When Meg Honner and Andy McIntyre got together in 2019, it was almost like a return to the past.
Decades earlier they had grown up in the same circles in Maitland, about two hours west of Adelaide on South Australia's Yorke Peninsula. After years of living in the city, they decided to return to Maitland in early 2020, just before the beginning of the COVID pandemic.
The timing could not have been worse.
"It was tough," Meg said.
"Because of the pandemic, we didn't know where income was coming from."
Meg's work dried up, but for Andy, the situation was a little more complicated.
A decade's worth of health complications after a heart operation had left Andy unable to work.
After more than a year of bureaucratic wrangling, Andy was accepted onto the Disability Support Pension (DSP) in 2013.
But it was terminated last year after Andy told Centrelink he had been in a relationship with Meg — her income as a freelance art director had put them just over the fortnightly income cut-off.
"It was about $400 over the cap [of $3,297.60 per fortnight] … and they were pretty adamant that was the end of Andy's DSP," Meg said.
Because Andy did not inform Centrelink about Meg as they began their relationship, he was hit with debts for overpayment dating back to early 2020.
From June 2020 to July 2021 — when the impact of the COVID pandemic hit many industries — Meg earned about $22,000, and the couple had to take out personal loans to pay the bills.
While today Meg's income has recovered — ensuring she earns too much for Andy to reapply for the DSP — she is still struggling to pay off the loans and is "robbing Peter to pay Paul every fortnight".
Andy also takes numerous medications to treat his disabilities and conditions that cost at least $500 a month.
For Andy, the loss of the DSP was devastating, and it has left him entirely financially reliant on Meg.
"When I was on disability income, you felt like you had [your] independence. You could help with the groceries for the week, or you could help with something," he said.
Andy said he and Meg would be "better off apart".
"I would get my disability [pension], Meg would get her wage, and she wouldn’t have so much debt." he said.
"I could do that tomorrow," Meg said.
"Move back to Adelaide and say we've broken up — and Andy would definitely be better off.
"But of course we want to be together, so it's not an option."
What is the partner income test?
When Australians claim income support, they’re asked to provide the government with their relationship status.
If they are part of a couple, their partner's income is also assessed, affecting their access to payments and how much they can get.
It is a way of making sure the most financially vulnerable Australians can still access welfare while also ensuring fair and equitable use of taxpayer dollars.
If a recipient's relationship status changes, it needs to be relayed to the government within a fortnight of the relationship starting or debts, like those incurred by Andy, can be issued for overpayment.
In some cases, lengthy questionnaires need to be filled out to help the government decide whether an applicant is part of a couple.
Some questions include whether the two people live together, share household chores and have joint assets — though others, such as one asking whether the pair is having sex, have been described by welfare advocates as invasive.
The thresholds at which Centrelink supports are tapered or cut varies by payment and situation.
For those on the DSP, once a couple’s combined income hits $320 per fortnight, the payment decreases by 50 cents for every subsequent dollar.
Once the combined income for a couple aged 21 or over living together reaches $3,297.60 per fortnight, the DSP is cut off entirely.
"Income tests are generally about making sure that payments [are] targeted at those that most need them," Grattan Institute economic policy program director Brendan Coates said.
But partner income tests, he said, can “erode the functions” of Centrelink payments in insuring people from unexpected things like losing a job or acquiring a disability.
'It doesn't reflect how people live their lives'
Welfare advocates say the partner income test is too rigid and based on an outdated view of relationships.
"The idea that sits behind this 'couple rule' is that the cost of living is lower if you're partnered and you're pooling your resources," Economic Justice Australia chief executive Leanne Ho said.
"But when you look at modern relationships, that just doesn't reflect how people live their lives.
"It makes people financially dependent much earlier than they would otherwise have chosen to be.”
The partner income cut-off threshold for JobSeeker was briefly raised in the early days of the pandemic, ensuring thousands more Australians could access the payment, before it reverted back at the same time the coronavirus supplement was scrapped at the end of March 2021.
With low-income Australians currently feeling the pinch of cost-of-living pressures, Ms Ho said the next government should look at relaxing some of the rules again.
"We assess them individually. So why should social security be any different?.
"[Welfare recipients are] the most vulnerable group with the lowest amount of resources, so we should look at once again extending support by relaxing the [partner] income test."
'No regard for us'
The ABC heard from a number of people on lower incomes calling for a relaxation of the rules but who did not want to be identified, some fearing their payments could be altered if they spoke out.
A spokesperson for Social Services Minister Anne Ruston said means testing was central to Australia's income support system and the Coalition had no plans to change it.
'The temporary changes made to assist Australians access support where their jobs or livelihoods had been impacted by the coronavirus outbreak are not the same as the cost-of-living pressure we are currently seeing in Australia," the spokesperson said in a statement.
"Australia's income support system is a non-contributory system and means testing arrangements are in place to make sure that the system is fair for both the people who rely on it, but also for those who pay for it — the taxpayers.”
Labor did not respond to questions about its policies, but a party spokesperson said in a statement the Coalition had treated people with a disability "shamefully" while in government.
"Australians should be able to access government supports, like the NDIS and our social security system, fairly and without fear or anxiety," the spokesperson said.
Andy and Meg said they understood the rationale for an income test for couples with consistent high salaries, but believed couples with fluctuating incomes were being penalised.
“Centrelink could be a bit more flexible for people who are borderline like us,” Meg said.
Andy would like to see a system where those on the DSP could keep at least part of their support payment, regardless of the couple's income.
"[They should] individualise people a bit more … just have it that there is an option there for people not to feel so disheartened," he said.
Most of all, they think doing the right thing – telling Centrelink they were a couple – has left them worse off.
"I feel like Centrelink look at everyone as though they're lying to them," Meg said.
"We were being honest about our situation, but there was no regard for us in any of their system."
