Joe Hockey – a better retirement

Read about Joe Hockey’s hopes for retirees.

Joe Hockey – a better retirement

Madame Speaker, I want to reassure all Australian workers they can have confidence in their retirement plans.

There will be no new taxes on superannuation under this Government.

And the Age Pension will continue to increase, twice a year, this year, and every year – at the highest available indexation rate.

The Age Pension is our Budget’s biggest item of expenditure, $44 billion a year. This is more than 10 per cent of all government spending.

The Age Pension is a critically important safety net for many Australians.

That is why as our population ages, we need to ensure the pension is sustainable and affordable.

So, from 1 January 2017, we will make changes that benefit pensioners with fewer assets beyond the family home. But we will also tighten eligibility for those pensioners with higher levels of assets.

Importantly anyone who currently has a Pensioner Concession Card will continue to receive a concession card that provides the same benefits, such as subsidised utilities and transport, bulk billing and cheaper PBS prescription medicines.

These measures are all intended to provide security and certainty for older Australians in the years ahead.





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    MarLin
    12th May 2015
    10:40pm
    My only question at this early stage is that, if it was so easy to "do the right thing" by most people with the budget, why on earth did we have to suffer all that BS the first time around?
    cockyhockey
    12th May 2015
    11:07pm
    This Treasurer has confirmed he is not up to the job. What a turn around from the cigar smoking duo celebrating a great job done the first time only in their minds . From a disaster to a shocker. The economy has suffered to much along with those in struggle street.

    12th May 2015
    11:10pm
    Someone can't do math. The so-called ''wealthier'' retirees will now, in many cases, be worse off than pensioners unless they drain their savings and then go on the pension. How does that help the budget bottom line? Meanwhile couples can earn $70,000 a year and still get a pension, but someone with as little as $24,000 a year from investments gets none. Some, with both assets and income, don't even have their income assessed. Then, of course, there are those who dumped millions into a home to reduce their assets, but are actually far better off than people with less. It's a grossly unfair system that needs a total overhaul, but this Government, true to form, victimizes a group of battlers while protecting the wealthy, and pedals lies to justify it's cruelty.
    Essdubbya
    12th May 2015
    11:26pm
    Couldn't agree more. Another demonstration of the complete lack of understanding of those holding the levers of government. Labour is just as bad. I would love to see a full analysis and an explanation of the reasoning behind the seemingly arbitrary asset limits. Makes little sense to me.
    Golden Oldie
    13th May 2015
    12:53am
    Could someone please tell me how to get 3.25% on savings? Can't afford to buy shares as I will need the proceeds from the sale of my house to rebuild in about 1 year. Will lose the part pension and other benefits with no hope of getting any of it back under the new limits on changes made in January this year and also those from this budget. How can anyone plan for a reasonable retirement when the goalposts keep changing?
    Anonymous
    13th May 2015
    6:43am
    The incentive to invest in super has been retained, according to Hockey. Well done! So put your money into super and plan for retirement, and when you get to 65, if you've managed to save a tidy sum but your are NOT wealthy and definitely NEED a pension (as ALL financial modelling software evidences), we'll force you to blow your hard won savings in the first year or two of retirement and make all that careful investment futile.

    Why? Well, so that we can keep on giving $30 billion in tax concessions on super contributions - most of which only benefits the rich, and none of which helps the poor old battler who can't save enough to be self-funded but does manage to save enough that he SHOULD be comfortable.

    There has apparently been no consideration of the gross inequity in the income/assets test combination which says that if your ONLY income is return on invested assets, you lose the pension if you have $823,000 (homeowner couple), but if you are lucky enough to earn a few hundred dollars a fortnight in income, you can draw a pension despite having that AND $800,000 in the bank. There's no consideration, either, of your age and state of health. A 90-year-old with $550,000 might be quite well to do, but a 65-year-old with chronic health issues certainly isn't wealthy. Nor did the Government consider that the Health Care Card isn't recognized by many doctors and most specialists, so someone with high health costs might be tens of thousands worse off than a pensioner.

    Is the generous income test being changed? A couple can earn $70,000 a year and still get a part pension. But someone with assets might be only getting $24,000 a year return and loses it!

    The good news for you, though, Golden Oldie, is that the proceeds of the sale of your house are excluded from the means test for one year after you sell it.
    Nan Norma
    13th May 2015
    8:08am
    Golden Oldie. Both the Commonwealth bank and the Bank of Qld are paying 3.25%
    downunder
    13th May 2015
    10:37am
    Golden Oldie, Have a look at the ING online a/c and in combo with an 'no cost' ING Orange a/c you can even get 2% cash back on purchases under $100 (most of you groceries would fall under there). Just do your homework. Conditions apply.
    PlanB
    13th May 2015
    7:23am
    Golden Oldie, Try the ANZ On line saver --you can get the 2% PLUS a bonus interest there --and not have to tie up your money
    PlanB
    13th May 2015
    9:20am
    Don't go for the Maxi savers as you have to wait till the last day of the month to draw out money -- or you loose the whole months interestwith the OLS you can draw out at any time and NOT loose the whole moths interest -- can also make payment --ie -- pay bills from the OLS at anytime of the month
    PlanB
    13th May 2015
    7:26am
    I want to know how the LAST budget was so horrific and this one is better?????????????

    I bet it is a sweetener, to get them back in favor and get elected again --THEN WATCH OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Grateful
    13th May 2015
    7:57am
    Precisely. We all know what they REALLY want to do from last year. Very bad poker players, have already shown their hand and now lying to everyone that they really weren't their cards so please keep betting, "have a go", then they will show their 4 aces!!!! Caveat emptor!!!!!
    dougie
    13th May 2015
    7:54am
    I want to know - Why can't people be happy with what we have? I feel that the Government has tried to do the best they could for we pensioners and for small business. Maybe last years budget was harsh - maybe it had to be to bring the world of reality back. I do not know, but I do know that as a pensioner who owns a modest unit and who has a modest savings that I am happy and content and feel that I am better off than I was under a Labor government. This is not because of political leanings etc but just the way I feel within.
    You can now castigate me - criticise me or do whatever stupidity requires of those who want to crucify me for my thoughts.
    PlanB
    13th May 2015
    8:04am
    And Abbott said
    Abbott said $180,000 was low wage !!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Anonymous
    13th May 2015
    9:52am
    Good one doghie, finally a pensioner who is gratefull for what he gets and doesn't want the world as so many others on this site think they are entitled too.
    dougie
    13th May 2015
    10:15am
    PLANB,
    And what does your comment have to do with my statement?
    MB100D
    13th May 2015
    10:34am
    Well said Dougie, but, expect to get a bucket load full from the ENTITLED brigade.
    *Imagine*
    13th May 2015
    1:46pm
    Well dougie, robbo and Retired Knowall you are displaying the response that this clever 'divide and conquer' approach to older Australians was designed to engender.
    Forget for a minute all the sensible arguments and maths that many contributors have presented to explain the inequity of this asset limit approach to pension access. The point is that access to pension does not depend upon a retired person's wealth - IT DEPENDS ON HOW THEY HAVE THEIR WEALTH INVESTED. Millionaires will still have a full pension if most of their wealth is invested in their home, Family Trusts and annuities, whereas many older people have a more modest home, a super balance of $600 000 and only get a part pension. Still others have assets that are unable to be sold such as acreages attached to their modest home and will get no pension.The problem guys is that we are not happy because this is inequitable - I am pleased that you are getting what you do from the taxpayer. However, you are in the company of many other recipients who are getting public handouts at the expense of those, who have the same, or less, net wealth but haven't poured their money into a squillion dollar mansion. Pity that some are too blind to see that, it is not an entitlement attitude, rather it is abject annoyance at being told to spend everything that we have worked so hard for all our lives because successive Governments have spent the money put aside from taxation for our retirement and been too engrossed in self interest to plan for the baby boomer retirement bulge.
    Anonymous
    13th May 2015
    2:12pm
    I don"t disagree with your comment Imagine because everyone has a different set of circumstances and of course the result will be different some will always be better off than others.

    Personally I don"t get a cent out of the pension but I thought it was nice to see a person who appreciates what he gets from the pension as in doughie which is a change from the usual wingers we get in this column.
    MB100D
    13th May 2015
    3:47pm
    Imagine, your comments are flawed and full of half truths:
    1. Money is never and was never put aside from taxation to fund the pension. The pension is paid out of consolidated revenue.
    2. Who in their right mind would buy a squillion dollar mansion to get a miserly pension, 25% of ATWE? You cant eat a house.
    3. Its only going to get worse as the number of wage earner is surpassed by the number on pension. It wont matter who is in power, the end result will be the same, Govts have tinkered with the welfare system many time since it's inception in 1902, if people based their retirement on Govt policy they run the risk of being disadvantaged, its called sovereign risk. The only way to eliminate this risk is to structure your financial affairs during your working life so that you are completely self funded.
    dougie
    13th May 2015
    4:47pm
    Imagine,
    What a load of vitriol you have tried to disperse. So much garbage - so much I deserve more.
    Whatever you say I am happy that I live in this great land where such benefits are available. I am not jealous of those who have gathered more than I, maybe, just maybe I have dispersed more benefit to people in the community than you think possible. Maybe I have not looked for financial gain but rather to ease the way for some of my fellow men. This has been my choice and I am happy that I made it. You go your way and I will go mine. I do not look for heavenly rewards, nor in fact earthly rewards just the knowledge that I can look in the mirror when I shave and do not have to look away in shame. Can you do that?
    *Imagine*
    13th May 2015
    9:11pm
    Retired Knowall.
    Whose half truth? Google the National Welfare Act 1943 and get the whole truth. Money was put aside for pensions - and then, later it was spent. Funds were collected with the intention of funding pensions in the same manner as NZ and UK and may other developed nations, early wage slips show the actual amount. Incompetent governments took it from this special fund and placed it into consolidated revenue and now cannot fund the pension.

    Dougie. The only vitriol that I can see is that from your last post. I have simply stated some facts. There are many well off people who are rorting the system and many not so well off people who will now either have to sell assets such as vintage cars that they have held for decades as a hobby, or the river shack that the family have held for generations, etc. to live as well as those on the pension. I am pleased that you can be happy with what you have been able to do in your life and that you are pleased with your own reflection, but neither change the fact that this whole retirement system is unjust and it changes so often that nobody can plan their future with any certainty. I am not attacking you, I am pointing out flaws in the system. Re-read your post it says: I want to know - Why can't people be happy with what we have? Well I tried to tell you why, many do not have what you have, and you attack me. That is how the government wins and you like me will eventually lose.
    PlanB
    14th May 2015
    7:03am
    Because Dougie, it shows how out of touch with REAL life this Mongrel is
    dougie
    14th May 2015
    7:53am
    Imagine and Plan B,
    Isn't it amazing - I tell the world that I am happy and then you try to tell me why I should not be happy and I do not care.
    It is wonderful to wake each morning and to see the sun and hear the birds, the matter of politics is not going to spoil my final years, I want to be happy, so why not be so ?
    MB100D
    14th May 2015
    9:19am
    Hey Imagine, If your pension is because you worked all your life and are Entitled, where does the money come from to fund those pensioners that never worked a day of their life?
    I'm glad you conceed the pension comes from consolidated revenue.
    worker
    13th May 2015
    10:02am
    retirement could be very good if I received the life time perks and pensions of MPs Australian citizens employees after they leave some 5/6 years their employment.
    Time to remove or start the movement of the life time perks and pensions of how Employees MPs
    Sum1
    13th May 2015
    10:27am
    What stopped you from standing for parliament?..
    MB100D
    13th May 2015
    10:38am
    I'll tell you SUM1, common sense.
    If most of the whingers that post their dribble on this site had half a brain they wouldn't have to rely on the tax payer to support their retirement and then bleet on about how hard it is to survive on the pension.
    downunder
    13th May 2015
    10:30am
    A leopard never loses its spots, I wouldn't trust anything that comes out of his mouth (and this whole government for that matter). We are groomed for an early election, that's all. Enough ppl out there will be lulled in by smooth talk and a bit of charm. If the LNP were lucky and would get back in, we'll be told we wanted it and that's about it then. Good night OZ.
    Mar
    13th May 2015
    2:26pm
    It's all a lot of game playing and political maneouvering to try and keep their jobs longer.We will never know the real truth.
    Alexii
    13th May 2015
    2:27pm
    A better retirement???? Joke of the century.
    I wonder how it is a "better retirement" for all those currently on part pensions who have planned for it, and who are now going to see it reduced or wiped out completely? They won;t even be earning from their super investments or term deposits what people can get on a full pension. And certainly, they7 won;t be earnng what Abbott (fine m,an and PM that he is) once referred to as a $180K per annum as not a high wage (or words to that effect). These pppl, Hockey and Abbottt, are rotten B...s in my book and so too are the politicians who have supported or will support their plans.
    Hardworker
    13th May 2015
    6:58pm
    Spot on "Rainey" you are the only one who actually understands what these stupid politicians have done. The ones like myself who have not only worked hard but saved hard to ensure they have an acceptable retirement and not land on their children like so many single women are forced to, are now going to be victimized. The clever ones of course are going to sell all their shares etc. (disposable assets) in order to collect the full pension. Good one Hockey and Abbott, you've just cut any incentive for people to try harder to save for retirement!
    Adrianus
    14th May 2015
    5:43pm
    So welfare is incentive? I don't get that?
    Fair Go
    14th Jun 2015
    5:02pm
    My comment is, what about pensioners, like myself, who received the full pension but has very little to draw on apart from that pension? We didn't get any extra in the budget, but people who have more liquid assets and perhaps not a full pension, are to get more? I may be a bit dim, but I can't fathom the sense in it at all. Surely the people on pensions with little or no extra, deserve more than people who have quite a lot of assets.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles