You are 40, earning more than you did five years ago.

Your career looks stable. Your spouse is working too. Your current home has appreciated, and the children could certainly use another bedroom.

Then the bank tells you how much you can borrow.

Suddenly, the bigger condominium you thought was slightly out of reach looks possible.

The natural reaction?

If the bank says we can afford it, why not stretch a little more?

For years, that calculation may have felt reasonable, particularly for mid-career professionals expecting their income to remain stable or continue rising.

But artificial intelligence is one more reason to examine an assumption sitting quietly behind that decision.

Not necessarily whether you will still have a job.

But whether your income five or ten years from now will follow the path you expect it to today.

That matters when the financial commitment you are considering could last 20 to 30 years.

Much of the conversation around AI and employment tends to swing between two extremes.

One says AI is going to replace huge numbers of workers.

The other says AI will simply make everyone more productive.

Singapore's experience so far appears more nuanced.

In April 2026, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) reported that 28.5% of firms had adopted AI in some form. Among those firms, only 6.2% reported reducing headcount.

Far more were changing the work itself.

About 18.9% had redesigned job functions, while 13.9% had created new AI-related roles.

AI adoption was also particularly high in sectors containing many PMET roles:

Source: MOM, stats.mom.gov.sg

MOM's conclusion was not that AI was causing widespread unemployment. Rather, its effects were appearing more strongly in how jobs are being redesigned than in jobs disappearing altogether.

For a homeowner, that distinction is important.

Because you do not have to become unemployed for a large mortgage to become uncomfortable.

Your role could change.

Your company could restructure.

Your next position could come with a different compensation package.

You could spend several months transitioning between roles.

You might decide that staying employable requires retraining or moving into a different function.

Or a portion of your pay that once felt dependable, such as bonuses or variable compensation, could become less certain.

For a long-term borrower, the more useful scenario to test is therefore not simply whether AI eliminates the job, but whether a role change, transition or compensation reset could interrupt the income path the household had assumed.

And that is where the property question becomes interesting.

When buyers think about upgrading, the focus is usually on the property.

Can we afford the downpayment?

How much can we borrow?

What will the monthly instalment be?

Can we stretch another $200,000 for the larger unit?

But underneath all those questions sits another assumption:

that your future earning power will continue supporting today's property decision.

Suppose a couple earns a combined gross income of $20,000 a month.

Based on their current finances, they are considering taking a $1.5 million housing loan over 30 years.

At an illustrative interest rate of 3%, their monthly mortgage would be approximately $6,300.

At today's income:

$6,300 $20,000 = about 32% of gross household income.

That might feel manageable.

But imagine their combined income falls by 20% after one partner goes through a career transition.

Their mortgage has not changed.

Their property has not changed.

But now:

$6,300 $16,000 = about 39% of gross household income.

If the household temporarily relies on a single $10,000 income, the same mortgage consumes approximately 63% of gross income.

Illustrative example only. It excludes other debts, expenses, CPF usage and individual financial circumstances.

Nothing happened to the mortgage.

What changed was the income supporting it.

That is the part of affordability an approval letter cannot predict.

Singapore's Total Debt Servicing Ratio, or TDSR, requires a borrower's total monthly debt obligations to stay within 55% of gross monthly income.

It is an important safeguard against excessive borrowing.

That safeguard is more conservative than the headline 55% suggests.

For residential property loans granted by financial institutions, the TDSR calculation uses the higher of the loan's thereafter interest rate or a 4% medium-term interest-rate floor. This means a borrower may be assessed at a higher rate than the promotional mortgage rate actually being offered.

Variable income such as bonuses, commissions and allowances is also subject to a minimum 30% haircut when calculating TDSR. In other words, only part of income considered less dependable is recognised for the affordability test.

So the framework already builds in protection against higher rates and fluctuating income.

But there is still something it cannot determine.

Whether the fixed salary feeding that calculation will look the same five or ten years later.

That is the distinction.

TDSR can stress-test the financing assumptions available today.

It cannot tell you what your profession, employer or earning path will look like eight years from now.

CPF Board similarly advises buyers to think beyond the maximum loan available, factoring in job stability, future expenses and potential income changes when deciding what is genuinely affordable.

That becomes relevant when industries themselves are changing.

In June 2026, Shopee cut jobs in Singapore, with software engineers among those affected, as parent company Sea continued investing in AI.

Importantly, Shopee did not say those employees were directly replaced by AI. The company said departments may adjust staffing based on operational and business priorities following regular reviews of business operations.

So it would be inaccurate to conclude that AI simply "took their jobs".

But the episode illustrates something more relevant to a long-term borrower:

Even highly skilled, seemingly secure white-collar roles can be affected as companies reorganise around changing technology and business priorities.

That does not make those careers unsafe.

It does make it harder to assume that the way a role looks today will remain unchanged throughout a multi-decade mortgage.

This may be the more useful AI question for someone considering a larger home.

Imagine your job still exists five years from now.

That does not necessarily mean the economics of the job remain identical.

If AI allows a team to produce more with fewer manual processes, companies may reorganise responsibilities even without eliminating an entire occupation.

Some employees may become considerably more productive and valuable.

Others may find certain tasks automated or redistributed.

New roles may emerge.

Old responsibilities may disappear.

And the skills employers value most may change.

MOM's findings already point towards this process. Firms adopting AI have so far been more likely to redesign jobs or create new AI-related roles than to reduce headcount.

NTUC has raised similar concerns around adaptation.

Ahead of Budget 2026, it called for stronger transition support for PMEs as AI reshapes workplaces and employer expectations. Its Survey on Economic Sentiments 2025 found that 56% of PMEs felt they needed to upskill to remain relevant.

That does not mean those workers will lose their jobs.

Nor does MOM's evidence establish that AI is already reducing PMET salaries or long-term earning power.

What it does show is that work is changing.

For a 38-year-old considering a 25-year mortgage, that is worth accounting for.

You are not only asking whether you will remain employed.

You are asking whether your household finances have enough room to absorb the career transitions that could occur over the life of the loan.

Someone in their late 30s or 40s may actually be in their strongest financial position yet.

Your salary may be near its career high.

You may have built substantial CPF savings.

Your first property may have appreciated.

Your borrowing capacity could be significantly greater than it was ten years ago.

Which makes stretching for the bigger home especially tempting.

But this life stage can also come with heavier financial commitments.

Children.

Parents.

Insurance.

Retirement.

Education costs.

Perhaps even plans to slow down professionally later in life.

At the same time, you have fewer working years available to recover from a major financial setback than someone buying at 28.

That means your maximum borrowing capacity and your sensible borrowing capacity may not necessarily be the same number.