The number of Australians who make voluntary superannuation contributions has increased by five per cent from 2016 to 32 per cent, according to a report.
RaboDirect’s latest ‘Financial Health Barometer 2017’ report found that Generation Y were leading the way in terms of active engagement with their finances as 40 per cent made voluntary super contributions.
Baby Boomers followed Generation Y at 31 per cent, and Generation X at 25 per cent.
“These behaviours are already seeing benefits for Gen Y, with an increase in confidence about their ability to maintain a comfortable lifestyle when they retire,” the report said.
This correlated with the findings that 55 per cent of Generation Y believed they would have enough super to fund either a comfortable or modest retirement, followed by 31 per cent of Gen X, and 30 per cent of Baby Boomers.
Generation Y also had the lowest super gap in terms of their estimation of how much super they would need for retirement at $220,925. Baby Boomers had the largest gap at $500,516.
The report noted that as Australian workers added financial pressures to their life such as mortgage or family, focusing on longer term retirement and wealth creation goals took more of a backseat.
Speaking at the launch of the report, Dixon Advisory head of advice, Nerida Cole said: “No matter what life stage you’re at, there are strategies available to build your retirement savings and there’s still time to maximise this year’s more generous contribution limits, before the new super rules take effect on 1 July 2017”.
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.