about him one might reasonably expect only a bank would know, such as his bank username. On top of this, the scam text message appeared in a thread of other legitimate text messages that had previously been sent by the real HSBC. <h2>AFCA’s ruling</h2> HSBC argued to AFCA that having to pay compensation should be ruled out under the <a href="https://download.asic.gov.au/media/lloeicwb/epayments-code-published-02-june-2022.pdf">ePayments Code</a>, a voluntary code of practice administered by ASIC. Under this code, a bank is not required to compensate a customer for an unauthorised payment if that customer has disclosed their passcode. The bank argued the complainant had voluntarily disclosed these codes to the scammer, meaning the bank didn’t need to pay. AFCA disagreed. It noted the very way the scam had worked was by creating a sense of urgency and crisis. AFCA considered that the complainant had been manipulated into disclosing the passcodes and had not acted voluntarily. AFCA awarded compensation covering the vast majority of the disputed transaction amount, lost interest charged to a home loan account, and $5,000 towards Mr T’s legal costs. It also ordered the bank to pay compensation of $1,000 for poor customer service in dealing with the matter, including communication delays. <h2>Other cases may be more complex</h2> In this case, the determination was relatively straightforward. It found Mr T had not voluntarily disclosed his account information, so was not excluded from being compensated under the ePayments Code. However, many payment scams fall outside the ePayments Code because they involve the customer directly sending money to the scammer (as opposed to the scammer accessing the customer’s account). That means there is no code to direct compensation. Still, AFCA’s jurisdiction is broader than merely applying a code. In considering compensation for scam losses, AFCA must consider what is “fair in all the circumstances”. This means taking into account: <ul> <li>legal principles</li> <li>applicable industry codes</li> <li>good industry practice</li> <li>previous AFCA decisions.</li> </ul> Relevant factors might well include whether the bank was proactive in responding to known scams, as well as the challenges for individual customers in identifying scams. <h2>Broader reforms are on the way</h2> At the heart of this determination by AFCA is a recognition that, increasingly, detecting sophisticated scams can be next to impossible for customers, which can mean they don’t act voluntarily in making payments to scammers. Similar reasoning has informed a range of recent reform initiatives that put more responsibility for detecting and responding to scams on the banks, rather than their customers. In 2023, Australia’s banking sector committed to a new “<a href="https://www.ausbanking.org.au/scam-safe-accord/">Scam-Safe Accord</a>”. This is a commitment to implement new measures to protect customers, including a confirmation of payee service, delays for new payments, and biometric identity checks for new accounts. Changes on the horizon could be more ambitious and significant. The proposed <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/consultation/c2024-573813">Scams Prevention Framework</a> legislation would require Australian banks, telcos and <a href="https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/accc-vs-big-tech-round-10-and-counting">digital platforms</a> to take reasonable steps to prevent, detect, report, disrupt and respond to scams. It would also include a compulsory external dispute resolution process, like AFCA’s, for consumers seeking compensation for when any of these institutions fail to comply. Addressing scams is not just an Australian issue. In the United Kingdom, newly introduced <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy94vz4zd7zo">rules</a> make paying and receiving banks responsible for compensating customers, for scam losses up to £85,000 (A$165,136), unless the customer is grossly negligent.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/241558/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jeannie-marie-paterson-6367">Jeannie Marie Paterson</a>, Professor of Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicola-howell-1160247">Nicola Howell</a>, Senior lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/could-a-recent-ruling-change-the-game-for-scam-victims-heres-why-the-banks-will-be-watching-closely-241558">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

King Charles' $97k arrival gift slammed as "waste of money"

King Charles and Queen Camilla are set for a lavish welcome to commemorate their first visit since 2018, but taxpayers are not impressed with the massive cost. The sails of the Sydney Opera House will be illuminated from 8pm on Friday for four minutes with images from previous royal visits intended to show the "diverse ways in which Their Majesties have engaged with and celebrated NSW and Australia over the years." “We are lighting up the Sydney Opera House to warmly welcome The King and Queen to our beautiful harbour city," Premier Chris Minns said in a statement. "The photo projection on the Opera House sails celebrates a historic moment - The King’s first visit to NSW as Sovereign - and is a fitting tribute." The gesture does not come cheap, costing taxpayers an estimated $97,030, and many were unhappy about it. "Cannot support wasting our taxes on people who wouldn’t be here if we didn’t pay," one person wrote on Facebook. "At a time when rents are sky high ...more and more homeless.. Hospitals are overcrowded...Food and petrol prices are ridiculous...Do you really think it excites battling Aussies...having money spent this way?" another person asked. "How many homeless could be housed with the money spent on a visit by millionaires, paid by us?" another wrote. "Waste of money! Channel the funds to the needy. King who with the horse?!," another remarked. However, there were a few others who expressed their excitement about the royal visit. "I will definitely head in with the kids to see this," one wrote. "As a monarchist, yes I'm going there to warmly welcome them," another commented. "Can’t wait for their majesties arrival," a third added. Royal fans will have a chance to meet or see the monarchs, as they plant to engage with members of the public on the Sydney Opera House Forecourt on October 22nd at 4.20pm. Their appearance will be followed by a Fleet Review on Sydney Harbour, featuring an Australian Defence Force fly past. Members of the public can see the ships and fly past from various vantage points including Farm Cove, Royal Botanic Gardens and Mrs Macquarie’s Chair at approximately 4.50pm. Image: Instagram

Money & Banking

Pokies? Lotto? Sports betting? Which forms of problem gambling affect Australians the most?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alex-russell-133860">Alex Russell</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matthew-browne-97705">Matthew Browne</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matthew-rockloff-569">Matthew Rockloff</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a> Gambling, especially sports and race betting, is a hot political issue at the moment. This is largely due to the recommendations from a 2023 report from a nonpartisan federal government committee, chaired by the late Peta Murphy, called <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Social_Policy_and_Legal_Affairs/Onlinegamblingimpacts/Report">You Win Some, You Lose More</a>. This report <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Social_Policy_and_Legal_Affairs/Onlinegamblingimpacts/Report/List_of_recommendations">recommended</a> “the Australian government, with the cooperation of the states and territories, implement a comprehensive ban on all forms of advertising for online gambling”. This has led to lots of debate and controversy. Recently, Peter V’landys, head of the NRL and Racing NSW, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/nanny-state-nrl-afl-storm-the-field-over-gambling-ads-20240920-p5kc2q.html">claimed</a> lotteries were more harmful than race and sports betting combined, citing independent statistics. Let’s explore the relative harm of different types of gambling and see if this claim holds up. <h2>Australians love a punt</h2> Gambling is widespread in Australia, with <a href="https://www.gamblingresearch.org.au/publications/second-national-study-interactive-gambling-australia-2019-20">more than half of adults</a> engaging in at least one form each year. According to the <a href="https://www.gamblingresearch.org.au/publications/second-national-study-interactive-gambling-australia-2019-20">latest national data</a>, lotteries are the most common type (40% of Australians buy a ticket annually), followed by race betting (17%), pokies (16%), scratchies (15.7%) and sports betting (9.6%). However, the popularity of a gambling form doesn’t necessarily reflect its harm. Different gambling activities have distinct characteristics. Two key factors mean that some gambling forms are more harmful than others: the speed of gambling and bet size. Pokies allow for frequent, small bets, with spins every three seconds. Race and sports betting can involve much larger sums and betting that is relatively fast, but still slower than pokie spins. Sports betting, in particular, is getting faster with in-play betting and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30386964/">microbetting</a>. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hI_XFOc4is0?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe><figcaption>Poker machines, or ‘pokies’ are the biggest single source of gambling losses in Australia.</figcaption></figure> Lotteries, on the other hand, are much slower-paced. People typically spend a small amount on tickets and wait for a draw to find out if they’ve won. Although it’s possible to spend a lot on tickets, <a href="https://www.qgso.qld.gov.au/statistics/theme/society/gambling/australian-gambling-statistics">people tend not to</a>, unlike with faster gambling forms. The average spend on pokies among the 16% who play them is around $4,782 per year, compared to an average spend on lotteries of $377 per year. These are averages. Most won’t spend these amounts but some will spend far more, which raises the average amount. V’landys’ claim about lotteries being more harmful than race and sports betting was based on “independent statistics”. He said that of 100 people seeking help from a gambling hotline, 70 had issues with pokies, 15 with lotteries, eight with race betting, four with sports betting, and three with casinos. We were unable to verify these figures – if anyone has the data, we’d love to see the research to assess them. However, we do have publicly available data. <h2>What the data say</h2> The NSW GambleAware website’s <a href="https://www.gambleaware.nsw.gov.au/-/media/ghs-annual-activity-report-2020-21.ashx?rev=e070f9c8bdbf4031816a852f27246c54&hash=C5FC3AA23BE5F2EF69D551A5E2292BA9#:%7E:text=Of%20the%20clients%20receiving%20counselling,36.9%25%20of%20all%20female%20clients.">2020-21</a> report shows that of 2,886 people seeking help, 73.3% identified pokies as their primary form of gambling, while only 13 people (less than 1%) listed lotteries. Race betting accounted for 13.1%, and sports betting for 7.9%. These patterns were consistent with <a href="https://www.gambleaware.nsw.gov.au/about-us/corporate-documents">previous years</a>. People who experience problems also usually take part in more than one form of gambling, as the NSW report showed. When these secondary gambling activities were considered, sports betting was cited by 35.5%, race betting by 33.5%, pokies by 19.5%, and lotteries by 13.7%. <h2>What we discovered</h2> The best evidence on gambling problems and harm comes from large-scale prevalence studies, typically commissioned by governments and conducted by independent researchers. These studies offer high-quality insights into how each gambling form contributes to problems. While one prevalence study is great, our team recently combined data from seven national and state-based prevalence studies. This resulted in a very high-quality dataset that we can use to study this question. In <a href="https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2006/12/1/article-p182.xml">our analysis</a>, we used statistical techniques to show how strongly each gambling form is associated with problems. These techniques give us regression coefficients, which are just numbers that tell us how strong the association is. A higher number means a stronger association between that form and gambling problems. The most problematic form was pokies (coefficient = 0.147), followed by casino games (0.136), sports betting (0.068) and race betting (0.038). Lotteries, with a coefficient of 0.001, were the least problematic and were not statistically significant even in our large sample. As you might guess from such a low number, there’s very little relationship between lotteries and gambling problems. <h2>What about prevalence?</h2> Prevalence matters too – while pokies were most strongly associated with problems, the number of people participating in each gambling form is also important. Let’s consider an analogy – a car that gives out a lot of exhaust fumes. That car is harmful, but if virtually no one owns one, then it’s not going to account for much pollution. The same idea applies for gambling forms. If a gambling form is very harmful but very few people do it, it doesn’t account for many problems in the population. It works the other way, too – if there is a very clean type of car that many people drive, they also won’t add up to much pollution. Similarly, if we have gambling forms that have very little association with problems, it won’t add up to many problems in the population, even if lots of people take part. The regression coefficients tell us how problematic each gambling form is. Prevalance tells us how many people do it. When we combine these two bits of information, we can work out the degree of problems in the community that come from each form. When we did this, pokies were responsible for 52-57% of gambling problems in the community. Sports and race betting each contributed 9-11%, with a combined total of around 20%. Lotteries accounted for just 0.1-1% of problems. Even if we include scratchies as part of lotteries, this only adds another 2-5% of problems, still far below sports and race betting. <hr /> <iframe id="quxHH" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: 0;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/quxHH/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <hr /> <h2>The real issue</h2> What’s the takeaway? Lotteries are widely played but are not typically associated with much harm. Sports and race betting, despite having fewer participants, are more harmful due to their faster pace and the potential for large, frequent bets. Lotteries involve slower betting and lower spending, making them much less risky. If we aim to reduce gambling harm in our community, the focus should be on pokies, which are widespread in pubs and clubs <a href="https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2006/12/3/article-p721.xml">outside WA</a>, casino games and race and sports betting. These forms have features that make them far more harmful than slower-paced gambling like lotteries.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/240665/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alex-russell-133860">Alex Russell</a>, Principal Research Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matthew-browne-97705">Matthew Browne</a>, Senior Lecturer in Statistics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matthew-rockloff-569">Matthew Rockloff</a>, Head, Experimental Gambling Research Lab, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/cquniversity-australia-2140">CQUniversity Australia</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/pokies-lotto-sports-betting-which-forms-of-problem-gambling-affect-australians-the-most-240665">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

"What a score": Woman finds rare gems in Vinnie's op shop

One lucky thrift shopper has stumbled upon a rare find in her local charity shop, spotting stunning opal earrings on sale for just $2. The shopper took to Facebook to share her find, posting a photo of the gold earrings adorned with a series of blue opals that she got from a Vinnie's op-shop in Queensland. Many were quick to agree that they were "such a rare find" because of the low price, as admirers described the jewellery as "Pretty", "amazing" and "beautiful". "Holy moly," one person exclaimed. "I can't breathe," one other said. "What a score," another agreed. While some people were skeptical that the gems weren't real, others said, "There's no way someone would set that many beautiful opals into costume jewellery so I'd say you have found a unicorn there." "They most certainly look genuine opal and diamond," another agreed — and so do the experts. Sebastian Heffernan from Lightning Ridge Opal mines told <a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/womans-rare-2-find-at-vinnies-op-shop-worth-1000-absolute-steal-042951545.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Yahoo News</a> that while it's difficult to determine based on photos alone, the opals "don't appear to be fake". "It's normally pretty obvious when they are," he explained. "They would look a little bit too perfect a lot of the time. Whereas these ones, you can see that some of them have little dots of colour, some have medium flashes." Assuming the opals are real but the diamonds are fake and the gold is plated, rather than solid, Sebastian guessed the earrings could sell for just couple of hundred. However, Wayne Sedawie, who owns Opal and Gem Stone Auctions, reckons the lucky thrifter could fetch close to $1,000 for the earrings, if resold or cashed in to a reseller, and suggested she get them valued. "It's definitely good to maybe get them looked at by someone in person because they do look quite nice from the photo, and the metal itself could be worth a little bit if it is actual gold," Sebastian added. "But either way, two bucks is an absolute steal". "That's such a great find. They're beautiful," Wayne agreed. "Just clean them up and they'll last a thousand years." Image credits: Facebook

Money & Banking

The surprising unknown road rule that is costing drivers

A woman has issued a warning to Aussie drivers after being threatened with a hefty fine for a common car decoration. Janelle McEvoy, a young woman from Perth, took to TikTok to recall the moment she learned that she could be facing a fine for having an air freshener hanging from her car’s rear view mirror. “I randomly got breath tested on the way to an event this morning and the police officer told me when I get home I need to remove this hanging from my car to avoid the $100 fine and the demerit point,” she said in her TikTok video, which has since had nearly 2 million views. “Doesn’t everyone have one of these hanging from their car? Where is it supposed to go?” Thousands of people flocked to the comments on the video to share their surprise over the obscure road rule, with one person writing, “The way my jaw dropped when you showed what it was cause I bought the exact same thing not too long ago.” Another added, “That’s crazy, I have like four air fresheners and two crystal chains hanging from my car.” The rule, which varies between states, can carry fines and possibly the loss of demerit points, if a police officer deems that the driver’s vision is obstructed from whatever is hanging from the mirror. In NSW, drivers without a clear view of the road can be fined $410 fine and have three demerit points issued. In other Aussie states, the fine for obstructed vision can range between $100 and $361. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

What is bankruptcy?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jason-harris-147254">Jason Harris</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> <blockquote> "Capitalism without insolvency is like Christianity without Hell." </blockquote> Those were the <a href="https://time.com/archive/6882727/the-growing-bankruptcy-brigade/">words</a> of former Apollo 8 commander Frank Borman, speaking as chairman of Eastern Airlines in the United States in the early 1980s. That company later <a href="https://www.airwaysmag.com/legacy-posts/eastern-files-for-chapter-11-bankruptcy">entered</a> Chapter 11 bankruptcy itself, in an attempt to deal with a staggering amount of debt. We all know what it means to run out of money, but what exactly is bankruptcy? It’s certainly been in the news a lot. Tupperware <a href="https://theconversation.com/tupperware-has-filed-for-bankruptcy-is-multi-level-marketing-in-trouble-239387">filed</a> for it last month. Two Australian airlines have <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-slot-hoarding-and-is-it-locking-out-regional-airlines-like-rex-235960">become insolvent</a> this year, and other Australian businesses have been going under at <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-17/business-insolvencies-hit-record-highs-creditorwatch/103732960">record rates</a>. So how do companies go bankrupt – and what is bankruptcy protection under the law? What’s the famous Chapter 11? And is bankruptcy the end of the road? <h2>What exactly is bankruptcy?</h2> Sometimes, a person or company can’t pay all of their debts as they arise. In legal terms, we call this being “insolvent”. Receiving a large bill (such as a large tax bill) that you can’t pay on the day doesn’t necessarily make you insolvent. The law allows for a reasonable time to pay bills after receiving an invoice. But if large numbers of bills remain unpaid weeks or months after their due dates, it begins to suggest a person or business isn’t paying them because they actually can’t. Being unable to pay all of your debts makes you an insolvent debtor. Bankruptcy is the legal process that allows insolvent debtors to fairly resolve these debts. In Australia, insolvent individuals can file a bankruptcy petition with the <a href="https://www.afsa.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are">Official Receiver</a> in bankruptcy, a statutory office that is part of the Australian Financial Security Authority. A creditor who is owed at least $10,000 can also force another person into bankruptcy, by suing them in court and obtaining an order to make them bankrupt. For companies that can’t pay their debts, there are several options, including liquidation, voluntary administration and restructuring. More on these later. <h2>We let an expert take control</h2> When a person or company goes bankrupt, an independent external expert (or team of experts) is appointed to manage their assets and debt. For individuals, we call this person a registered bankruptcy trustee. In the case of corporate bankruptcies, we call them a registered liquidator. In both cases, the expert will take control of the debtor’s assets and affairs. They’ll be looking closely at why the debtor needed to declare bankruptcy in the first place, and whether anything can be sold to generate cash so at least some of the debt can be repaid. When a person goes bankrupt, not everything is up for grabs. The law allows them to <a href="https://www.afsa.gov.au/professionals/resource-hub/indexed-amounts#protected-property">retain</a> some basic essentials, such as clothes, furniture, tools of their trade, and a car valued at less than $9,400. Some categories of assets can also be exempt, such as superannuation and compensation for personal injuries. There are no similar extensions for corporate insolvency. All of a company’s assets are on the table. However, both types of debtor typically enter bankruptcy with few or no assets. In more than 80% of <a href="https://www.afsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-12/ror_bankruptcies.xlsx">individual</a> and <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/statistics/insolvency-statistics/insolvency-statistics-series-3-external-administrator-reports/#3.3">corporate</a> bankruptcy cases, there are no payments to the creditors they owe. <h2>Why seek bankruptcy protection?</h2> One key feature of formally filing for bankruptcy is that it imposes a “stay” on enforcement action against the debtor. This is a court order that gives the party owing money time to organise its affairs in an orderly way – such as by selling assets to raise cash. In corporate insolvency, there are formal procedures under Australia’s Corporations Act that aim to give a company the opportunity to negotiate a deal with its creditors. That might include formulating a plan to restructure, allowing it to exit insolvency and keep trading. But it could also include selling the business to a new owner so it can continue. Some large Australian companies, including <a href="https://newsroom.virginaustralia.com/release/virgin-australia-enters-voluntary-administration">Virgin Australia</a> and <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/network-ten-heads-into-voluntary-administration-20170614-gwqo47.html">Channel Ten</a>, have previously used “voluntary administration” to save their businesses. Voluntary administration can give a company a chance to reduce its debts through a statutory compromise with creditors called a “deed of company arrangement”. This involves the majority of a company’s creditors approving a deal – usually, to compromise on some of their debt in exchange for a promise of future payments. The funds to make these payments might come from selling assets, or be a percentage of promised future profits. If successful, this can allow a company to keep operating and minimise job losses that would otherwise occur if it were simply shut down and its assets sold off – known as being “liquidated”. Once liquidated, a company will be deregistered by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission – that is, it will cease to exist as a separate company. <h2>What is Chapter 11 bankruptcy?</h2> You’ll often hear or read about companies filing for “Chapter 11” bankruptcy. This is because in the US, there is one law – the Bankruptcy Code 1978 – that covers both individuals and companies. Just like we’ve discussed in the Australian context, Chapter 11 of that law is specifically aimed at giving debtor companies a chance to enter into a deal with their creditors – to reduce their debts, sell some or all of the assets and hopefully allow at least part of the business to continue operating. This is what Tupperware did last month, following years of financial pressure. Where the law differs between Australia and the US is in the fact that Chapter 11 allows the debtor company’s management to remain in charge of the bankruptcy process. We call this “debtor-in-possession”. In Australia, in contrast, the liquidator – which acts as the administrator in a voluntary administration – remains in control of the company. Filing for bankruptcy can signal the end of a company’s operations, but not always. It may be possible for an external administrator to try to save the business or sell some or all of it to a new owner, paying down debt and preserving jobs. <hr /> This article is part of The Conversation’s “<a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/business-basics-157462">Business Basics</a>” series where we ask experts to discuss key concepts in business, economics and finance.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/239393/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jason-harris-147254">Jason Harris</a>, Professor of Corporate Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-bankruptcy-239393">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Aussie family's refusal to sell family home could land them a $60m fortune

An Aussie family that repeatedly said no to selling their much-loved family home to developers could land them a $60million in Australia's booming property market, but the defiant family refuses to sell. A year ago, the Zammit family from Quakers Hill in Sydney's north west caught worldwide attention when they refused to sell their 20,000 sqm parcel of land to developers who had purchased all the other land around them. The family received offers of up to $50m to sell their home to complete the new development named The Ponds, but they refused to sell. That didn't deter developers who are still offering the owners a massive amount of cash to sell their homes, with offers reportedly around $60m now, meaning the family have earned another $10m or 20 per cent over the past year. According to PropTrack home prices in Quakers Hill have risen by 8.5 per cent over the past 12 months, meaning that the Zammits would have earned at least another $4.25 million. The median price of a home in Quakers hill is now at $1.172m, around a decade ago it was $700,000. Last year, one of the property owners, Diane Zammit, 50, told news.com.au that the neighbourhood used to be “farmland dotted with little red brick homes and cottages." “Every home was unique and there was so much space – but not any more. It’s just not the same,” she said. It is estimated that 50 houses could fit on the block of land if they chose to sell, but some of their neighbours reportedly don't want them to, as they like living in a cul-de-sac. Ray White Quakers Hill agent Taylor Bredin previously praised the family for staying put. “The fact that most people sold out years and years ago, these guys have held on. All credit to them," he told 7News. “Depending on how far you push the development plan, you’d be able to push anywhere from 40 to 50 properties on something like this, and when subdivided, a 300 square metre block would get a million dollars.” Images: Channel 7

Money & Banking

Medicare is covering less of specialist visits. But why are doctors’ fees so high in the first place?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/susan-j-mendez-2219444">Susan J. Méndez</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Fees for medical specialists are going up faster than <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-25/medicare-rebates-only-covering-half-of-specialist-costs/104389360">Medicare rebates</a>, leading to a bigger gap for patients to pay. Recent data from the <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/medicare/mbs-funded-services-data/contents/summary">Australian Institute of Health and Welfare</a> shows that in the first quarter of this year, Medicare rebates covered just over half (52%) of the total fees. This is <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-25/medicare-rebates-only-covering-half-of-specialist-costs/104389360">down from 72%</a> two decades ago, and the lowest proportion on record. Doctors can charge what they like, while the government determines the Medicare rebate. The difference between the two, or the gap, is what impacts patients. For GPs, the government provides an incentive for doctors to <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/increases-to-bulk-billing-incentive-payments#1-november-2023-changes">bulk bill</a>, but there’s no such incentive for other specialists. Doctors blame large gap payments on rebates being too low, and they’re partly right. After adjusting for inflation and increasing demand, the average dollar amount one person receives in Medicare rebates annually dropped from <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/medical-specialists/referred-medical-specialist-attendances">A$349 to $341</a> over the past decade. But this is only a part of the problem. When many people can’t afford hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars for essential specialist care, we need to look at why fees are so high. <h2>How do specialists set their fees?</h2> Although general practice is technically a speciality, when we talk about medical specialists in this article, we’re talking about non-GP specialists. These might include paediatricians, oncologists, psychiatrists and dermatologists, among many others. In determining fees, specialists consider a combination of patient-level, doctor-level and system-level factors. Patient characteristics, such as the complexity of the patient’s medical condition, may increase the price. This is because more complex patients may require more time and resources. Specialists, based on their experience, perceived skill level, or ethical considerations, may charge more or less. For example, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623007104?via%3Dihub">some specialists report</a> they offer discounts to certain groups, such as children or pensioners. System-level factors including the cost of running a practice (such as employing staff) and practice location also play a role. Problems arise when prices vary considerably, as this often signals limited competition or excessive market power. This holds true for medical services, where patients have little control over prices and rely heavily on their doctors’ recommendations. In <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4909881">recent research</a>, my colleagues and I found fees varied significantly between specialists in the same field. In some cases the most expensive specialist charged more than double what the cheapest one did. <h2>Doctor characteristics influence fee-setting</h2> My colleagues and I <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.105119">recently analysed</a> millions of private hospital claims from 2012 to 2019 in Australia. We found the wide variation in fees was largely due to differences between individual doctors, rather than factors such as patient complexity or the differences we’d expect to see between specialties. Up to 65% of the variance in total fees and 72% in out-of-pocket payments could be attributed to differences between doctors in the same field. To understand what doctor-level factors drive high fees, <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4909881">we looked at</a> data from a representative survey of specialists. We found older specialists have lower fees and higher rates of bulk billing. Practice owners tended to charge higher fees. We also found doctors’ personalities affect how much they charge and how often they bulk bill patients. Doctors who scored more highly on the personality trait of agreeableness were more likely to bulk bill patients, while those who scored more highly on neuroticism tended to charge higher fees. What we couldn’t show is any evidence fees were associated with competition. <h2>Effects on patients</h2> This is not a competitive market. On the contrary, it has high entry restrictions (long training requirements) and a limited supply of specialists, particularly in <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/workforce/health-workforce">rural and remote areas</a>. Meanwhile, patients’ access is controlled by the need for referrals which expire, generally after a year. Patients are often unable to shop around or make informed decisions about their care due to a lack of information about the true cost and quality of services. For private hospital services, the fee structure is complicated by the fact that several providers (for example, surgeon, anaesthetist, assistant surgeon) bill separately, making it difficult for patients to know the total cost upfront. Despite efforts to introduce price transparency in recent years, such as through the government’s <a href="https://medicalcostsfinder.health.gov.au/">Medical Costs Finder</a> website, the system remains far from clear. Reporting is voluntary and the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.06.001">evidence is mixed</a> on whether these tools effectively reduce prices or increase competition. All of this contributes to high and unpredictable out-of-pocket costs, which can lead to financial strain for patients. About <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-services/patient-experiences/latest-release#barriers-to-health-service-use">10.5% of Australians</a> reported cost was a reason for delaying or avoiding a specialist visit in 2022–23. This raises important questions about equity and the sustainability of Australia’s universal health-care system, which is built on the principle of equitable access to care for all citizens. <h2>What can be done?</h2> Patients can take steps to minimise their costs by proactively seeking information. This includes asking your GP for a range of options when you’re referred to a specialist. Note the referral from your GP can be used for any other doctor in the same specialty. Similarly, ask the specialist’s receptionist what the fee and rebate will be before making an appointment, or for a <a href="https://www.ama.com.au/articles/informed-financial-consent#Two">detailed quote</a> before going to hospital. Shop around if it’s too high. But responsibility doesn’t only lie with patients. For example, the government could seek to address this issue by increasing investment in public hospital outpatient care, which could boost competition for specialists. It could also publish the range of fees compared to the rebate for all Medicare-billed consultations, rather than relying on voluntary reporting by doctors. Price transparency alone is not enough. Patients also need quality information and better guidance to navigate the health-care system. So continued investment in improving health literacy and care coordination is important. If things don’t change, the financial burden on patients is likely to continue growing, undermining both individual health outcomes and the broader goals of equitable health-care access.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/239827/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/susan-j-mendez-2219444">Susan J. Méndez</a>, Senior Research Fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/medicare-is-covering-less-of-specialist-visits-but-why-are-doctors-fees-so-high-in-the-first-place-239827">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

We tend to underestimate our future expenses – here’s one way to prevent that

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ray-charles-chuck-howard-1361224">Ray Charles "Chuck" Howard</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/texas-aandm-university-1672">Texas A&M University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/abigail-sussman-227057">Abigail Sussman</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-chicago-952">University of Chicago</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-j-hardisty-753777">David J. Hardisty</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-british-columbia-946">University of British Columbia</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/marcel-lukas-1236384">Marcel Lukas</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-st-andrews-1280">University of St Andrews</a> <h2>The big idea</h2> When asked to estimate how much money they would spend in the future, people underpredicted the total amount by more than C$400 per month. However, when prompted to think about unexpected spending in addition to typical expenses, people made much more accurate predictions. These are the main findings of a series of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F00222437211068025">studies and experiments that we conducted</a> and which have just been published in the <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/home/mrj">Journal of Marketing Research</a>. In our first study, we began by asking 187 members of a Canadian credit union to predict their weekly spending for the next five weeks. Then, at the end of each week, we asked them how much they actually spent. For the first four weeks, people underpredicted their weekly spending by about $100 per week or $400 for the month. In the study’s fifth and final week, we ran an experiment to see if we could improve people’s prediction accuracy. Specifically, we randomly assigned participants to one of two groups. In group one, participants estimated their spending for the next week just as they had done in previous weeks. These folks once again significantly underpredicted their spending. In group two, participants were asked to think of three reasons why their spending for the next week might be different than usual before making their estimate. This led them to make higher and much more accurate predictions – coming within just $7 of what they actually spent. Importantly, participants in each group spent roughly the same amount of money that week, on average. The only difference between the two groups was whether they accurately predicted that amount. <iframe id="WlDv3" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: 0;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/WlDv3/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> Next, we conducted nine experiments to better understand why people underpredict their spending and whether being prompted to think of unusual expenses helps improve accuracy. In all, over 5,800 people participated in these experiments, including a representative sample of U.S. residents. These experiments revealed two important insights. First, people primarily base their spending predictions on typical expenses like groceries, gasoline and rent. They usually fail to account for irregular – though still common – expenses like car repairs, last-minute concert tickets or one-off health care bills. This is what leads to underprediction. Second, prompting people to think of irregular expenses in addition to typical expenses helps them to make more accurate spending predictions. In our studies, people did not factor in atypical expenses unless we asked them to do so. <h2>Why it matters</h2> Helping people improve the accuracy of their spending predictions could help them improve their financial well-being. Underpredicting expenses can be costly. For example, 12 million Americans <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2012/07/19/who-borrows-where-they-borrow-and-why">borrow a total of more than $7 billion</a> in payday loans each year because they can’t meet their monthly expenses. These loans typically have extremely high interest rates – <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/data-visualizations/2022/how-well-does-your-state-protect-payday-loan-borrowers">more than 250% in some states</a>. Payday loans also come due in full so quickly that around three in four borrowers <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2012/07/19/who-borrows-where-they-borrow-and-why">end up borrowing again</a> to pay off the original loan. If consumers could better anticipate how much money they will spend in the future, it might help motivate them to spend less and save more in the present. In fact, one of our studies shows that our suggested prediction strategy <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243721106802">not only boosted spending estimates</a>, it also increased intentions to save. <h2>What’s next</h2> Members of our research team are currently investigating if, when and why underpredicting one’s expenses may be beneficial. For example, if a person sets an optimistically low budget and actively tracks their spending against it, does that help them reduce their spending? We are also investigating whether people who work in the gig economy show a corresponding tendency to mispredict their future income.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/189100/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ray-charles-chuck-howard-1361224">Ray Charles "Chuck" Howard</a>, Assistant Professor of Marketing, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/texas-aandm-university-1672">Texas A&M University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/abigail-sussman-227057">Abigail Sussman</a>, Professor of Marketing, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-chicago-952">University of Chicago</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-j-hardisty-753777">David J. Hardisty</a>, Assistant Professor of Marketing & Behavioral Science, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-british-columbia-946">University of British Columbia</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/marcel-lukas-1236384">Marcel Lukas</a>, Lecturer in Banking and Finance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-st-andrews-1280">University of St Andrews</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-tend-to-underestimate-our-future-expenses-heres-one-way-to-prevent-that-189100">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Lotto winner loses $1 million prize

A mystery Lotto winner has forfeited their million-dollar winnings after failing to collect their prize money for an entire year. The ticket was purchased from a BP petrol station in Mawson Lakes, in North Adelaide, on September 27th 2023, but wasn't claimed before passing the one-year expiration date. According to The Lott spokeswoman Anna Hobdell, the lucky winner could've claimed their seven-figure prize simply by registering their ticket to a player card or online. "It's likely our mystery winner has (been) going about their year as normal with no idea they became an overnight millionaire more than a year ago," she said. "If the mystery winner had registered their ticket to a player card or online, they would have already been united with their million-dollar treasure." Ms Hobdell said any prize that goes unclaimed for a year will be forfeited to the Lotteries Commission of South Australia. She went on to say that the winner could still claim their $1 million, but would need to submit their ticket, a prize claim form and an ex-gratia statutory declaration form with the commission. "This also serves as an important reminder to register your tickets," Ms Hobdell said. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

"The worst is still yet to come": Grim warning for chocolate lovers

Chocolate lovers could be facing a potential nightmare ahead of the festive season as cocoa supplies hit an all time low, driving confectionary prices to a record high. Most of the world's cocoa beans are grown in West Africa, where ongoing inclement weather and crippling crop diseases, coupled with economy-wide pressures like rising labour, packaging and energy costs, have put unprecedented pressure on the chocolate industry in recent months. However, market analyst Rabobank’s Paul Joules told <a title="www.smh.com.au" href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/why-a-global-cocoa-crunch-will-sour-chocolate-for-years-to-come-20240927-p5ke0w.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Sydney Morning Herald, </a> “the worst is still yet to come for consumers”, as the stockpiles of cocoa that manufacturers have been relying on for the past 18 months have run out. “While hedging has protected many manufacturers from the worst effects of the price rises until now, eventually all these forward contracts will get used up, and prices will have to increase to reflect the current cocoa price,” Rabobank’s Soaring chocolate prices report, released last week, read. Rabobank wanted that the increased costs of manufacturing will be passed down to consumers, with dark chocolate lovers being the most affected due to the high concentration of cocoa. Analysis by Mr Joules found that, worldwide, a 100 gram block of chocolate with 70 per cent cocoa content could rise from $4.90 to $6.50, with a “similar increase could be expected in Australia”. “It can take anywhere from six to 12 months for … price hikes to be reflected in the retail pricing of products,” Saxo Head of Commodity Strategy, Ole Sloth Hansen said. “The trend of shrinkflation is likely to become more pronounced. Consequently, while there might not be a stark rise in the price tags of chocolate items, the quantity offered for the same price will see a reduction.” Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

"Treated as fools": Prime Minister hits out at supermarkets

On Thursday night the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) released an interim report on its supermarket inquiry, and found the price of a typical basket of groceries has increased by more than 20 per cent since 2019. The report found that low-income households spent more than a fifth of their income on food. While prices across all grocery products have increased, the most considerable hikes were in staples such as dairy products by 32 per cent, bread and cereal items by 28 per cent and meat and seafood prices have increased by a fifth. The price of fruit and vegetables has increased by 19 per cent between the March 2019 quarter to the June 2024 quarter. The ACCC released the interim report after examining whether supermarket giants were dudding suppliers and ripping off customers due to a lack of competition. In a statement on Friday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has condemned major supermarkets. “Customers don’t deserve to be treated as fools by the supermarkets. They deserve better than that,” he said. “This is an important piece of work and we will study it closely. “My government is taking a range of actions to make sure Australians are paying a fair price at the checkout and Australian suppliers are getting a fair price for their goods.” Assistant Minister for Competition Andrew Leigh said this was the most comprehensive inquiry they've had in 15 years. “Businesses need to do the right thing by Australians,” he said. “Greater competition is critical for lifting dynamism, productivity and wages growth, putting downward pressure on prices and delivering more choice for Australians dealing with cost-of-living pressures.” The report also found that due to "excessive" prices, many shoppers were buying less food and focusing on cheaper products to stay within their budgets. Others were eating less frequently and have smaller meals, or changing their shopping habits by comparing online prices before going in store. As a result, ACCC deputy chair Mick Keogh said Australians were “losing trust in the sale price claims by supermarkets”. “These difficulties reportedly arise from some of the pricing practices of some supermarkets, such as frequent specials, short-term lowered prices, bulk-buy promotions, member-only prices and bundled prices,” he said. In Australia, Woolworths and Coles contribute to 67 per cent of supermarket sales, with Aldi accounting for 9 per cent and IGA contributing 7 per cent. The ACCC will release their recommendations in their final report due in February 2025. This follows the ACCC launching <a href="https://o60.me/2ssagq" target="_blank" rel="noopener">legal action</a> against Coles and Woolworths over allegations of misleading customers with fake discount prices. Image: Daria Nipot / Shutterstock.com/ MICK TSIKAS/EPA-EFE/ Shutterstock Editorial

Money & Banking

Katy Perry's massive AFL payday revealed

Katy Perry is reportedly set to take home a huge sum for her AFL grand final performance at the Melbourne Cricket Ground on Saturday. The AFL secured the Wide Awake singer as their headline pre-game entertainment act in July. Since then, there have been rumours of disagreements between Katy's team and organisers on the set list, but the pop star is still set to be paid $1 million for each song she performs. According to The Herald Sun, Katy will be paid $5 million for the event, as she will perform five songs on the night. She is also set to share the stage briefly with an Aussie female pop star, that is yet to be named, but is someone she "looks up to". During an appearance on Channel 10's The Project, Katy hinted that the mystery guest is a Scorpio, which could point to Delta Goodrem or Tina Arena. “She’s a Scorpio, that’s another hint for your digging,” she said when probed by The Project host Sarah Harris. Perry reportedly only recently settled the drama about which five songs she'll be performing according to footy journalist Tom Morris. Morris told SEN Breakfast on Monday that the AFL requested that she performed her popular hits from her older albums, but Katy's team was reported to have pushed back, as they wanted to perform two new songs from her comeback album 143. They eventually reached an agreement for Katy to perform just one new song. Image: The Project

Money & Banking

Jamie Oliver sells vintage Fiat with unique plate number

Jamie Oliver is putting up his 1955 Fiat 1100 pick-up for auction on Saturday September 28. The celebrity chef, who is an avid car enthusiast, has owned the vehicle since 2012, and it is still in its original and unrestored condition, with just 43,000 km on the clock. The ute was imported from Italy in 1973, and the celebrity chef is the third UK owner of the vintage vehicle. Not only does the ute still have its original steel wheels - with yellow highlights - it has a unique plate number that spells out '677 Yum'. The rear of the car has been embellished by the celebrity chef, with a sticker of a white hearts and the initials J.O which stands for both his name and his wife Juliette, known as Jools. The Fiat 1100 is painted green and has brown vinyl seats, with the spare wheel stowed behind them. It has a four-speed manual gearbox that connects the four-cylinder petrol engine to a live axle rear-end. Classic Car Auctions, the auctioneers selling the car, has assessed the vehicles condition and given it an overall grade of 80 out of 135, meaning that the car is still in 'good condition'. The ute is expected to sell for between £6000 and £8000 ($AU11,700 to $AU15,600). Images: Classic Car Auctions

Money & Banking

More Australians are using their superannuation for medical procedures. But that might put their financial health at risk

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/neera-bhatia-15189">Neera Bhatia</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> A record number of Australians are accessing their superannuation early on compassionate grounds, mainly to fund their own medical procedures – or those of a family member. Some 150,000 Australians have used the scheme in the last five years. Nearly 40,000 people <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/research-and-statistics/in-detail/super-statistics/early-release/compassionate-release-of-super">had applications approved</a> in 2022-23, compared to just under 30,000 in 2018-19 – an increase of 47%. Some people think this flexible use of funds is a good way to ensure people can fund their own medical needs. But more transparency and better oversight is needed. <h2>What are compassionate grounds?</h2> Since July 2018, the Australian Tax Office has administered the early release of superannuation – meaning before <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals-and-families/super-for-individuals-and-families/super/withdrawing-and-using-your-super/super-withdrawal-options#Preservationage">retirement</a> – under certain circumstances, including compassionate grounds. <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals-and-families/super-for-individuals-and-families/super/withdrawing-and-using-your-super/early-access-to-super/access-on-compassionate-grounds/expenses-eligible-for-release-on-compassionate-grounds">Compassionate grounds</a> for you or your dependant (such as child or spouse) are: <ul> <li>medical treatment or transport</li> <li>modifying your home or vehicle to accommodate special needs for a severe disability</li> <li>palliative care for a terminal illness</li> <li>death, funeral or burial expenses</li> <li>preventing foreclosure or forced sale of your home.</li> </ul> The medical treatment must be for a life-threatening illness or injury, or to alleviate acute or chronic pain, or acute or chronic mental illness. The treatment cannot be “readily available” through the public system. Cosmetic procedures are excluded. You also have to prove you cannot afford to pay part or all of the expenses without accessing your super, for example, by spending your savings, selling assets or getting a loan. People who can access other funding for the expense, such as via the <a href="https://theconversation.com/lists-of-eligible-supports-could-be-a-backwards-step-for-the-ndis-and-people-with-disability-236578">National Disability Insurance Scheme</a>, are ineligible. <h2>Why are people using this scheme more?</h2> The ATO has not explained what is driving the surge. General cost-of-living pressures may play a role. People may have fewer savings to draw on for medical procedures. But the treatments most commonly being accessed using superannuation – fertility treatments, weight loss surgeries and dental care – point to other systemic issues. There have long been issues with IVF and <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-isnt-dental-included-in-medicare-its-time-to-change-this-heres-how-239086#:%7E:text=The%20real%20reason%20dental%20hasn,has%20a%20structural%20budget%20problem.">dental care</a> not being readily available or funded in the public health system. Weight loss surgeries (including <a href="https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/bariatric-surgery/about/pac-20394258">bariatric surgery</a>) can help combat potentially life-threatening conditions such as heart disease. Recent <a href="https://www.monash.edu/news/articles/fewer-australians-having-bariatric-surgery-monash-university-led-report">research</a> suggests there has been an overall drop in the number of Australians having bariatric surgeries since 2016. But of those, 95% are performed through the private system. While early access to super can provide individuals access to critical treatment, there are issues with how compassionate grounds are defined and regulated. <h2>Lack of clarity</h2> As my co-author and I <a href="https://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Issue-442-PDF-3-Bhatia-and-Porceddu.pdf">have shown</a>, the vague wording of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/F1996B00580/2022-09-28/text">Superannuation Industry regulations</a> leaves them worryingly open to interpretation. For example, the meaning of “mental disturbance” is not defined. You may not meet the criteria of having an acute or life-threatening illness, or acute or chronic pain. But if you can show a certain condition causes you acute mental disturbance, you may qualify to release your superannuation early. People accessing their superannuation for IVF use this criterion, for example, by arguing they need to access funds to continue treatment and alleviate the acute mental distress caused by ongoing infertility issues. Two registered medical practitioners are each required to submit a report demonstrating the treatment is needed, and one must be a specialist in the field in which the treatment is required. However, the regulations do not specify clearly that the specialist should have relevant qualifications. In the IVF example, this means the specialist opinion can be provided by a fertility doctor rather than a mental health expert – and that person may stand to profit if they later also provide treatment. <h2>A closed-loop system</h2> Conflict of interest is another major issue. There is nothing in the regulations to stop a medical practitioner – such as a dentist – being involved in all steps and then financially benefiting. They could encourage a patient to access superannuation for a treatment, write the specialist report and then also receive payment for the treatment. Some clinics <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/apr/06/online-ads-promote-simple-access-to-super-to-pay-for-healthcare-despite-strict-rules">promote</a> accessing superannuation as an option to pay for expensive treatments. This raises important questions about the independence of the process, as well as professional ethics. Medical practitioners making recommendations for early release of superannuation should be doing so on genuinely compassionate grounds. But the potential for exploitation remains an ethical concern, when a practitioner can financially benefit from recommending early access to nest egg funds. Transparency around potential <a href="https://theconversation.com/people-are-using-their-super-to-pay-for-ivf-with-their-fertility-clinics-blessing-thats-a-conflict-of-interest-161278">conflicts of interest</a> are impossible to ensure without proper oversight. <h2>What is needed?</h2> 1. Mandatory financial counselling The ATO <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/healthcare/worrying-trend-record-number-of-australians-raid-super-to-fund-medical-treatments-20240920-p5kc44.html">has warned</a> accessing super early is not “free money”, with a spokesperson urging people to get financial advice. But the law should go a step further and make this compulsory. That way people making decisions during an emotionally charged moment can understand any future implications. 2. Tightening of the criteria Greater clarity in the legislation – such as defining “mental disturbance” – would help prevent loopholes being exploited. 3. Better oversight Less health-care industry involvement would promote greater transparency and independence. An independent body of medical practitioners could assess applications rather than practitioners who could financially benefit if applications are approved. This would help alleviate perceived and actual conflicts of interest. Accessing superannuation early may be the only option for some people to start a family or access other life-changing medical care. But they should be able to make this decision in a fully informed way, safeguarded from exploitation and aware of the implications for their future.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/239588/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/neera-bhatia-15189">Neera Bhatia</a>, Associate Professor in Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/more-australians-are-using-their-superannuation-for-medical-procedures-but-that-might-put-their-financial-health-at-risk-239588">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Readers response: What was/is your biggest waste of money?

As the cost of living continues to take hold on people's everyday spending, we find ourselves being more careful pinching our pennies. However, despite our efforts, sometimes it's hard to not feel like you're wasting your cash. We asked our readers what was, or is, their biggest waste of money, and the response was overwhelming. Here's what they said. Billy Smooth - Rent and insurance. Felicity Jill Murphy - Many meals that I could not get through. Barry Lenny - Rates and taxes. I get bugger all for the enormous amounts of money I have to pay. Norbert Kratz - Lottery tickets. Sue Meers - The monthly fee for living in a retirement village. Magda Klopper - Craft stuff and clothes I did not wear. Gaynor Hall - Alcohol! Going to stop buying it now. Paula Fortune - Use to be smokes up until I finally quit for good in January 2005! Good thing I did considering how expensive they are now. Sue Brown Leete - A speeding fine I just got. Sandii Smith - Too many things to mention. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Why isn’t dental included in Medicare? It’s time to change this – here’s how

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-breadon-1348098">Peter Breadon</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kate-griffiths-94706">Kate Griffiths</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> When the forerunner of Medicare was established in the 1970s, dental care was left out. Australians are still suffering the consequences half a century later. Patients pay much more of the cost of dental care than they do for other kinds of care. <a href="https://www.commonwealthfund.org/sites/default/files/2021-08/Schneider_Mirror_Mirror_2021.pdf">More</a> Australians delay or skip dental care because of cost than their peers in most wealthy countries. And as our dental health gets <a href="https://theconversation.com/reform-delay-causes-dental-decay-its-time-for-a-national-deal-to-fund-dental-care-217914">worse</a>, fees keep on rising. For decades, a litany of reports and inquiries have called for universal dental coverage to solve these problems. Now, with the Greens <a href="https://greens.org.au/news/media-release/tax-big-corporate-profits-fix-peoples-teeth-greens">proposing</a> it and Labor backbenchers <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/dental-on-medicare-must-be-next-frontier-for-labor-backbenchers/news-story/1c69314d7609815b937ced5af4542ba0">supporting</a> it, could it finally be time to put the mouth into Medicare? <h2>What’s stopping us?</h2> The Australian Dental Association <a href="https://ada.org.au/ada-responds-to-the-greens-dentistry-in-medicare-proposal">says</a> the idea is too ambitious and too costly, pointing out it would need many more dental workers. They say the government should start small, focusing on the most vulnerable populations, initially seniors. Starting small is sensible, but finishing small would be a mistake. Dental costs aren’t just a problem for the most vulnerable, or the elderly. More than <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-services/patient-experiences/2022-23/patient_experience_202223_tables_13_to_15.xlsx">two million</a> Australians avoid dental care because of the cost. More than <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/a053aa74-c471-436e-ab7e-a82e83ae73a3/aihw_den_231_dentalcare_oralhealthanddentalcareinaustralia_tranche7_21NOV2023.xlsx">four in ten</a> adults usually wait more than a year before seeing a dental professional. Bringing dental into Medicare will require many thousands of new dental workers. But it will be possible if the scheme is <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/915-Filling-the-gap-A-universal-dental-scheme-for-Australia.pdf">phased in</a> over ten years. The real reason dental hasn’t been added to Medicare is it would cost billions of dollars. The federal government doesn’t have that kind of money lying around. Australia has a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-budget-is-full-of-good-news-but-good-news-isnt-the-same-as-good-management-230110">structural budget problem</a>. Government spending is growing faster than revenue, because we are a relatively <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/news/can-we-talk-about-a-fairer-more-prosperous-australia/">low-tax country with high service expectations</a>. The growing cost of health care is a major contributor, with hospitals and medical benefits among the top six fastest-growing major payments. The structural gap is only <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/publication/2023-intergenerational-report">likely to grow</a> without major policy changes. So, can we afford health care for all? We can. But we should do it with smart choices on dental care, and tough choices to raise revenue and reduce spending elsewhere. <h2>Smart choices about a new dental scheme</h2> The first step is to avoid repeating the mistakes of Medicare. Medicare payments to private businesses haven’t attracted them to a lot of the communities that need them the most. Many rural and disadvantaged areas are <a href="https://theconversation.com/if-you-live-in-a-bulk-billing-desert-its-hard-to-see-a-doctor-for-free-heres-how-to-fix-this-204029">bulk-billing deserts</a> with too few GPs. The poorest areas have more than <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/A-new-Medicare-strengthening-general-practice-Grattan-Report.pdf">twice</a> the psychological distress of the wealthiest areas, but they get about half the Medicare-funded mental health services. As a result, government money isn’t going where it will make the biggest difference. There are about <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/dental-oral-health/oral-health-and-dental-care-in-australia/contents/hospitalisations/potentially-preventable-hospitalisations">80,000</a> hospital visits each year for dental problems that could have been avoided with dental care. If there is too little care in disadvantaged and rural communities, where oral health is worst, that number will remain high. That’s why a significant share of new investment should be quarantined for public dental services, with those services targeted to areas where people are missing out on care. Another problem with Medicare is its payments often have little relationship to the cost of care, or the impact that care has on the patient’s health. To tamp down costs, Medicare funding for dental care should exclude cosmetic treatments and orthodontics. It should be based on efficient workforce models where dental assistants and therapists use all their skills – you might not always need to see a dentist. The funding <a href="https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2019-06/apo-nid241086.pdf">model</a> should take account of a patient’s needs, reward giving them ongoing care, and have a <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/915-Filling-the-gap-A-universal-dental-scheme-for-Australia.pdf">cap</a> on spending per patient. Oral health should be measured and recorded, to make sure patients and taxpayers are getting results. <h2>Tough choices to balance the budget</h2> Those steps would slash the cost of The Greens’ plan, which is hard to estimate but might reach more than <a href="https://www.pbo.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-09/Putting%20dental%20care%20into%20Medicare.pdf">$20 billion</a> a year once it’s phased in. Instead, the cost would fall to roughly <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/filling-the-gap/">$7 billion</a> a year. That would be a good investment. But if you’re worried about where the money will come from, there are good ways to pay for it. Many reforms could reduce government health budgets without harming patients. There is waste in government funding of <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/935-blood-money.pdf">pathology</a> tests and <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/823-Premium-Policy4.pdf">less cost-effective</a> medicines. In some hospitals, there are <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/806-costly-care.pdf">excessive costs</a> and potentially harmful <a href="https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/qhc/28/3/205.full.pdf">low-value care</a>. Over the longer-term, investments in <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/The-Australian-Centre-for-Disease-Control-ACDC-Highway-to-Health-Grattan-Report.pdf">prevention</a> can reduce demand for health care. A <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Sickly-Sweet-Grattan-Institute-Report-May-2024.pdf">tax on sugary drinks</a>, for example, would improve health while raising hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Measures like this would help the government pay for more dental care. But demand for health care will keep growing as the population ages, and as expensive <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-11/proposal-to-speed-up-medicine-approvals/104338766">new treatments</a> arrive. This means a broader strategy is needed to meet the three goals of balancing the budget, keeping up with growing health-care demand, and bringing dental into Medicare. There are no easy solutions, but there are many options to reduce spending and boost revenue without hurting economic growth. Choosing Australia’s infrastructure and defence megaprojects <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/back-in-black-a-menu-of-measures-to-repair-the-budget/">more wisely</a> could save several billion dollars each year. Undoing Western Australia’s special GST funding deal – <a href="https://www.austaxpolicy.com/western-australia-gst-deal-the-worst-australian-public-policy-decision-of-the-21st-century-thus-far/">described</a> by economist Saul Eslake as “the worst Australian public policy decision of the 21st Century thus far” – would save another <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/back-in-black-a-menu-of-measures-to-repair-the-budget/">$5 billion</a> a year. Reducing income tax breaks and tax minimisation opportunities – including by reining in superannuation tax concessions, reducing the capital gains tax discount, limiting negative gearing, and setting a minimum tax on trust distributions – could raise more than <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/back-in-black-a-menu-of-measures-to-repair-the-budget/">$20 billion</a> a year. Major tax reform like this offers economic benefits while creating space for better services such as universal dental coverage. No one likes spending cuts and tax hikes, but they will be needed <a href="https://theconversation.com/chalmers-has-a-70-billion-a-year-budget-hole-here-are-13-ways-to-fill-it-203331">sooner or later</a> regardless. Dental coverage might be just the sweetener taxpayers need to accept it.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/239086/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-breadon-1348098">Peter Breadon</a>, Program Director, Health and Aged Care, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kate-griffiths-94706">Kate Griffiths</a>, Deputy Program Director, Budgets and Government, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-isnt-dental-included-in-medicare-its-time-to-change-this-heres-how-239086">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Advertising a house is ridiculously expensive in Australia – could that be affecting the property market?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/james-graham-1264059">James Graham</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Australia has long been one of the <a href="https://www.forbes.com.au/news/investing/sydney-melbourne-adelaide-are-top-10-least-affordable-cities-for-housing/#:%7E:text=Demographia's%20annual%20report%20assesses%20housing,second%20place%2C%20and%20Vancouver%20third.">most expensive</a> places in the world to buy a house. Now, it’s apparently also one of the costliest places to sell one. Recent <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/sep/16/the-symbiotic-relationship-that-makes-selling-a-house-in-australia-so-damn-expensive">reporting</a> in the Guardian has raised concerns about the market dominance of Australia’s two main real estate advertising websites, realestate.com.au and Domain. Facing little competition, the largest – realestate.com.au – appears to have <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/sep/16/the-symbiotic-relationship-that-makes-selling-a-house-in-australia-so-damn-expensive">significantly increased its fees</a> in recent years, while thwarting disruptive innovations from smaller competitors. Why does that matter? Because when it comes to selling a house, Australia <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/sep/16/real-estate-website-fees-australia">stands out</a> globally. In most other countries, any advertising costs are tiny or bundled in with agent fees. Here, along with only <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/sep/16/the-symbiotic-relationship-that-makes-selling-a-house-in-australia-so-damn-expensive">Sweden and New Zealand</a>, home sellers pay their own advertising costs in addition to real estate agent fees and commissions. This advertising can be expensive – up to several thousand dollars for a single property listing. But it also seems necessary, with a lack of alternative platforms offering comparable reach. Setting aside the problems of monopolistic pricing behaviour, what are the economics of high and rising real estate advertising fees? Do home sellers get value for the money they spend on advertising? And what might be the impacts of these fees on the Australian housing market? <h2>Is advertising on big platforms worth it?</h2> First, it’s worth asking whether real estate advertising is actually effective and whether bigger platforms are better. To explore these questions, a group of US-based economists <a href="https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.99.5.1878">studied</a> the outcomes of advertising on a large platform favoured by real estate agents in the United States called the “multiple listing service”, compared with a smaller for-sale-by-owner platform. The study found no differences in eventual home sales prices between the two platforms. But properties on the multiple listing service were more likely to sell and spent less time on the market. However, the size of the advertising platform didn’t explain these benefits. Rather, the different platforms appealed to buyers and sellers with varying patience levels. This variation in willingness to “wait-and-see” affected the time it took to sell. Translated to the Australian context, that raises questions about the value for money of advertising on a larger platform – which here, unlike the US, attracts significant fees. <h2>Housing markets are ‘search markets’</h2> Next, we need to consider how high costs of advertising property might affect the housing market more broadly. Housing markets fall into a category called “search markets” within economics. Sellers seek buyers, and buyers seek sellers offering up properties that meet their required criteria. The economics of search markets have been extensively studied by the likes of <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2010/summary/">Nobel laureates</a> Peter Diamond, Dale Mortensen and Christopher Pissarides. Their insights highlight the key factors that determine search market outcomes. Sellers consider the costs of listing an item for sale (such as advertising) and the time it takes to find a buyer. Buyers, on the other hand, consider their alternatives to buying (such as renting) and the time it might take to find a suitable seller. The likelihood of a sale – and how long everything will take – depends on the number of potential buyers relative to sellers. The sales price is then negotiated after meetings between the two. This gives us a framework to speculate about how Australia’s high – and increasing – costs of advertising real estate could be affecting the broader housing market on both sides of this equation. <h2>Costs can affect both supply and demand</h2> On the supply side, high fees reduce the net financial benefit of selling a home, which could discourage homeowners from listing their properties. All else being equal, this could lead to fewer properties on the market, shorter selling times, and higher prices for the properties that are listed. But we can predict some effects on the demand side, too. High fees also reduce the net benefit of buying a home, as current buyers expect to be sellers in the future. These costs are likely to be even more pronounced for property investors, who buy and sell property more frequently than homeowners. Anticipation that selling costs will be high in the future could suppress the demand for housing, reducing prices and increasing the time it takes to sell a property. Interestingly, <a href="https://www.nber.org/papers/w32855">recent research</a> from the US suggests that these demand-side effects might outweigh the supply-side effects. Economists studied the impact of a series of court decisions that forced the National Association of Realtors to reduce real estate agent fees. They found lower fees increase the lifetime benefits of homeownership, which leads to a significant increase in house prices. Significantly, that suggests lowering the costs of selling property – including advertising – could increase property values. <h2>Just one part of the housing story</h2> High prices in any area of economic life are likely to rankle our sense of a fair deal. High fees for advertising real estate have an obvious immediate impact on a home seller’s wallet. But the nuanced flow-on effects to the broader housing market are harder to tease out. They are also likely to vary across different property markets within Australia. Commentators and policy makers should think carefully before leaping into action in this area. In the meantime, advertising fees are one more thing to keep an eye on as Australian housing costs continue to rise.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/239111/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/james-graham-1264059">James Graham</a>, Senior Lecturer in Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/advertising-a-house-is-ridiculously-expensive-in-australia-could-that-be-affecting-the-property-market-239111">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Millions of Aussies to receive cash boost as welfare payments rise

Millions of Australians who rely on welfare payments will receive a much needed cash boost as of Friday, thanks to an indexation boost. Recipients of the age and disability pensions, rent assistance, carer payments, and JobSeeker payments will all receive the increase. Age pensioners, as well as those on the disability pension and carer payments, will see an increase of $28.10 a fortnight for singles and $42.40 a fortnight for couples. This boost will take the total payment per fortnight, including energy supplement, to $1114.40 for singles and $862.60 for each member of a couple. Maximum rates of Commonwealth rent assistance will also be increased by 10 per cent from today, with indexation applied on top, as single recipients, with no children, renting on their own, and receiving the maximum rate will get an additional $23 per fortnight in rent assistance. For families with one or two children, their payment will increase by $27.02 per fortnight. Single JobSeeker recipients with an assessed partial capacity to work of zero to 14 hours per week will move to the higher rate of JobSeeker, receiving $849.50 a fortnight (including the energy supplement and pharmaceutical allowance). "This indexation will deliver timely boosts to people receiving allowance payments and pensions, ensuring that these vulnerable cohorts have more money in their pockets for everyday expenses," Social Services Minister Amanda Rishworth said. A full breakdown of the payment changes <a title="can be found here" href="http://www.dss.gov.au/about-the-department/benefits-payments/previous-indexation-rates" target="_blank" rel="noopener">can be found here</a>. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Are older adults more vulnerable to scams? What psychologists have learned about who’s most susceptible, and when

Could a recent ruling change the game for scam victims? Here’s why the banks will be watching closely

King Charles' $97k arrival gift slammed as "waste of money"

Pokies? Lotto? Sports betting? Which forms of problem gambling affect Australians the most?

"What a score": Woman finds rare gems in Vinnie's op shop

The surprising unknown road rule that is costing drivers

What is bankruptcy?

Aussie family's refusal to sell family home could land them a $60m fortune

Medicare is covering less of specialist visits. But why are doctors’ fees so high in the first place?

We tend to underestimate our future expenses – here’s one way to prevent that

Lotto winner loses $1 million prize

"The worst is still yet to come": Grim warning for chocolate lovers

"Treated as fools": Prime Minister hits out at supermarkets

Katy Perry's massive AFL payday revealed

Jamie Oliver sells vintage Fiat with unique plate number

More Australians are using their superannuation for medical procedures. But that might put their financial health at risk

Readers response: What was/is your biggest waste of money?

Why isn’t dental included in Medicare? It’s time to change this – here’s how

Advertising a house is ridiculously expensive in Australia – could that be affecting the property market?

Millions of Aussies to receive cash boost as welfare payments rise

Our Partners