That extra you're about to get in super, most of it will come from you

Font Size:

Peter Martin, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

There’s something odd about those television and internet advertisements telling us we are getting more super.

The money seems to come from nowhere.

“Pretty soon,” explains the woman getting onto an escalator, “the amount of super paid on top of our wages will go up”.

Fair enough, but the increases in compulsory super contributions will come out of the same bucket as wages – so-called on-costs that employers use to pay wage cheques, workers compensation, payroll tax, employees pay-as-you-go tax, and employees super contributions, which is also known as the ‘super guarantee’.

The ad is a bit like those promising buyers of mobile phones the ‘free gift’ of an accessory. It has to be paid for somehow, and it’s usually out of the purchase price.

Paul Keating, prime minister when compulsory super was introduced in 1992, put it this way in a reflection on the history of modern superannuation in 2007

the cost of superannuation was never borne by employers. It was absorbed into the overall wage cost

Last year’s retirement income review examined every study that had ever been conducted on the topic and concluded that the “weight of evidence suggests the majority of increases in the super guarantee come at the expense of growth in wages”.

A more informative advertisement would have referred to super “paid on top of our wages, at the expense of our wages”.

The ads are funded by Industry Super, which represents the big funds that want to manage the extra super. There’s no reason for them to tell the whole story.

Source: Australian Tax Office

They’re the start of a campaign to get the government to actually deliver the five legislated increases of 0.5 per cent of salary starting in July that are scheduled to take compulsory super from 9.5 per cent of salary to 12 per cent over five years, and they are about to get more aggressive.

An extra half a percent of salary into super each year for five years culminating in an extra 2.5 per cent would be a big ask at any time, but in the present circumstances it is worth considering how a COVID-affected employer might respond.

That employer has choices. It could shave each of the next five annual wage increases so that it won’t end up paying out more than it would have.

Or it could eat into profits (which is difficult if it is barely surviving), or attempt to put up prices (which is also difficult at the moment) or it could shave its wage bill by letting go of staff.

In normal circumstances the first is the most likely, although in the circumstances we are in, and given the scale of the increases proposed, economists don’t rule out some of the last – letting go of staff.

The less employers expand employment or the less they increase wages, the less will be spent on their products, giving them even less money for wages. Household saving is already at unprecedented highs.

Most of us save enough, some too much

These downsides might be worth putting up with if we needed the extra super, but the November Retirement Income Review found that – to the surprise of some – we don’t.

High earners have always saved enough for retirement, originally outside of super and now inside of it, making very large extra contributions on top of what’s compulsory in order to take advantage of the tax benefits.

Low earners earn so little while working that the cocktail of super, the pension and private savings gives them about as much or more per year in retirement as they got while working, albeit partly funded at the expense of wages while they are working.

The review found that if the increases in compulsory super proceed as planned, the bottom one third of retirees will get more than they got while working.

International benchmarks suggest most non-renters need only 65-75 per cent of what they got while working, because they face far fewer of the costs they faced in their working lives including paying off a home, saving for retirement, raising and educating children, and commuting.

If the legislated increases in compulsory super go ahead, an astounding two-thirds of Australian retirees will get more than that benchmark. They will have been enriched in retirement at the expense of their living standard while working.

Retirement Income Review

So where does the target of 12 per cent salary locked away in super come from? You might be forgiven for thinking it was adopted after an independent review, and you’d be partly right.

The 2009 retirement income system review conducted as part of the Henry Tax Review examined the right amount of super and concluded that “the superannuation guarantee rate should remain at 9 per cent“.

Yet as the review’s final report endorsing that conclusion was being released on 2 May 2010 Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Treasurer Wayne Swan announced that “the superannuation guarantee will be gradually increased to 12 per cent, implying that decision derived from the review.

12 per cent is not what was recommended

It didn’t derive from the review, but the hubbub over the mining tax announced at the same time meant that few people noticed.

The best thing to do would be to abandon the 12 per cent target. It’s neither something we need nor something that would help us at the moment.

But if the super lobby makes that hard, I’ve another idea. It’s to allow the increase to proceed – an extra 0.5 per cent of salary from each employer per year, amounting to 2.5 per cent of salary after five years – but to give workers the option of having it directed instead to their wage account. For an employer, it’ll make no difference which account it goes to.

For Australians short of income at the time they need it, and an economy needing wages and spending, it might make a difference.The Conversation

Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Would you like the increase to the superannuation guarantee to go ahead as scheduled?

If you enjoy our content, don’t keep it to yourself. Share our free eNews with your friends and encourage them to sign up.

Join YourLifeChoices today
and get this free eBook!

By joining YourLifeChoices you consent that you have read and agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy


The superannuation mistake that could cost you $170,000

Choosing the wrong super product could reduce retirement savings by up to $170,000.

Super funds go to war with the government

'It's time for the government to leave people's super alone,' says super chief.

Senator urges retirees to use their savings 'more efficiently'

Retirement savings could be used in a better way, says senator.

Written by The Conversation


Total Comments: 4
  1. 1

    Wow, that comment sure turned a few previous statements, (mainly by the the big funds, both private and union) upside down. Who would ever have thought that Rudd and Swan may have bent the truth a little to suit their agenda’s.

  2. 3

    Considering that the present government tried to increase the pension age to 70 not so long ago, an increased SG to 12% will at least give some the opportunity not to have to work, or take the ‘default pension’ route (Jobseeker) before they are 67 or … 70.
    At 0.5% an increase, which the author seems to suggest is an ‘ok’ wage increase, the real pressure should be going onto companies who are raking in the profits whilst wages stagnate!
    As the head of the RBA recently said, it is high time that real wages increased..
    Let alone offer the chance for those who took out their $20 k In the past year at least some time to catch back up.

  3. 0

    Thank you for a party political broadcast on behalf of the Liberal Party .

  4. 0

    Well this is a change. Often we read (and in this publication) about the risk of government reducing the pension – both in terms of the amount payable and the number to whom it is paid – particularly as people are increasingly able to retire on income generated by their super savings but MORE particularly as the number of salary and wage earners as a percentage of the population decreases and the number of pensioners increases due to ageing of the population – hence the need for those currently working to invest in super. We cannot, you tell us often enough, assume a continued age pension payment.
    We read about possible changes to assets test which may include part or all of pensioner’s residence etc. There already are in place mechanisms to ensure a minimum withdrawal each fortnight if you are reliant on a government payment in part…
    We worry about aged care requirements where one’s house is sold to provide care – especially if you are on your own (women more likely than men).
    We worry about reverse mortgages being touted but meaning debt….
    Nor do most ordinary people have ‘arrangements’ that hide wealth transfer; instead our home is our children’s and grandchildren’s inheritance. If we ‘eat’ into it ,we reduce our ability to secure aged accommodation and care and also become unable to pass on anything to our children…
    But the first paragraph is the one most relevant to this article.



continue reading


How to … fall back asleep

Waking up at night and struggling to get back to sleep can be stressful and exhausting. According to WebMB, around...


Curing the incurable: Why some patients make astounding recoveries

As a GP and someone who works in the holistic health field, Dr Jerry Thompson has long been interested in...


The 'ism' that's rife and no, it's not okay

Ageism, like all 'isms', creates a social hierarchy and disadvantages people based on an aspect of their diversity. Compared to...


When conversations become a competition

Australia has a well-deserved reputation for being a very competitive nation on the world stage. Perhaps it dates back to...


Wakey wakey - a history of alarm clocks

Matthew S. Champion, Australian Catholic University Australians are returning to our normal rhythms. The first beats of the day are...


The top-selling-souvenir from every country in the world

Do you buy souvenirs to remember your overseas holidays? If so, we imagine you have been looking at these very...


ACCC to keep a keen eye on travel issues this year

Australia's consumer watchdog expects to have its hands busy dealing with COVID-affected travel complaints this year. In his annual address...


Cruisers turn to superyachts to satisfy their cruise cravings

Typically, Australia is one of, if not, the biggest cruise market in the world. It wasn't so long ago that...