Financial assets that could supposedly assist retirees financially will never deliver the same stability as super, according to Association of the Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA).
The association’s chief executive, Martin Fahy, said ASFA strongly refuted any alternative facts about the significance of super and that super remained the main game in town.
“Analysis of wealth distribution using mean or average data instead of an approach based on the median or typical Australian is breathtaking in its lack of analytical rigour,” Fahy said.
Fahy said that figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) showed that super was still the most commonly held asset after homes, bank and accounts, and motor vehicles for Australians in the 15 to 64 year age range.
Together with owner-occupied housing, Fahy said super remained the most significant form of saving to support lifestyle in retirement for 90 per cent of households.
He called out debate that super was not beneficial to all income earners and said that the sector would continue to provide for the ageing population.
“Another key fact under attack by some commentators is that super already makes a substantive difference to the retirement incomes of low-income earners,” he said.
“The suggestion that super doesn’t assist low-income earners is a nonsense.
“Even low balances under the assets test threshold can lead to significant increases in income.”
Fahy said Australians should not sell out future retirees for short-term fiscal imperatives and said those who would reach a comfortable standard of income in retirement was set to increase 20 per cent by 2040.
