The Board of Taxation's push to increase the super payment threshold for low income and casual workers to $1350 a quarter has been deemed unfair by the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST).
The AIST is calling on the Federal Government to refuse this measure, saying low income workers and those in dangerous jobs already face many challenges in accumulating sufficient savings.
The body is also pushing for the scrapping of the $450 monthly super payment threshold, saying all employees should receive super payments. The threshold means those who earn below $450 miss out on otherwise compulsory super contributions.
"If you work, you should get super," AIST CEO Tom Garcia said.
"Moves to deny more workers of super will simply widen Australia's retirement savings gap."
Garcia rejected arguments moving to a quarterly threshold would decrease red tape on small businesses, saying e-commerce reforms in the super industry is already doing this.
"The super industry has spent millions of dollars moving towards electronic super payments making payroll thresholds for super redundant."
Garcia added removing the monthly $450 threshold would impose minimal costs to the Government.
He said it would help disadvantaged workers, including those with more than one employer — common in industries like retail, hospitality and nursing as the monthly threshold applies only to a single employer, not on a combined income level.
There is a need for Australia’s superannuation funds to simplify their investment menus, according to the firm, given over a third of funds have more than 30 options, of which one or more are “arguably subscale”.
The research house is set to offer research ratings of superannuation funds for the first time amid growing demand from financial advisers.
Treasury is calling for submissions on its draft regulations in relation to the calculation of the proposed Division 296 tax.
Initially intended to offer a “simple, cost-effective” option for Aussies invested in default fund options, a super consultant has weighed in on what the scheme has actually done for members.
Add new comment