Fears for breadth of retirement income review

Government set to designate ‘sacred cows’ in retirement review: reports

baby boomers

Baby boomers had their say in the May federal election, sensationally playing a key role in returning the Coalition rather than electing a Labor Party intent on dismantling franking credits. Now it appears the Government will tread carefully with its retirement income review so as not to upset the same cohort.

The terms of reference for the review, which have been promised by the end of the year, are being determined with a view to keeping baby boomer voters onside, according to media reports.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg is drafting the guidelines, with Prime Minister Scott Morrison taking a keen interest.

The review would be expected to cover the key pillars of retirement: superannuation, private savings, the Age Pension and home ownership. YourLifeChoices’ next Retirement Affordability Index, set to be released on 6 October, will present expert views on the aspects that must be considered – or reconsidered. Ours will be a no-holds-barred exercise that explores all issues, sensitive or not.

The Australian Financial Review is reporting that the Government may rule out touching certain ‘sacred cows’.

It says that according to government insiders, the Age Pension and the superannuation system are unlikely to be hit and that other “no go” zones have been identified.

“It leaves open a less contentious review to iron out kinks, such as the interaction of superannuation and the government pension, which can create perverse spending and investment incentives for middle-income retirees stuck between the two systems,” the AFR reports.

“The impact of superannuation on the government’s balance sheet and national savings will also be examined.”

Professor John Piggott, a member of the Rudd Government's Henry tax review and pension review panels in 2009, told the AFR: “It’s very important the retirement income system is viewed as a whole to recognise how the system fits together.

“Overall, we have a good retirement income system, but it needs systematic attention.”

He said that “risk sharing” retirement income products needed to be developed to allow for the fact people are living longer.

“Most people revert to an account-based pension which doesn’t share any of the risk,” said Prof. Piggott, director of the Australian Institute for Population Ageing Research.

A Green Paper prepared by the Actuaries Institute’s Public Policy team and written by Anthony Asher, David Knox and Michael Rice, stresses the need for integration between the key elements of retirement.

It says: “A world-leading system would take an integrated view across the major sources of income and expenses for retirees, including the Age Pension, superannuation and non-superannuation savings (including the family home), aged care and health costs (including pharmaceuticals). The current system, though world-leading in some aspects, falls well short of that.”

It argues that the system is “complex, intrusive, contains anomalies, produces perverse incentives and is sometimes unfair.”

[b1] Do you fear or welcome the retirement income review? Should the Government be brave and thoroughly review all areas?

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

RELATED ARTICLES
    Unless there is something missing from the end here, I don’t think we need this final sentence.





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Tricky
    24th Sep 2019
    9:54am
    Heaven forbid if the government looks at its hypocritical treatment of unfair and unjust DEEMING RATES on cash deposits which impacts on pensioners and part pensioners! Thoughts and Prayers!
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    10:12am
    With many super funds and other investments earning 10% or more then the deeming rates are very generous. Even with half your money in cash deposits and half in than better preforming investments you would be earning more than the deeming rates.
    Greg
    24th Sep 2019
    10:55am
    Uncaring Big Bear - plenty of people don't have investments earning 10% mate. Try thinking of others for a change.
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    11:03am
    Another reply from the LNP paid troll VCBB. Deeming rates are a rort by the government to try & force those with a little money into risky investments like shares. If you are retired & not working at all then you have to return to the workforce under government legislation to be able to start or add to any superfund or pension fund etc, so VCBB it's not as easy as you make out.
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    12:09pm
    As usual, nonsense, BB - deeming rates have nothing to do with super fund payouts, and everything to do with having the temerity to hold a few dollars in the bank.

    Keystroke error for the day:- Deem Ingrates ....
    Theo1943
    24th Sep 2019
    5:15pm
    I read earlier this week that less than 5% of age pensioners have more than $250,000 in assets. Looking at the comments here it appears all the contributors are in that category.
    Farside
    24th Sep 2019
    6:39pm
    do you have any stats to support that anecdote Theo?

    The 5% claim seems unlikely given roughly 24% of those of pensionable age receive a part-pension and therefore do not qualify for the full pension courtesy of income or assets test. Given there are just shy of 2 million age pensioners, it follows there would be somewhere more than 450,000 part pensioners. I suspect more than 50,000 of the part pensioners are caught by the assets test thresholds ($263,250 and $394,500 for home owning singles and couples respectively), and no need to even contemplate the full pension renters with less than than the asset threshold, which are higher than the $250,000 stated. Of course most could be caught by the income test but I doubt it.
    Tricky
    24th Sep 2019
    10:05am
    The government attacks the banks of not passing on interest rate rises and falls and here we have a government being hypocritical when it comes to DEEMING RATES on cash deposits in fixed term deposits, whereby they do not demonstrate leadership and equality when dealing with pensioners and part pensioners, it appears that we do not matter.

    We are not big donors and don't have access like Hillsong, Twiggy, Gina, Murdoch media, Pratt, big business or the minerals council, its like screaming into the wilderness.

    This inquiry is not going to be beneficial to pensioners and part pensioners.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    10:13am
    Simply invest you money in better preforming investments and you will earn more than the deeming rates.
    Greg
    24th Sep 2019
    10:58am
    Again Very Uncaring Big Bear retirees often don't want to invest in more risky investments. Maybe it's worked for you...so far, that doesn't mean it always will work.

    You're a narcissistic person, the likes of which are not needed here.
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    11:07am
    Another reply from the LNP paid troll VCBB. Deeming rates are a rort by the government to try & force those with a little money into risky investments like shares. If you are retired & not working at all then you have to return to the workforce under government legislation to be able to start or add to any superfund or pension fund etc, so VCBB it's not as easy as you make out.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    11:39am
    The most risky investment you can have is cash deposits as it loses it's value quite a lot after inflation and tax.
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    11:46am
    What tax, at 0.25% interest for most accessible accounts ( and possibly 0% if rates drop anymore) I doubt if you'll earn enough to pay tax & if you do you have millions in the bank & inflation is running under 2% so no great loss either really.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    12:03pm
    Not much left if any after 30 years to spend if you leave your money in cash deposits. If you invest it well you will earn more than you can spend so it grows until you depart this mortal world. I'd rather live and die well instead of being on struggle street myself.
    sunnyOz
    24th Sep 2019
    12:13pm
    BigBear....strongly object to you saying ..."simply invest...." Many elderly people - they do not have super, just a little savings in the bank. They grew up not knowing or having been taught the complexities of 'superannuation, share market, investments", etc. Is NOT so simple.

    Only this morning, I was around helping my elderly aunt now living in Aged Care. Worked all her life on her farm with hubby (who passed away 5 years ago). No kids. One reason I have to go around to see her is to play her message bank, delete rubbish calls, etc. The only "simple" thing she understands is that she is techno and money illiterate! What little money she does have is in the bank she has been with all her life - earning the grand sum of .9%. There is not a hope in hell of her changing her money to "better investment platforms" as she does not know or understand it. And one of the big financial bibles is to never invest in anything you do not understand. Believe me, I have tried.
    Farside
    24th Sep 2019
    6:47pm
    sunnyOz, choices have consequences and it is nobody's fault that your aunt chooses to invest with her lifelong banker and suffers as a result. She is not Robinson Crusoe in not understanding finance, however some old sticks will take advice or appoint a guardian or financial administrator with power of attorney to act in their interests.
    MarkAdel
    25th Sep 2019
    12:02am
    I support you VCBB.
    The left wing extremists here all expect to be spoon fed by the Government.
    They expected this to happen all of their working life.
    I planned my retirement from age 21.
    It’s a pity others here didn’t do the same
    Karl Marx
    25th Sep 2019
    6:14am
    MarkelAdel, another capitalist right wing LNP paid troll
    Farside
    25th Sep 2019
    1:22pm
    I wish Karl and others who seem so knowledgeable of these paid troll gigs could share how they know of them so those interested might apply for one. It cannot be that difficult to wind up one side or the other of an argument as keyboard warrior intolerance and outrage is so easily triggered these days.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    10:14am
    It's time to give everyone over retirement age the pension if they want it and it then becomes a debt on their estate when they die. So simple to do.
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    11:13am
    Not a very smart response is it, just more proof you're an LNP troll or employee. All we have to do is get rid of all our assets before we die then there is nothing to repay & i'll be the first to offload all my assets & take it offshore just like the rich & politicians do now.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    11:37am
    Ha ha I'd like to see you do that and your family leave you destitute.
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    11:42am
    lol my money will be offshore & undeclared, I'll get the full pension, can access the money anytime. I won't be destitute as I'll be doing what the rich & politicians do now with peace of mind that any government won't change the laws that will affect them or their rich mates.
    hahahahahahaha
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    12:11pm
    Rubbish - you don't pay back what is a bought in advance payout at retirement...
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    5:17pm
    Nothing is bought in advance. You only get the old age pension (welfare) as you have no other means of support.
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    8:20pm
    So that 7% of income tax still being taken is for handling the account for you?

    Pension and all other GENUINE Social Security is paid for .... it's not the fault of Pensioners, the disabled, and the Unemployed that government continually hands out welfare for PPL, childcare, and other things ... just to garner votes - what has been paid for every day of working life and is still being paid in tax levied to make up any shortfall, is not a debt and never can be.
    feefifofum
    24th Sep 2019
    10:56am
    As long as they don’t shift the goal posts for those of us who have already retired. You make decisions based on the rules at the time you retire - very unfair & unsettling when these rules keep changing and your retirement income level drops!!! Every change needs to have a grandfathering proviso.
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    11:23am
    This government doesn't really care about the impact of changing goal posts even if you have structured your retirement around current rules as was proven in January 2017 when $1.50 per $1,000 was increased to $3.00 against assets which dropped or took away pensions completely for 100's of thousands of pensioners.
    KSS
    24th Sep 2019
    12:41pm
    Well Karl Marx you can stop bellyaching about this or any other Government seeing you've squirrelled away your assets overseas. So what exactly IS your problem?
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    1:08pm
    KSS, roflmfao, I don't have any assets or monies overseas, YET & I didn't say I had, learn to read. Just pointing out the stupidity of some posts regarding paying back any pension received when you die.
    I think you have the problem, me, no, no problem at all. Always look on the bright side
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    11:05am
    Universal pension for all, no asset or income testing. Tax paid on ALL income & ALL investments etc. Can't be any fairer than that.
    johnp
    24th Sep 2019
    12:07pm
    Agree 100% Karl
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    5:18pm
    Any old age pension received is to be paid back from your estate when you die too.
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    8:20pm
    Posed and answered above, BB.
    GeorgeM
    25th Sep 2019
    12:49pm
    Agree, Karl. Really simple! But Govt bureaucrats & politicians may not like it as it reduces their power to tinker with the rules. Hence, all sensible Retirees need to go as hard as possible to push for such simple solutions to the Review. Ignore BB, should change his name to BS.
    Horace Cope
    24th Sep 2019
    11:23am
    To answer the question, "Do you fear or welcome the retirement income review? Should the Government be brave and thoroughly review all areas?", I welcome any review of the pension/welfare system and, yes, all areas must be looked at or the review will be a farce.

    The result of the reviews will certainly favour some and antagonise others but any good legislation should be designed to disadvantage as few people as possible. No legislation since Federation has ever advantaged 100% of the population. It is hoped that any major changes will be "grandfathered" as those already retired have certainly made financial decisions on the rules in place at that time.
    BillF2
    24th Sep 2019
    11:23am
    Professor Piggott reckons we have a good retirement system, overall. Obviously, he has not had any experience of it, and speaks like all academics and paid government advisors. Furthermore, he continues to promote the furphy about people living longer. He ignores increasing problems of health and quality of life. The Australian retirement system is not designed to give a good quality of life after work has ended, rather to keep as many as possible at, or about, the poverty line. It is not a simple, worry-free system. Centrelink is testimony to that. The green paper by the Actuaries Institute appears to be much more realistic, so there is little chance of the government paying any attention to it, or adopting any of its findings. A government review that does not improve the system is a waste of time and money.
    cupoftea
    24th Sep 2019
    11:25am
    The government and there Deeming rates,you can always buy shares or put your super into growth as they say you can do that which you can, but some of us say if you can afford to lose it gamble it if you cant don't touch it we all remember the GFC
    cupoftea
    24th Sep 2019
    11:25am
    The government and there Deeming rates,you can always buy shares or put your super into growth as they say you can do that which you can, but some of us say if you can afford to lose it gamble it if you cant don't touch it we all remember the GFC
    Mad as Hell
    24th Sep 2019
    11:52am
    The 2017 changes to the Pensioner Assets Test should have been grandfathered and needs to be reversed.
    Farside
    24th Sep 2019
    4:49pm
    should have, wasn't, reversal not going to happen .... majority are unconcerned so time to move on
    Mad as Hell
    24th Sep 2019
    5:14pm
    Stealing pensioners assets should never be condoned.
    Farside
    24th Sep 2019
    6:51pm
    wasn't stolen and nobody is going to change anything because you cannot let it go. I also don't like it but no point grizzling and not adjusting to the new normal.
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    8:24pm
    Assets purchased after income tax have no bearing - including them in a pension assets test is double taxing them... wrong on all counts.

    Double taxing an asset is tantamount to stealing it.... or a significant portion of it...

    (Downe at Ye Olde Governmente Revenooers:-

    "Lessee now, Trebor (the magnificent) - you own a boat and a Windbag bought out of post income tax money you've earned legitimately over a lifetime of solid work... well - we're fair - we'll only take the engine and trailer from your boat and the wheels from your Windbag - oh - and the differential.... the wheels aren't enough ...."

    Yeah... yeah - that's fair... in a pig's eye....
    Rae
    25th Sep 2019
    6:42am
    It was one of the foolish policies of Hockey. The consequences were the beginning of the collapse in retail and hospitality as all those savers stopped spending. They were never going to borrow to make up the shortfall of cashflow like the government expected. In fact the sensible ones went immediately into frugal mode to again save and invest for income.

    My new saving regime to replace the income lost is as Karl suggests overseas. Much safer. Deposits are not safe in a bank any longer since the bail in legislation either. In fact bank deposits are at risk if we enter a recession. Shares fall quickly and rebound again. The only losers are those who panic and sell as the prices crash. It's really a perfect buying time. A low cost index fund has been rewarding. Yes at some point it will fall for a while but I have no intention of selling. I'll be still buying and it will be noice and cheap then.

    Continually cutting real cashflow in Main Street is not clever policy at all.

    I'm now very grateful that Hockey kept me out of Centrelink clutches even if it was a very dumb idea for Australian businesses.
    GeorgeM
    25th Sep 2019
    12:53pm
    Correct, Mad as Hell, the reversal of the 2017 Asset Test changes MUST be pushed for in this review, as even Economists (such as reported in YLC recently) have pointed out in detail the absolute stupidity of these changes making people on $400K assets better off than those who just miss out on pension or those on say $850K.
    Farside
    25th Sep 2019
    1:27pm
    I will be grateful if the review does not put me further in the poo by further reducing the assets threshold down further so those on $300K are better off than those on $400K.
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    12:08pm
    Why would 'government' be concerned over retirement strcuturing the many? their retirement package is secure in ways that of the majority never will be - without massive changes.... theirs is safely held tax-free in the Bahamas and is guaranteed indexed for life... on the other hand that of the peons is subject, with super, to changes in the market, and Pension is subject to the whim of the incumbent government.....

    "My coffee's hot, properly sweetened, the screens are operating normally, my guaranteed super is fine, I'm about to finish my work week and head off for a night on the town, even communications with you are terrific - what IS your problem, Apollo Thirteen?"
    floss
    24th Sep 2019
    1:03pm
    Does this mean we will get the same pension fund as our pollies, sorry just joking.
    mogo51
    24th Sep 2019
    3:17pm
    I wish floss, but it's the holy grail on for the blood sucking politicians.
    Farside
    24th Sep 2019
    4:50pm
    get the same job floss and no problem, plenty of public servants getting 15.4% superannuation
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    5:21pm
    Pollies don't get welfare.
    Karl Marx
    24th Sep 2019
    6:05pm
    Pollies get welfare as it's paid from the public purse or is there a different rule for pollies & the rich. So just keep touting the LNP line as a paid troll VCBB because as you have pointed out in the past any payment from the taxpayers purse is WELFARE.
    talk about double standards
    Farside
    24th Sep 2019
    6:57pm
    are you drinking the red cordial Karl? Pollies, civil servants, defence personnel, contractors, professionals and others each dip into the public purse in exchange for services provided. Not all are rich and nor does it mean what they are paid is welfare, unlike the age pension and other social security recipients. No double standard here.
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    8:25pm
    Anything over and above superannuation rules for the many is welfare pure and simple - no problem-o....
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    8:30pm
    Pollies etc can put in 9.5% like everyone else up to the same limits, and be charged on the income from the rest as earning interest derived from savings - at the DEEMED rate ..... they cop a cut to their super for having too much, and they pay income tax on the over and above..... no problem-o...

    Let's see how many of those leeches line up for the Golden Stairway To Life when their salaries are controlled, their expenditure is via a card and is reviewed and only valid expenditures permitted, and their super is chopped down to that of the peasants.... you don't really think they line up to serve the nation and people, do you?

    It's a tough gig, you say? Well - give me the nice salary and perks and the income for life and the opportunity to use the position to further family fortunes through 'getting in on the ground floor of multi-billion dollar government initiatives' and organising deals and future 'employment' with benefactors and donors - and you can slag off at me all you like in the papers etc....

    That's the game....
    mogo51
    24th Sep 2019
    3:15pm
    Just reading through the comments here, what a shame we are all wasting time attacking each other here. We should be putting forward some positive suggestions and ideas for discussion.
    VUbear, you are a really uncaring bear, so if you can tell me where you have your money earning 10% pa in the current market, I will forgive you! Mine is in an Industry fund that has a long history of sound performance, low fees. For the fist half of the year it performed at 3-4%, after being negative for most of last financial year!!!
    So kindly see if you can obtain redemption and give us the details. Otherwise, if as I suspect you are talking nonsense, go and annoy others and leave this site for sensible contributors.
    Anonymous
    24th Sep 2019
    4:40pm
    No doubt mogo51 you be pleased with Bill Shorten getting his Mrs on the board of your industry fund earning a couple hundred grand doing nothing and this coming out of your earnings talk about jobs for the boys or in this case girls.
    Farside
    24th Sep 2019
    5:05pm
    check Canstar for details of the many funds outperforming your fund for the year to June 2019. Even the sponsored comment on the podcast lists funds delivering better than 10%; admittedly best balanced funds were below 10% but still far better performance than your fund.
    https://blog.stockspot.com.au/best-performing-super-funds/?cat=156
    Rae
    25th Sep 2019
    6:54am
    If your fund is not performing a bit better than a balanced index of shares, bonds and property in assets not including derivatives then you need to ask what they are invested in and why the returns are less than the index returns. It could be insurances and fees. You need to ask the questions.

    International shares are still returning good gains purely due to the Australian dollar falling so far and so fast.
    Nikolai
    24th Sep 2019
    5:00pm
    I am amazed that none of the pensioner groups or environmentalists have said a word about Morrison's pledge of $150 million to NASA not only could this money be better spent on the aged and disability pensions but would stop the obscene pollution that is being caused by rockets being sent into space on top of the pollution caused by the flights politicians are taking
    Tricky
    24th Sep 2019
    10:20pm
    Not to mention Morrison @ scomo assisting TRUMP with his 2020 Presidential election campaign paid for by Australian TAX payers.
    Rae
    25th Sep 2019
    6:59am
    It will hopefully assist our It people and research teams to invent more useful products. I can't see a problem spending such a small amount if the outcomes are good.

    I'd like to see more jobs created by government as the private sector isn't doing so well. There are plenty of things that need doing. Even soil reclamation, community food gardens, weed clearing and tree planting could be done immediately in most areas. Even the cities have parks and such that could be gardened.

    Giving all the unemployed gainful employment would boost spending and eliminate the fuss about Newstart.
    Nikolai
    24th Sep 2019
    5:00pm
    I am amazed that none of the pensioner groups or environmentalists have said a word about Morrison's pledge of $150 million to NASA not only could this money be better spent on the aged and disability pensions but would stop the obscene pollution that is being caused by rockets being sent into space on top of the pollution caused by the flights politicians are taking
    Anonymous
    24th Sep 2019
    5:10pm
    Pensioners are well looked after Nikolai money can be perhaps better spent on Hospitals not welfare.
    VeryCaringBigBear
    24th Sep 2019
    5:20pm
    Agree pensioners are very well looked after with many people having trouble waiting to retire as they are better off than working.
    Farside
    24th Sep 2019
    7:00pm
    many priorities ahead of increasing aged and disability pensions (and the $150 million gift to NASA) for raiding the treasury coffers
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    8:32pm
    What do they call jet-setting politicians?

    Air Pollution......
    Tricky
    24th Sep 2019
    10:28pm
    If pensioners are better looked after there are big savings in hospital care!
    Roby and Very Caring Big Bear are not displaying any empathy towards the plight of senior australians.
    Karl Marx
    25th Sep 2019
    7:17am
    VCBB sounds very much like Old Geezer lol
    TREBOR
    24th Sep 2019
    8:42pm
    The entire gamut of government expenditure is in need of a full review - not some self-loaded commission of idiots handed a rubber stamp and a heap per day to do nothing for real...

    Oh, well - just discussing the Afghan fiasco elsewhere - and mooted that there was a need to limit commitments for individuals, to closely monitor them for 'going off the reservation', and to train and 'blood' many more competent operators.... that will all cost a heap of dullahs... just one area...

    (sighs) even I can't be perfect in my intentions.... maybe we should withdraw from Afghanistan... leave it up to the natives .....
    Paddington
    24th Sep 2019
    9:02pm
    I am tired of getting the blame for putting this mob back in.
    VCBB, you sound familiar lol. A rose by any other name would have the same words.
    Tongue in cheek name as well, very caring!
    johnyperth
    25th Sep 2019
    4:22am
    I hope that I read this wrong, but, are you saying that a senior on the age pension who has just received $3:60 per week on the age pension wont be looked into to "hopefully" receive a bigger rise??
    $ 3:60 rise per week on the age pension is nothing but an insult to age pensioners!!
    By the way, where is Tim Wilson these days!!??
    Why isn't Tim supporting these age pensioners who received only $3:60 per week rise!!??
    If Tim doesn't stick up for these pensioners as he did regarding the Franking Credit scheme during the last federal election then Tim will be seen as nothing but pure hypocrisy!!
    No wonder why people have lost faith in politics in Australia!!
    Farside
    25th Sep 2019
    1:32pm
    you have faith in Tim Wilson and his IPA dogma .... funniest thing I have heard since his buddy James Paterson was on Q&A.
    Chooky
    29th Sep 2019
    10:49am
    Tim Wilson is a pompous, wealthy right winger whose interest in age pensioners ended the moment LNP won the election. I can’t believe how many older people were fooled by his roadshow of rhetoric. We are supposed to grow wiser with age. Nope. Now let’s see if the same old fools are fooled again in 2022.
    Australia, don’t complain, you voted for it.
    GeorgeM
    25th Sep 2019
    1:06pm
    "...the system is “complex, intrusive, contains anomalies, produces perverse incentives and is sometimes unfair.” Absolutely!

    The system must be reviewed in total and massively SIMPLIFIED, say by replacing the complete Broken Age Pension system by Universal Age Pension for all with NO tests except Age (65 years) and Residency (say 15 years), with NO more Centrelink administration needed for Age Pensioners any more, as ATO can send out payments after an initial simple application. A Future Fund needs to be re-established to fund these, by gradually re-using the 7.5% taxes collected as part of Income Taxes for such purposes. Australia need to increase the money set aside for pensions as we allocate only about half of what (percent of GDP) the OECD does.

    A capped level of Super concessions must be maintained to encourage Savings to supplement Age Pensions, and encourage people to also look after themselves to the extent they can.

    As the Productivity Commission (which recommended this review) only focused on the Superannuation aspect (compulsory Super), it is possible this Review also may try to focus only on limited Terms of Reference. It is therefore up to all Retirees, and representatives such as YLC and other Seniors Groups, to push hard for serious reforms to be included to improve the system for Retirees, not just focused on the Govt's Budget.
    MarkAdel
    26th Sep 2019
    1:55am
    I think Karl lives in China.
    Where else would he get his views.
    I voted Labor previously before realising how loose they were with my tax dollars.
    Chooky
    29th Sep 2019
    10:36am
    While many were distracted by AFL grand final yesterday, the treasurer quietly announced (yes, Saturday) the intent to examine the inclusion of the principle home in the assets test for age pension along with raising the age pension age to 70.
    All this while continuing to give away billions to those who have NOT paid tax via franking credits.
    If successful implementation occurs, then dramatic two tier retirement groups will emerge. Those with personal wealth with be will continue to be rewarded and those without personal wealth will be penalised.
    You doubt the review will return the government’s desired outcome? This is not an independent review. Frydenburg is writing the Terms of Reference. He will limit the Terms if Reference to ensure the desired outcome. That’s what they do.
    Are you a pensioner? Did you vote LNP? Weren’t you easily fooled!
    ex PS
    30th Sep 2019
    6:04am
    There is allready an Assets Test on homes. How come a pension recipient who ow ns a house gets less than one that rents?
    It is an Assets Test by stealth.


    Tags: money, retirement, income, review