The bill amends the Social Security Act 2018 and the Public and Community Housing Management Act 1992 so that the housing contributions of all boarders (62 percent of each boarder's weekly payment) are recognised when calculating housing subsidies and income-related rent, instead of counting only the third and subsequent boarders. It aims to stop the same accommodation costs being subsidised more than once and to align the treatment of board and rent payments.
Parliament advanced this bill under urgency (committee of whole house, first reading, second reading, third reading) — moving it through faster than usual, with less time than normal for public submissions.
These are claims MPs made in Parliament’s debate — not verified facts.
This bill changes how income from boarders is counted when the government works out a person's housing assistance. It amends the rules for the Accommodation Supplement (a subsidy that helps with rent, board or mortgage costs) and the income-related rent subsidy (which caps the rent that social-housing tenants pay based on their income), along with related payments such as Temporary Additional Support and the student Accommodation Benefit. Under the previous rules, payments received from boarders were generally not counted as income (unless boarding was the person's main income), while payments from renting out part of a property were counted — an inconsistency that could see the state effectively subsidise the same accommodation costs more than once. The bill makes boarder payments be treated the same way as rental payments when assessing eligibility for, and the amount of, housing assistance, closing that gap.
The bill is a Government measure developed by the Ministry of Social Development as part of wider welfare and fiscal-sustainability work. Its supporters argue it fixes an unfair and confusing anomaly — a "double dip" in which a person could receive housing assistance while also collecting boarder income covering the same accommodation — making the treatment of boarder and rental income consistent and ensuring public money is well targeted. Critics point out that counting boarder income will reduce housing assistance for some low-income people and families who take in boarders to make ends meet, potentially leaving them worse off at a time of high housing costs, and that the requirement to declare boarders adds administrative burden. The core trade-off is between consistency and savings on one hand and support for struggling households on the other.
See the Parliament.nz ↗ site for the full bill.