Retiree tax concessions should not be limited to super: A.I.R.

14 February 2013
| By Staff |
image
image
expand image

Retirees should be able to manage their own retirement income within their individual priorities whether they have superannuation or not, according to the Association of Independent Retirees (A.I.R.) president Max Barton.

A.I.R. is calling for a Productivity Commission inquiry into Australia's superannuation system.

"Superannuation accounts should become a retiree's individual fund management vehicle rather than having to have super pensions, private bank accounts and a myriad of forms and restrictions," he said.

"The best retirement model for Australians is one which allows them to have responsibility for their own financial affairs within a framework of assistance and minimal regulatory control.

"This applies equally to those with superannuation and those without," he said.

One tenth of Australians had to build their retirement assets outside of super, according to Barton, because they did not have traditional employer/employee relationships.

They were forced to pay full margin tax on all income whether they were building assets or using them to live on, he said, and were offered no similar super tax concessions.

Nearly half of Australians were being bombarded daily with industry and union interests which was eroding confidence in the system, Barton said — and a Productivity Commission enquiry would take the debate outside the public arena.

He said seven months of public stoush and debate between the political parties was unacceptable.

Barton said prominent economists had warned of the perils of increasing compulsory superannuation to 12 per cent, as investments would have to be made overseas, removing assets that support the growth of Australian industry.

The size of funds meant assets could not be used to encourage the development of small business, which was the engine for growth and employment in Australia, according to Barton.

Barton said Australians were being continuously reminded of the inadequacy of their retirement savings, but no constructive approaches to relieve the anxiety of the issue had been put forward.

Although government initiatives were aimed at encouraging retirees to lead an active life and extend their working lives, the "so-called work test" prevented many of them from gaining employment to subsidise their income.

"The sensible way forward is to have the issues examined in a constructive way through the Productivity Commission," he said.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

11 months ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

11 months 1 week ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

11 months 1 week ago

The government’s adjustment to the Future Fund’s mandate could set a dangerous precedent, warns an economist, raising concerns that it may pave the way for problematic fu...

54 minutes 39 seconds hence

The proposed reforms have been described as a key step towards delivering better products and retirement experiences for members, with many noting financial advice remain...

1 hour ago

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 Co...

3 days 23 hours ago