주택연금 가입 의향 특성에 관한 연구 = A study on the characteristics of the enrollment in home pension

국문 초록 (Abstract)

급속한 고령화 사회의 진행과 국내외 경기 침체로 노년층의 안정적인 생활자금의 확보가 어려워 지고 있다. 더불어 고령자에 대한 사회구조적 변화와 사회 안전망이 부족한 가운데 퇴직인구 증가, 핵가족화, 기대수명 연장으로 고령화 사회의 변화에 대한 대응과 구체적 대책이 미흡하다.
따라서 2007년 7월 주택연금 제도를 도입하였다. 우리나라 전체 가계자산의 대부 분은 부동산이 차지하고 있으며, 노년층과 베이비붐 세대의 대부분은 금융자산보다 부동산 자산 비중이 높다. 특히, 통계청의 ‘2020년 가계금융복지조사’에 따르면 한국 인의 대다수는 금융자산보다 부동산 등 실물자산이 더 많은 것으로 나타났다.
그렇기 때문에 주택을 보유하고 있는 노년층의 노후생활자금 확보에 유용한 수단 으로 주택연금 제도가 긍정적으로 평가되고 있다. 퇴직 후 일정한 수입이 없는 노년층에게 주택연금 제도는 소유하고 있는 주택을 담보로 지속적인 거주를 보장받으며, 동시에 노후생활자금의 대출이 가능하므로 상대적으로 적은 복지예산으로도 높은 효율성을 제공할 수 있다.
본 연구의 목적은 국내 주택연금 시장의 연도별, 지역별, 연령별, 성별 및 지급방 식에 대한 현황과 주택 거주 및 보유실태, 가계경제 생활 실태, 노후준비 실태, 주택 연금에 대한 인식 및 이용행태 등을 살펴보고, 주택연금 가입대상 중 미가입자의 주 택연금 가입 의향 특성을 분석하였다. 또한, 다양한 변수 간에 어떠한 상관관계가 있는지를 도출하여 향후 제도적·정책적 주택연금 제도의 개선과 활성화를 위한 시사점을 제시하는 것이다.
연구의 목적을 위해 전국 17개 지역의 주택연금 가입대상 중 주택연금 미가입자 인 만 55세 이상의 성인남녀 300명을 대상으로 인구통계학적 요인, 주택소유실태 요인, 경제적 요인, 노후대책 및 주택연금에 대한 인식, 주택연금 가입이유 및 미가입 이유에 대한 요인, 제도적·정책적보완에 대한 요인을 파악하였다. 그리고 각 변수 간 t-검증과 카이제곱검증, 요인 상관분석등 다각적인 분석을 진행하였다.
응답자의 일반사항에서 성별에 있어서는 남자, 여자가 각각 50% 이었고, 전체 응 답자 모두가 주택을 소유하고 있었으며, 연령은 전체 응답자의 90.0%가 50대로, 이 는 퇴직시기와 맞물려 자녀의 학자금이나 자녀결혼자금 등에 대한 필요한 자금 때 문에 주택연금에 대한 관심도가 높다는 것을 알 수 있었다.
주택소유 실태에서 주택보유수는 ‘1채 보유자’가 91%로 가장 많았고, 주택종류는 ‘아파트’가 80.3%로 가장 많았다. 주택 현시세에서는 전체의 60%가 ‘5억 이하’로 생 각하고 있었으며, 상속의향에 있어서는 66.7%가 ‘있다’로 응답하여 뿌리 깊은 상속문 화단면을 알 수 있었다.
노후대책에서 전체의 67.0%가 노후생활자금으로는 ‘300만원 이하’가 적당한 것으 로 파악되었고, 전체 응답자의 59.7%가 노후대책 충분여부에서 ‘부족한다’고 조사되 었다. 이는 주택연금 제도가 향후 중요한 노후대책의 수단으로 이용될 수 있음을 알 수 있었다.
주택연금 인식에서는 ‘무엇인지 정도안다’가 전체 응답자의 58.0%로 가장 많았고, ‘잘 알고 있다’는 전체 응답자의 2.7%에 불과한 것으로 조사되었다. 주택연금에 대한 평가는 전체 응답자의 95.3%가 긍정적으로 생각하고 있었고, 가입의향에 있어서는 전체 응답자의 49.6%가 긍정적이며, 주택연금 수령방식은 ‘월 지급’ 방식을 선호하 고, 연금수령 예상금액은 ‘300만원 이하’ 가 많았다.
주택연금 가입이유에서 노후생활자금용으로 80%가 ‘그렇다’로 가장 많았고, 잔여연 금상속으로 51.7%가 ‘그렇다’, 자녀부담근절은 77.0%가 ‘그렇다’로, 생활비 증가예상은 50.7%가 ‘그렇다’로, 여행, 문화생활 등 삶의 질향상은 66.6%가 ‘그렇다’로 가장 많이 응답하였다. 이는 자녀에게 부담주지 않으면서 여행, 문화생활 등 노후의 삶의 질을 향상 하기위한 노후생활자금용으로 활용하고자 하는 희망사항을 엿볼 수 있었다. 주택연금 미가입이유에서 ’연금수령액 소액‘이 44.4%가 ’그렇다‘, 주택가격상승기 대는 49.0%가 ’그렇다‘, 로 응답하였다. 이는 주택가격 상승기대에 따른 충분한 연금수령액이 보장 되어야 함을 시사해 주는 것으로 사료되었다.
제도적·정책적보완에서 적극적인 홍보는 76.0%가 ’그렇다‘, 초기보증료·연보증료인 하는 74.4%가 ’그렇다‘, 연금수령액 상향조정은 82.0%가 그렇다’, 다주택가입자조건완 화는 48.0%가 ‘그렇다’, 세금혜택확대는 80.6%가 ‘그렇다’, 연금수령기간 선택완화는 81.4%가 ‘그렇다’, 부부가입시 수령자 선택완화는 72.6%가 ‘그렇다’로 가장 많이 응답하였다. 결국 개인별 니즈에 맞게 연금수령기간완화, 세금혜택확대, 초기·연보증료 의 인하, 적극적인 홍보등 다양한 신상품 개발을 원하고 있음을 알 수 있었다.
본 연구에서 실증분석하여 도출된 결과를 바탕으로 제도적·정책적 보완점을 종합 적으로 제시하였다. 첫째, 소비자 보호 기능이다. 주택연금 제도는 개인이 자신의 노후계획과 자산처분을 결정하는 중대한 결정행위이다. 다만, 이러한 제도를 이해하기 어려울 수 있으며, 주거용 부동산을 담보로 하는 만큼 이용자의 불안이 클 수밖에 없으므로 적절한 방안을 마련하기 위한 상담이 선행되어야 한다. 주택연금 가입자의 경우 노후자금 및 상속에 대한 인식이 강하며 노령층의 특성상 반복적인 상담과 상 세한 상담이 예상되므로 주택연금연계 재무설계 서비스 제공이 필요하다.
둘째, 다양한 홍보의 활성화이다. 우리나라의 경우 뿌리 깊은 상속 문화 때문에 자녀는 부모가 가입하려고 할때 반대하는 경우가 있고, 주택 소유에 대한 보수적인 경향으로 인해 새로운 고객을 찾기 어려운 경우가 많다. 우리나라 고령층의 대부분 은 주택을 자산증식의 효과적인 수단으로 주택을 소유하려는 강한 의지와 자녀에게 유산을 남기고 싶은 강한 의지를 가지고 있다.
셋째, 세제지원 강화이다. 현재 주택연금 가입자는 근저당권 설정 시 농업특별세· 등록세 등의 면제, 재산세 25% 감면, 주택연금 대출이자 비용 소득공제 등 세제혜택 이 지원되고 있다. 향후 주택연금 가입자 수요를 활성화하기 위해서는 기존 세제혜택을 강화하고, 고령층이 주택연금을 사용할 수 있도록 세제혜택을 추가로 지원하는 조세지원책이 필요하다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Between the economic downturn at home and abroad, and the rapidly increasing number of elderly people in the population it is becoming increasingly difficult for this demographic to secure funds for comfortable post-retirement life. Amidst the lack of social structural changes and a social safety net for the elderly population specific measures benefitting this demographic in response to societal changes are inadequate. These changes are attributed to an increase in the size of the retired population, an increase in the number of nuclear families, and an increase in life expectancy.
As a result, the housing pension scheme was introduced in July 2007. Real estate accounts for most of total household assets in Korea, with most of the elderly and baby boomers having a higher proportion of real estate assets than financial assets as a percentage of total assets. According to the “2020 Household Financial Welfare Survey” by Statistics Korea, the majority of Koreans had more real assets, such as real estate, than financial assets.
Therefore, the housing pension scheme is being touted as a useful means of securing funds for the elderly who own houses. The housing pension scheme guarantees continuous residence in the house they own, which they offer as collateral under the scheme. It is also possible for the elderly to borrow money for living expenses with their house as collateral, if they do not have a fixed income after retirement, thus providing high-efficiency support with a relatively small budget for retirees.
This study aims to examine the current status of the domestic housing pension market by year, region, age, gender, and payment method, as well as housing residence and ownership, household financial situation, preparation for post-retirement life, and perception and usage of housing pensions, etc. Furthermore, the characteristics of non-subscribers' intention to subscribe to housing pension plans among those eligible for housing pensions were analyzed. This paper presents implications for improving and revitalizing the housing pension scheme in the future, by deriving what kind of correlation exists between the various variables.
For the purpose of this study, demographic factors, factors for home ownership status, economic factors, perceptions of retirement plan and the housing pension, and reasons for subscribing or not subscribing to the housing pension, as well as factors for institutional and policy implementation were analyzed for 300 adult men and women over 55 years of age who were not enrolled in the housing pension plan in the 17 regions nationwide. In addition, various analyses were performed, such as the t-test, chi-square test, and factor analysis including correlation between variables.
In the general survey of respondents, men and women each accounted for 50% of the respondents, respectively. All respondents owned houses, 90.0% of all respondents were in their 50s and it was found that there was a high interest in housing pension because they needed funds for their children's school expenses or marriage, which coincided with their retirement.
In terms of home ownership, "single owner" accounted for the largest portion at 91%. As for the type of housing, "apartments" accounted for the largest portion at 80.3%. While at the current housing price, 60% of total respondents estimated the value of their houses was “500 million won or less.” In terms of the bequest intention, 66.7% answered "yes," indicating a deep-rooted wish to hand out their wealth to children.
As for the retirement plan, 67.0% of the total respondents found that “3 million won or less” a month was appropriate for their retirement living expenses, and 59.7% of the total respondents surveyed responded that their current retirement savings were “not enough.” It was thus found that the housing pension scheme could be used as an important means for retirement in the future.
Regarding the perception of the housing pension, “I know what it is” accounted for the largest portion at 58.0% of all responses, while only 2.7% of all respondents chose “I know about it well.” As for the evaluation of housing pension, 95.3% of all respondents thought positively about the scheme. While 49.6% of all respondents were positive about it subscribing to the plan. Then, the way housing pension is paid, “monthly payment” was preferred, while the expected amount of pension payments was “3 million won or less” a month in most cases.
Among the reasons for subscribing to the housing pension plan, 80% answered “yes” that it was for retirement living expenses, followed by “yes” of 77.0% for relieving their children’s burden to take care of them, 66.6% for a better quality of life including expenses for travel and culture activity, 51.7% for inheritance of the remaining pension balance, and 50.7% for preparation for expected increase in living expenses. A glimpse of the respondents’ hopes could be obtained, i.e., that they wished to use the housing pension payments as a fund for old-age life to improve their quality of life, such as travel and culture activity, without burdening their children.
However, the reasons for not subscribing to the housing pension, 49.0% of the respondents answered “yes” to “expectations for housing price increases,” while 44.4% of the respondents answered “yes” to the “excessively small amount of pension receipt.” This seemed to imply that sufficient pension payments should be guaranteed in accordance with the expected increases in housing prices.
In terms of institutional and policy implementation, 82.0% said “yes” for upward adjustments in pension payments, followed by 81.4% for the easing of the pension payment period, 80.6% for expansion of tax benefits, 76.0% for active public relations promotion, 74.4% for initial guarantee and annual guarantee fee reductions, 72.6% for the easing of the choice of the recipient when subscribing as a married couple, and 48.0% for eased conditions for multi-family subscribers. In sum, it could be seen that respondents wanted various new products to be developed, which would meet individual needs, such as an eased pension receipt period, expanded tax benefits, reduced initial and annual guarantee fees, and active public relations promotion.
This paper presented institutional and policy areas for improvement based on the results derived from the empirical analysis in this study. First, consumer protection is needed. Whether to subscribe to the housing pension scheme, is an important decision for individuals in determining their retirement plans and asset disposals. However, understanding the housing pension scheme can be difficult, and consultations to develop an appropriate plan should precede subscription since users are inevitably anxious about using their homes as collateral. In the case of housing pension subscribers, they are highly aware of retirement funds and matters regarding inheritance. Thus, repetitive and detailed consultations can be expected, especially considering the characteristics of the elderly population. It is therefore necessary to provide financial planning services linked to the housing pension.
Second, various public relations promotion efforts must be enhanced. Children often object when their parents try to subscribe to the housing pension because of the expectation that they would be beneficiaries once their parents pass away. Thus, it is often difficult to find new customers for the housing pension plans due to the conservative tendency toward home ownership. Most of the elderly in Korea have a strong inclination toward home ownership as an effective means of asset growth and a strong desire to leave a legacy for their children.
Third, tax support must be strengthened. Currently, housing pension subscribers are provided with tax benefits, such as exemption from special agricultural tax and registration tax, a 25% reduction in property tax, and income deduction for interest payment on housing pension loans, when the mortgage is set up. To revitalize housing pension subscriber demand in the future, existing tax benefits need to be strengthened and tax support measures are needed to support tax benefits so that more elderly people will be motivated to use the housing pension plans.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서 론············································································································1
• 제1절 연구의 배경 및 목적···················································································· 1
• 1. 연구의 배경·····································································································1
• 2. 연구의 목적·····································································································2
• 제2절 연구의 범위와 방법 및 구성······································································· 2
• 1. 연구의 범위 및 방법······················································································2
• 2. 연구의 구성·····································································································3
• 제2장 주택연금 가입의향에 관한 이론적 고찰······················································· 6
• 제1절 주택연금 ······································································································ 6
• 1. 주택연금 개요·································································································6
• 2. 주택연금의 특성·····························································································9
• 3. 주택연금의 재가입 및 담보주택 변경·······························································14
• 제2절 해외 주요국의 주택연금제도····································································· 18
• 1. 미국···············································································································18
• 2. 일본···············································································································20
• 3. 특성 및 시사점·································································································23
• 제3절 선행연구 고찰····························································································· 26
• 1. 주택연금 이용의향과 가입결정에 관한 연구·······················································26
• 2. 주택연금에 대한 연령별 인식과 노후준비에 관한 연구·········································28
• 3. 선행연구와의 차별성····················································································30
• 제3장 주택연금 운영 현황················································································ 32
• 제1절 연도별 및 지역별 주택연금 공급 현황····················································· 32
• 1. 연도별 주택연금 공급 현황··········································································32
• 2. 지역별 주택연금 공급 현황··········································································33
• 제2절 지급유형별 및 지급방식별 주택연금 공급 현황······································· 34
• 1. 지급유형별 주택연금 공급 현황··································································34
• 2. 지급방식별 주택연금 공급 현황··································································34
• 제3절 연령구간별 및 성 별 주택연금 공급 현황················································ 35
• 1. 연령구간별 주택연금 공급 현황··································································35
• 2. 성 별 주택연금 공급 현황···········································································35
• 제4장 주택연금 특성에 관한 실증분석···························································· 36
• 제1절 실증분석 개요. ···························································································· 36
• 1. 연구 대상 및 범위······························································································36
• 2. 변수 선정 및 설문 구성 내용··············································································36
• 제2절 실증분석······································································································ 38
• 1. 기술통계량·····································································································39
• 2. 빈도분석········································································································40
• 3. 차이검증········································································································50
• 4. 교차분석········································································································54
• 5. 요인 상관분석·······························································································59
• 제3절 실증분석 결과 ··························································································· 65
• 제5장 결 론 ···································································································· 71
• 1. 연구의 요약 및 시사점·····················································································71
• 2. 향후 연구 과제·································································································76
• 참고문헌···················································································································· 77
• Abstract ····················································································································· 92