My elderly mum has to pay $5.50 a day for a TV. This seems outrageous

September 2, 2026 — 5:00am

You have reached your maximum number of saved items.

Remove items from your saved list to add more.

My mum recently entered aged care and has now been there for four weeks. We opted out of the Higher Everyday Living Fee (HELF). There was already a television in her room but I have now been asked whether we want to pay $5.50 a day for the television service. That’s more than $2000 a year.

I asked whether we could provide Mum with her own television but was told we would still have to pay the fee. When I questioned this, I was told bringing in our own television would require approval and might be refused. In other words, unless we pay $5.50 a day, Mum may have no television in her room.

This seems outrageous. Is the provider entitled to charge this fee for a television?

HELF can only be charged for services above the standard required under the Residential Aged Care Service List, or for additional services the provider is not already required to supply.

However, because your mother entered aged care after November 1, 2025, the provider can charge a HELF for an additional service such as an in-room television. This applies even if existing residents receive the same service free. Government guidance specifically gives the example of a new resident being charged a HELF for an in-room television because it is additional to the services the provider must supply.

The real issue is whether the provider can insist on $5.50 a day even if you supply your own television. I would ask them to explain in writing exactly what the fee is paying for, why it would still apply to your own television, and on what basis they could refuse permission for your mother to have one.

The real issue is whether the provider can insist on $5.50 a day even if you supply your own television.

It has been suggested that we establish a superannuation proceeds trust (SPT) in our wills. It sounds almost too good to be true. We have been told it can help minimise the 15 per cent death benefits tax, deal with excess transfer balance cap issues – particularly for a surviving spouse – and allow income to be distributed to minors at adult tax rates. If an SPT is so useful, why aren’t they more commonly used?

Your instinct is sound but a superannuation proceeds trust is a legitimate estate-planning strategy, not a loophole. You don’t hear much about them because they suit only particular circumstances.

Start with the tax. When a superannuation death benefit is paid to an estate, the Tax Office looks through the estate to determine who ultimately benefits. A lump-sum death benefit passing to a death-benefit dependant, such as a spouse or minor child, is generally tax-free. But money ultimately benefiting a non-dependant – typically a financially independent adult child – can attract tax of 15 per cent on the taxable component (or 30 per cent in some cases where the death benefit includes life insurance proceeds).

The complication arises when there is a mixture of beneficiaries. I put this to estate-planning lawyer Rachael Rofe, who told me: “If the super simply falls into the general estate and is shared among dependants and non-dependants, the executor has to establish how much of the taxable component is ultimately benefiting a dependant. If the benefit isn’t properly separated, there is a risk that the taxable component will be taxed as benefiting a non-dependant. An SPT ring-fences the death benefit for the relevant dependants, so the tax-free treatment is protected.”

There are two other attractions. A surviving spouse who is already near their transfer balance cap may be unable to retain the whole death benefit in super as a pension. An SPT can provide a structured way to hold and manage the excess outside super, rather than simply paying it outright to the spouse. And income distributed by the trust to minor children may qualify to be taxed at ordinary adult rates, rather than the penalty rates that normally apply to children’s trust income.

So why isn’t an SPT in every will? Because it is not needed in every estate. As Rofe says, its value depends entirely on the family circumstances. Where there is substantial super, a surviving spouse who may face transfer balance cap problems, minor children, or a mixture of dependant and non-dependant beneficiaries, an SPT can be extremely useful. In a straightforward estate, however, the additional complexity and cost may achieve very little. It’s a specialist estate-planning tool, not an automatic addition to every will.

Could you elaborate on how investment bonds are treated for the Age Pension and Commonwealth Seniors Health Card income tests? Are they regarded as financial assets and subject to deeming?

For the Age Pension assessment, they are treated as an asset for the assets test and given a deemed income for the income test.

The Commonwealth Seniors Health Card is subject to an income test only, which is based on adjusted taxable income plus deemed income from account-based pensions. Investment bond earnings are taxed internally within the bond and generally do not form part of taxable income unless a withdrawal is made within the 10-year period. If that occurs, some or all of the earnings form part of the owner’s taxable income.

I am an 86-year-old widower and I’m writing because the budget changes to capital gains tax have left me confused. I own and live in my home, together with my little dog. I also own a small studio apartment, which has mostly been rented out, although my children have lived there at various times. I bought it before 1985 for $50,000 and it is now worth about $600,000. As a pre-CGT asset, I understand it has so far been exempt from capital gains tax.

My taxable income is currently low enough that I pay no tax. Am I correct in thinking that from July 1, 2027, I could be subject to the new 30 per cent minimum tax on rental income and bank interest? And if I want to preserve the studio’s pre-CGT status, would I need to sell it before July 1, 2027? I would greatly appreciate your advice.

At June 30, 2027, you should have the investment property valued by a registered valuer. That valuation will become its cost base for CGT purposes from that date. If you sell after July 1, 2027, the new value will be indexed to the sale date, and any gain accruing after July 1, 2027, may be subject to the proposed 30 per cent minimum tax. Given your age, it may be simpler to sell before then while the property remains tax-free. If you keep it, the rental income will continue to be included in your ordinary taxable income.

Noel Whittaker is the author of Retirement Made Simple and other books on personal finance. Email: [email protected]

Advice given in this article is general in nature and is not intended to influence readers’ decisions about investing or financial products. They should always seek their own professional advice that takes into account their own personal circumstances before making any financial decisions.

Expert tips on how to save, invest and make the most of your money delivered to your inbox every Sunday. Sign up for our Real Money newsletter.

You have reached your maximum number of saved items.

Remove items from your saved list to add more.

License this article

Noel Whittaker, AM, is the author of Making Money Made Simple and numerous other books on personal finance.Connect via X or email.AdvertisementAdvertisement