The Australian Greens have signalled they may be less willing to support lifetime concessional contributions cap in the wake of receiving research from the independent Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO), suggesting that the benefits may not be as attractive as some might think.
According to the PBO research commissioned by the Greens, a $500,000 lifetime cap on non-concessional superannuation contributions would improve the budget bottom line by $2.5 billion over the next decade.
However, the same research suggests that a $600,000 lifetime cap would cost the budget $805 million by 2026 while an $800,000 cap would cost $3.3 billion over the decade with any cap on contributions above $540,000 costing the budget money over the long term.
Commenting on the PBO findings, Greens Treasury spokesman, Adam Bandt suggested that rather than pursuing lifetime caps, the Government might be better served targeting the generous super tax concessions enjoyed by wealthier Australians.
A range of superannuation organisations have supported the implementation of lifetime caps, with the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) advocating $1 million while Deloitte Access Economics has advocated $580,000.
The Government is expected to consider lifetime caps in the context of its broader review of tax settings.
The proposed reforms have been described as a key step towards delivering better products and retirement experiences for members, with many noting financial advice remains the “urgent missing piece” of the puzzle.
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.