Add new comment

Submitted by Steve on Wed, 12/19/2018 - 06:22

Given a couple loses most of their Aged Pension after $500,000 in super (up to $844,000), due to Australia's bizarre asset & income test rules, why would they make more voluntary contributions? The only way to fix this is to move to the NZ system, where there is a universal age pension (paid say from age 70), with no asset or income text. You would pay some tax on earnings or on direct income, but at a far lower rate than say under age 65. All this article proves is that the Australian system revolves around envy, and has been badly designed.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

4 months 1 week ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

4 months 2 weeks ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

4 months 2 weeks ago

The sovereign wealth fund grew $11.5 billion in the March quarter, according to its latest portfolio update, having previously voiced caution about inflation’s downward t...

7 hours ago

The professional body is calling for the annual performance test to transition to a two-metric test, so it better aligns with the overarching duty of super fund trustees ...

10 hours ago

Christophe Picardel, Regional Head of Private Capital for Asia Pacific, Securities Services at BNP Paribas’Philippe Kerdoncuff, Head of Asset Owners and Asset Managers, A...

13 hours 19 minutes ago