17/03/2025
So DHA has once again published a supposedly independent / third-party report showing how much savings an property investor can make use DHA. But how reliable is this?
Well once again the report leaves some glaring questions to be answered.
1. The study does not seem to factor in the cost of the annual valuation fee we have to do. This can be over $1k of extra annual cost. In a private lease we don't need to do a valuation but with DHA this needs to be planned for. As the DHA savings for units averages about $2.7k then this one line item will significantly reduce that value.
2. The study compares maintenance costs excluding structural repairs, but how is 'structural' is defined. Is it per industry standard or per DHA contract definition ie anything connected / fixed to the property structure. This effectively means, that doors, tiles, taps, lights, gyprock, etc would all be classified as structural.
Without such a definition, I don't see how the analysis could have been done. So this leave much doubt in my mind as to the veracity of their claims and once taken into account could well overturn the findings.
3. The report concludes showing how low DHA fees are as a % of assets compared with various Superannuation funds. While I do not contest this finding, I do wonder the relevance as their comparison ignores the returns / income from these alternatives [which could potentially be much higher and so out weight the added costs]. To make this a meaningful comparison the relevant data to examine would be net returns [after costs]. I'm sure that the report writers are smart enough to have thought of this and done the analysis. So then the question remains why did they not present it? Could it be that the results of a net returns analysis did not show favorably?
Note this is not to say that a DHA property is not a good investment. I myself have one and there are certainly some pros to the DHA approach - but one must be careful. DM me if you'd like further information / details.