Skip to content

The "$70k income is too low for novated lease savings" myth — corrected

A common piece of forum advice reads something like:

"If you're on $70k, your income is too low to derive any real saving from a novated lease."

The same person will rarely raise the same objection for someone earning $130k.

This claim is mathematically incorrect — at least when it comes to the savings achieved per dollar spent pre-tax. Understanding why reveals something important about how marginal tax brackets actually work.

Why the claim is wrong: same tax bracket, same discount

The core insight is straightforward:

The 30% marginal tax bracket applies from $45,001 all the way up to $135,000.

Both a $70k earner and a $130k earner sit comfortably within that same bracket. Since the effective discount from spending pre-tax dollars equals your marginal rate plus the 2% Medicare levy, both earners enjoy the same 32% effective discount on every pre-tax dollar spent on the lease.

As explained in why "tax saved" is the wrong way to think about novated leases, spending pre-tax income is equivalent to receiving a discount:

  • 30% bracket → 32% discount effect
  • 37% bracket → 39% discount effect
  • 45% bracket → 47% discount effect

To make this concrete: suppose a lease involves $15,000 per year in pre-tax lease payments over three years.

Income After-lease taxable income Marginal rate Effective discount
$70,000 $55,000 30% 32%
$130,000 $115,000 30% 32%

Both earners:

  • Remain within the 30% bracket throughout the lease
  • Receive the same 32% effective discount on every dollar of lease payments
  • Experience broadly similar effects on means-tested calculations1

The dollar saving on the lease portion is therefore identical for a $70k and a $130k earner — not smaller for the lower earner.2

But the concern is potentially valid — for other reasons

So why does this advice persist, and is there anything to it?

The underlying intuition is not entirely wrong. There are legitimate reasons why someone on $70k may be less suitable — they just have nothing to do with the size of the tax saving or net saving.

If you've read the article on when a novated lease is worth it, you'll know that one's appropriateness for novated lease is highly context-dependent. For lower-income earners, several risk factors are more likely to apply:

  • Saving for a house deposit — lease payments reduce take-home pay and make it harder to accumulate a deposit, which tends to be a more immediate constraint at lower incomes
  • Less job security — earlier-career workers change employers more often, and early termination of a novated lease can carry significant costs
  • Less capacity to cover the balloon payment — the residual value must be settled at lease end. Without sufficient savings, you may be forced into a new lease cycle indefinitely — which becomes far less ideal if the EV FBT exemption is discontinued
  • Greater relative sensitivity to policy changes — if FBT exemption for EVs is removed or means-tested benefits are reduced, the same dollar-for-dollar change hurts relatively more on $70k than on $130k, even if the absolute figure is identical

While each of these factors is independent of tax savings, lower-income earners are collectively more exposed to them. It is reasonable to approach novated leasing with more scrutiny at lower incomes — not because the savings mechanism is less effective, but because the risks and opportunity costs are higher.

Key takeaway

A $70k earner and a $130k earner in the same marginal tax bracket achieve identical dollar savings from novated lease payments. The common claim that "$70k is too low to benefit" is mathematically wrong when it comes to the tax saving mechanism.

However, lower-income earners face legitimate non-tax reasons to be more cautious: fewer financial buffers, higher relative risk exposure, and less flexibility to absorb adverse events. These concerns are real — they just don't come from the savings amount per se.

Support this independent calculator & guide

This calculator and guide are built and continuously maintained as an independent project.

If it has helped you think more clearly, avoid a costly mistake, or saved you meaningful money, you're welcome to support its ongoing maintenance and improvements:

  1. There are some edge cases where the two situations can diverge — for instance, if the lease happens to push someone below a HELP repayment threshold, or affects a particular means-tested benefit differently. These are worth checking individually, but they do not change the main conclusion in most cases. ↩

  2. One edge case where a $70k earner could derive a lower saving than a $130k earner: if the annual lease payment exceeds $25,000, pushing their taxable income below $45,001. In that scenario, part of the pre-tax spending falls into the lower 16% + 2% Medicare bracket, reducing the average effective discount. ↩