Downsizers across England and Wales could unlock an average £305,090 by moving from a four bed to a two-bed home, according to the latest analysis from Savills.
Research by the agent found there are 1.29m owner occupiers aged 65 and over living in a four-bedroom house.
The analysis reveals the potential income that these households could unlock by moving to a smaller home.
Based on an average life expectancy of about 20 years for those aged 65 the average downsizer can provide themselves a tax-free income of £1,218 a month for the rest of their life, Savills said.
Lucian Cook, head of residential research at Savills, said: “Understandably, homeowners have traditionally been reluctant to downsize given their attachment to the former family home, but it is increasingly commonplace for people to look at their home as a way of supplementing their pension provision.
“Those approaching, or having already reached, retirement age have been some of the biggest beneficiaries of house price growth. By moving to a property that better suits their needs, downsizers particularly those in high value locations - can give themselves retirement funding a significant boost, particularly vital in the face of rising living costs.”
Downsizers in London can expect to unlock the most equity by downsizing. On average, Londoners moving from a four-bed home, to a two-bed home, can unlock £2,523 a month, followed by those in the South East at £1,485 a month.
Those in the North East unlock the least by downsizing, at £826 per month on average.
Cook added: “This analysis lays bare the north-south divide when it comes to downsizing.
“Those who live in typically more affluent areas in London and the South East have the option to use housing equity to make a meaningful contribution to retirement income, despite typically having slightly longer life expectancies. For those in the Midlands and the North there is far less to be gained by downsizing and they’re therefore likely to leave downsizing until later in life, if indeed they downsize at all.”
Region
|
Local authority
|
Female life expectancy at 65 (years)
|
4 to 2 bed average unlocked (£)
|
4 to 2 bed per month (£)
|
East Midlands
|
Rutland
|
22.56
|
321,833
|
1,189
|
East of England
|
Three Rivers
|
21.87
|
591,139
|
2,252
|
London
|
Westminster
|
22.19
|
3,307,111
|
12,420
|
North East
|
Northumberland
|
20.91
|
249,017
|
992
|
North West
|
Trafford
|
20.94
|
391,213
|
1,557
|
South East
|
Elmbridge
|
22.24
|
673,476
|
2,524
|
South West
|
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
|
21.38
|
455,057
|
1,774
|
Wales
|
Isle of Anglesey
|
20.91
|
265,891
|
1,060
|
West Midlands
|
Stratford-on-Avon
|
22.13
|
399,043
|
1,503
|
Yorkshire and The Humber
|
North Yorkshire
|
21.83
|
284,215
|
1,085
|
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Why is this income 'tax-free'? Surely one of the main problems of downsizing is sheltering the proceeds from tax, given that most of the people who downsize are likely to be risk-averse and will want to hold the majority of this wealth as cash, rather than shares, etc. The current ISA limit of £20,000 per person per year limits manoeuvrability here, even assuming downsizers also utilise the £50,000 per head premium bond allowance, which provides tax-free winnings.
Further to my previous comment, I've realised that the monthly figure quoted is probably based on the capital released by downsizing, i.e. the total amount divided by 240. Surely the monthly figure should be classed as capital drawdown, rather than income? And the problem of tax-sheltering the cash still remains. I also think 65 is too young for most people to consider downsizing - we certainly wouldn't want to sacrifice either the space we enjoy in our large property or the future capital gain it is likely to generate (given the reality of the housing shortage) at such a 'young' age.
Please login to comment