Legislative changes could see more super fund members eligible for the First Home Super Saver Scheme (FHSS).
Under the Treasury Laws Amendment (2023 Measures No.3) Bill, which was currently before the House of Representatives, schedule 4 of the bill would bring about changes to the FHSS to ensure it works better for first home buyers.
The FHSS had first been introduced in the 2017–18 budget as a way for people to save money for their first home within their superannuation via voluntary concessional and non-concessional contributions. A maximum of $15,000 could be saved in one financial year with a total maximum releasable amount of $50,000.
In a speech in the House of Representatives, Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, said: “Currently, the legislation underpinning the First Home Super Saver Scheme is inflexible and can result in a poor user experience with the scheme, including users having their savings for a first home locked away until retirement, not what was intended by the scheme but the way the scheme is operating under its current rules.
“These changes will better enable mistakes made during the First Home Super Saver Scheme release process to be fixed without adverse financial outcomes for those who use the scheme.”
Changes would be retrospective and apply to eligible applications made from 1 July 2018 to ensure users who had not yet been paid their savings could still access that money.
They included:
Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Coalition, which has pledged to reverse any changes if it wins next year’s election.
In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges.
Chant West analysis suggests super could be well placed to deliver a double-digit result by the end of the calendar year.
Specific valuation decisions made by the $88 billion fund at the beginning of the pandemic were “not adequate for the deteriorating market conditions”, according to the prudential regulator.