Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 585

Fixing the construction industry house of cards

If there is an industry Australia needs confidence in right now, it’s the residential construction sector. Yet, at a time of unprecedented need to build, construction companies are collapsing like houses of cards, leaving consumers with lost deposits and half-finished homes.

For consumers, embarking on building or renovating a home represents a large financial commitment, however when compared to other major investments that Australians will make in their lifetime, protection for their funds is limited. Indeed, builders can – and do – spend consumer deposits in any way that they please.

This article argues for the introduction of a regulatory mechanism that ring-fences consumer funds as a necessary element to restore confidence in the sector, improve the financial viability of homebuilders, and give hope that national home-building targets can be met.

Something’s broken in the residential construction sector

Australia needs to build new homes. Driving demand is high immigration, with 2023 seeing a net migration of 518,000 immigrants, coupled with an ongoing trend for fewer habitants per home. On the supply side, building commencements are in decline, with 2024 data for new dwelling commencements at 10-year lows. Overall, the ratio of new population to new dwelling approval is the worst since data began to be recorded in 1984.

Despite this urgent need to build, residential construction companies are going into liquidation at an alarming rate. According to ASIC data, in the 2023-2024 financial year 2,832 construction companies went into insolvency, representing the greatest proportion of company collapses, and a problem that is trending worse, not better. These are not small nor newly established companies either. Several industry-revered names have gone under, including Clough Group, Probuild, and Porter Davis Homes.

Covid disruptions, including skilled labour shortages and rising raw material costs, are often blamed for the high level of insolvencies. However, as the economy begins to settle down, the building industry doesn’t appear to be following suit. Warning signs have been unheeded, with a 2022 review by the Reserve Bank of Australia identifying financial pressures across the sector. This same report predicted that insolvency levels would increase – exactly what has transpired since – and the potential for the financial stress of these insolvencies to spread to consumers and the wider construction supply chain.

Going ‘under the hood’, Australia’s homebuilding industry is characterised by low profit margins and fixed price contracts, meaning that there is little headroom nor mechanism for builders to absorb pressures such as rises in material costs and shortages of labour. Indeed, rising labour and/or material prices are a common tune when companies have entered into insolvency.

This means that many homebuilders have been operating at negative cashflows, where suppliers don’t get paid, and projects are left unfinished. According to the Association of Professional Builders,” the construction industry is broken and will continue to fail until it is fixed”, a call that has been echoed by investigative journalists and suppliers to the sector.

Consumers left ‘carrying the can’

When a residential homebuilder goes bust, consumers become unsecured creditors and are at the bottom of the food chain after a lengthy insolvency process. For many consumers, the great Australian dream of building or renovating a home has turned into a nightmare. News is replete with stories of lost consumer deposits and half-finished homes.

The only available remedy is builder’s insurance, with most states (Tasmania being an exception) legislating that builders take out insurance that covers an insolvency event. However, such protection has bounds: claims cannot be initiated until five weeks after insolvency, policy limits vary between states, and in some cases, are limited to 20 per cent of the value of the build. In the case of Porter Davis Homes, this insurance wasn’t taken out in the first place, leaving consumers completely in the lurch.

The fallout does not stop at consumers; subcontractors also join consumers on the unsecured creditors' lists. Often small or family-run businesses become unsecured creditors needing to cover the cost of their materials and staff if they want to continue to trade.

The asymmetric risk for consumers, compared to other largest investments

Embarking on building or renovating a home is one of the largest investments an Australian will make. Yet, in comparison to other large investments, such as superannuation, banking deposits, or payments to professional services firms, there is little regulation in the construction sector regarding how consumer funds are utilised and protected.

Across financial services, regulations protect consumer funds in the event that one of these institutions collapses. Consider consumer payments for legal services; here consumer funds must be held in a client account and only used for their intended purpose. Contrastingly, when a homeowner places a deposit with a builder, this money can be spent for any purpose. In some cases, there have been stories of builders on luxurious holidays at the same time as homes go unfinished. More often, given the cash flow pressures across the industry, consumer deposits from one project are used to complete prior commitments.

It seems nonsensical that consumer deposits can be used for purposes outside which they are intended, however builder accounts are opaque and it is very hard to know where the money goes and little incentive or need for homebuilders to spend money on the project for which it is intended.

One remedy for homebuilders’ tight cash flows is to delay payments to suppliers. Another remedy is to take on more projects because these new deposits will increase cash flow in the short term. Paradoxically, this means that troubled builders put more consumers at risk, thus becoming a classic Ponzi scheme – until it falls over.

More money does not fix a broken system

The present political solution to Australia’s home-building challenge is to throw a wall of money at it. Federally, there is the 1.2 million new homes target backed by the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, a $3 billion New Homes Bonus, and a $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator. States are chipping in, too; one example is the New South Wales Government’s $2.2 billion commitment to new infrastructure and unlocking land – all with the view to promote new dwellings. 

The NSW Premier, Chris Minns, says his state is currently unable to meet its target of 75,000 new homes annually. There is very little evidence that throwing money at the problem has yet resulted in a single new home being built, but plenty of historical evidence that such large-scale stimulus will increase inflation – exactly the pressure that the residential construction sector has proved it cannot cope with.

A solution – protecting consumer deposits

Against a backdrop of stories of consumers being left in the lurch, it is hard to see confidence returning unless the industry takes a new approach. Financial services firms already provide a template for ring-fencing consumer funds and ensuring that money is spent for its intended purpose. Extending this protection to the residential construction sector would require setting up project accounts, where consumer funds reside until they are drawn down by builders and subcontractors and the work is completed to standard. In the event that the builder goes bust, this money remains in place to pay subcontractors and continue the build. A side benefit of this approach is that it may improve the robustness of the construction industry, providing homebuilders with a motive to ensure that each project stands on sound financial footing.

Stories of consumers losing their deposits are not what is needed right now. Fragile supply chains where subcontractors are unsure if they will get paid do not bode well for the sector either. The idea of ring-fenced accounts is not new. It’s time for governments to fix what is broken, chiefly how money flows through the industry. Doing so might be the only way to get value for money from Australian taxpayers' investment in new homes.

 

Dr Bradley Hastings is an Insights Associate at the UNSW Business Insights Institute and Dr Peter Swan is a Professor in the School of Banking and Finance at UNSW Business School. To learn more, watch SBS Insight: Season 2024 Episode 23 – Buildings Blocked, which features Dr Brad Hastings

The UNSW Business Insights Institute delivers economic and business insights, research and methods to government and business. Using a program-based approach consisting of Knowledge Hubs and Research Labs, the Institute helps industry partners solve complex challenges by providing them with access to novel research insights.

This article was originally published by UNSW Business School’s BusinessThink. Subscribe to BusinessThink for the latest research, analysis and insights from UNSW Business School.

 

7 Comments
peter c
November 10, 2024

There are not enough young people going into the construction industries, and the industry is suffering from a labour shortage. Parents are steering their children away from the industry and into areas of oversupply e.g law because of perceived prestige.
What makes the matter worse is only 5% of immigrants are employed in building and construction. Labour shortages leads to increased delays and costs.
Then you can add all the Nimby’s who don’t want any building or construction development in their established suburbs and you have a recipe for increased costs and undersupply.
Every time we hear about record home prices we should all see this as society failure not success.

Trace
November 08, 2024

Like John said, import less people. We don't have the housing for them, we cannot build fast enough, we never will. We should only be bringing those in that add value to the country and economy with the required skill set, some, if not a good understanding of building codes and building standards.
I'm in the building industry and the workmanship of these so called skilled immigrants is nothing but laughable. I also visit Asian countries and and can see the construction methods they import with them, extremely alarming - would I buy a house from a company that uses this labour, never, not unless I was on the project daily inspecting and having everything corrected.
As for the Ponzi scheme analogy, we are in one, have been for years.

Peter C
November 10, 2024

So what do we say to all those businesses, particularly small businesses who keep telling me “we can’t find staff”? If it wasn’t for Chinese and Indian immigrants many essential jobs (e.g drivers, cleaners and aged care) would not be filled. Even cafes and restaurants are struggling to find staff in some areas. Our young people are picking and choosing because demographics says they can.

Trevor
November 10, 2024

Crackdown on unemployment benefits?

John
November 08, 2024

We don't need to build more houses. To reduce demand for housing, we need to import far fewer people, while ensuring that those few we do import have the in-demand skills, the language, the culture, attitude and commitment to integrate well into Australian society and values. while paying a $50k visa levy to help provide the increased infrastructure their presence will require.

Trevor
November 07, 2024

Fixed price contracts are a recipe for disaster. Ring fencing deposits will exacerbate the builder’s cash flow problems. Personally I would prefer to buy an existing house.

Tony
November 15, 2024

Are you suggesting a do and charge contract? If so you may be increasing the cost of the end product (and decreasing the efficiency of the builder). How does one get a loan when the final amount is unknown?
Fixed price contracts do work, but the builders, suppliers and contractors need to work together to forecast price increases accurately. These increases must be included in the contract price over the forecasted building times.

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Coalition's super for housing plan is better than it looks

Labor policies and the impact on housing

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Vale Graham Hand

It’s with heavy hearts that we announce Firstlinks’ co-founder and former Managing Editor, Graham Hand, has died aged 66. Graham was a legendary figure in the finance industry and here are three tributes to him.

Warren Buffett is preparing for a bear market. Should you?

Berkshire Hathaway’s third quarter earnings update reveals Buffett is selling stocks and building record cash reserves. Here’s a look at his track record in calling market tops and whether you should follow his lead and dial down risk.

US election implications for investors and Australia

The return of Donald Trump to the US presidency brings the prospect of more US tax cuts and deregulation, but also more tariff hikes, trade wars and policy uncertainty. Here's what it means for markets going forward.

Avoiding wealth transfer pitfalls

Australia is in the early throes of an intergenerational wealth transfer worth an estimated $3.5 trillion. Here's a case study highlighting some of the challenges with transferring wealth between generations.

Taxpayers betrayed by Future Fund debacle

The Future Fund's original purpose was to meet the unfunded liabilities of Commonwealth defined benefit schemes. These liabilities have ballooned to an estimated $290 billion and taxpayers continue to be treated like fools.

The rising tension between housing debt and retirement balances

Australians are taking more mortgage debt into their 60s than ever before. Retirement planning assumptions haven’t adapted and could result in future income projections that ultimately disappoint retirees.

Latest Updates

Shares

Australian stocks will crush housing over the next decade, one year on

Last year, I wrote an article suggesting returns from ASX stocks would trample those from housing over the next decade. One year later, this is an update on how that forecast is going and what's changed since.

Superannuation

Addressing the gender super gap

The harsh reality is that most women retire with significantly less superannuation than men. There are many reasons for the gender super gap and here are some possible solutions to fix the long-running issue.

Superannuation

Meg on SMSFs: Where are the risks in our major super sectors?

Given the amount of money in super, it’s not surprising that there is a lot of focus on risk. SMSFs are often portrayed as the riskier option for the community as a whole, but does that tell the full story?

Superannuation

Global pension reforms and how Australia can improve

With plans to retire next year, Mercer's David Knox looks back at the global pension index he helped create, the key trends and developments since inception, and what Australia can to do to get better.

Shares

Cyclical stocks will drive markets higher in 2025

Magellan's Head of Global Equities, Arvid Streimann, thinks that although stock price momentum will slow next year, cyclical companies will lead the pack. He outlines the risks to his forecast and the stocks he likes best.

Economy

How this GDP per capita recession compares to history

GDP was 0.3% for last quarter but the real story is this was Australia’s seventh consecutive quarter of negative GDP per capita growth. How does this economic drought compare to past ones, and what can we expect in future?

Investing

The mispriced investment opportunity in global defence

Markets benefitted from peace for 40 years, but a military resurgence is now underway, fuelled by geopolitical tensions and technological advancements. Defence spending is soaring, offering potential opportunities for investors.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.