The flaws in the superannuation arguments being promoted by the Grattan Institute and others have been rammed home by a new Mercer Report released today.
The report, authored by Mercer’s David Knox, declares that the Grattan findings are flawed because it has used a series of assumptions that is not realistic for the average Australia.
Pointing to the dangers posed by the Government’s announcement of a review of Australia’s retirement income system, Knox backed his analysis by claiming that the Grattan assumptions simply did not stack up to closer scrutiny.
He said, on that basis, it was “vital to counter misleading conclusions to ensure all discussion and debate is grounded in reality and typical behaviour”.
Knox’s report for Mercer found that the Grattan Institute’s assumptions were based on a number of flawed assumptions including:
Knox said Grattan’s sole focus on retirement income also failed to consider the need for flexibility to provide retirees with access to capital, an important feature of retirement products.
“Mercer’s research has shown that retirees want a stable income for their whole life, as well as access to capital to provide them with some protection from unexpected expenses that can easily occur during retirement,” he said.
Dr Knox warned policy makers to approach Grattan’s research with “considerable caution” given it was limited to “a single cameo” that had given rise to “misleading” conclusions.
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.