logo
Should young Australians be worried about Labor's superannuation tax changes?

Should young Australians be worried about Labor's superannuation tax changes?

The Guardian4 hours ago

As debate rages over the Labor government's tax changes for large superannuation accounts, some young workers have asked their financial advisers whether they will be caught by the reforms.
Advisers have told Guardian Australia that some young workers have even questioned whether they should stop making additional contributions.
Experts say it's unlikely that younger Australians will get caught by the changes, with older, high-income earners the most exposed to the reforms.
Here's what young Australians need to know about the changes.
Most workers are legally entitled to be paid a guaranteed 11.5% of their wages into their superannuation fund, or 12% from July this year.
The government levies a tax of 15% on the earnings on super balances of workers yet to retire and of retirees with more than $2m.
Labor has proposed to lift that 15% tax to 30%, but only for the earnings from the portion of the balances over $3m. Earnings on the first $3m in an account would still be taxed at 15%.
The tax would be levied each year. You can read a broader breakdown here.
Economists expect most young people currently working will not hit $3m balances, though higher-income earners will have a higher chance at getting there.
By the 2050s, when millennials will be looking at retirement and gen Z and Alpha will dominate the workforce, one in 10 people will have $3m balances, Treasury and Grattan Institute modelling shows.
That could rise to three or four in every 10 people in the 2060s according to Diana Mousina, an AMP economist. But she says it is unlikely that 'half of gen Z' will reach $3m in super balances, contrary to some media reporting of her analysis.
Mousina's modelling shows a worker earning more than $90,000 a year who works for 40 years consecutively with a 3% pay rise every year would probably achieve a $3m balance. This means a worker in their 20s who reaches $90,000 or over soon, then maintains it for the rest of their working life, could one day be affected.
Workers on lower incomes who made no extra contributions and took time off work, for example to have a child, would be unlikely to reach $3m, according to Harry Chemay, a superannuation and wealth management consultant.
The Financial Services Council, meanwhile, expects about 500,000 people of 14.6 million currently employed would earn enough to see their top-range tax breaks reduced slightly under the new proposal.
While the reform would increase tax rates on big balances, superannuation would still be an effective way for high-income earners to reduce the tax they pay.
The average superannuation balance in mid-2022 was $164,000, so most Australians are nowhere near balances over $3m.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
The proposed 30% tax rate is still lower than the top income tax rate of 45%, meaning superannuation contributions would continue to offer a tax break for well-paid workers.
Public debate over the tax illuminated how lightly superannuation is taxed, according to Jonathan Philpot, a wealth management partner at accounting firm HLB Mann Judd in Sydney.
'It actually highlights that super actually has much lower tax rates than virtually any other structure you can have in your retirement years,' he says. 'I wouldn't want people changing their super plans.'
Experts believe it is likely the threshold for the new tax would be lifted above $3m at some point in the future, so some young people who hit the $3m figure may not end up paying extra.
Mousina is among those who agree the $3m benchmark for the new extra rate will probably rise but she suggests the increase could be baked into the new laws for the tax, which need the Greens' support to pass.
'We should think about indexing it, rather than just having no legislation around when it's going to cap out,' she says.
The lack of assurance on whether the tax threshold will be lifted above $3m has attracted some media outcry, despite expert consensus that the figure would have to rise.
Debate has also focused on the proposal to tax a type of investment return called unrealised gains, which would see high earners pay tax on a rise in value of some assets on paper while leaving them unable to get that money back if the asset value falls in the future.
Most super accounts would have limited exposure to unrealised gains, according to Chemay. Australians with self-managed super funds are more likely to struggle with this type of investment.
However, self-managed super funds only make up about 1 million of the 20 million or so super savers – and just 15% of them are under the age of 45.
For perspective, four million Australians have more than one super account. The government in 2018 estimated the resulting extra fees would leave the average worker about $50,000 worse off by the time they retired.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

North missed £140bn of transport investment during last government
North missed £140bn of transport investment during last government

The Herald Scotland

time29 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

North missed £140bn of transport investment during last government

It reached the figure, which it said was enough to build seven Elizabeth Lines, by considering the amount of spending per person across the different English regions over that period. While England as a whole saw £592 spent per person each year, London received double that amount with £1,183 spent per person, the IPPR said. The entire North region saw £486 spent per person, with the North East and North West seeing £430 and £540 spent per person respectively. This amounted to £140 billion of missed investment for the North, more than the entire £83 billion estimate of capital spending on transport in the region since 1999/2000, according to the analysis. The region with the lowest amount of investment over the period was the East Midlands with just £355 spent per person. Among the most divisive transport investment projects for the previous government was the HS2 rail project, which was axed north of Birmingham in October 2023. Then-prime minister Rishi Sunak pledged to 'reinvest every single penny, £36 billion, in hundreds of new transport projects in the North and the Midlands', including improvements to road, rail and bus schemes. Earlier this week, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a £15.6 billion package for mayoral authorities to use on public transport projects across the North and Midlands ahead of the spending review. It is expected to include funding to extend the metros in Tyne and Wear, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands, along with a renewed tram network in South Yorkshire and a new mass transit system in West Yorkshire. Rachel Reeves has set out plans for new transport investment in the North and Midlands (Peter Byrne/PA) Marcus Johns, senior research fellow at IPPR North, said: 'Today's figures are concrete proof that promises made to the North over the last decade were hollow. It was a decade of deceit. 'We are 124 years on from the end of Queen Victoria's reign, yet the North is still running on infrastructure built during her rein – while our transport chasm widens. 'This isn't London bashing – Londoners absolutely deserve investment. But £1,182 per person for London and £486 for northerners? The numbers don't lie – this isn't right. 'This Government have begun to restore fairness with their big bet on transport cash for city leaders. 'They should continue on this journey to close this investment gap in the upcoming spending review and decades ahead.' Former Treasury minister Lord Jim O'Neill said: 'Good governance requires the guts to take a long-term approach, not just quick fixes. So the Chancellor is right in her focus on the UK's long-standing supply-side weaknesses – namely our woeful productivity and weak private and public investment. 'Backing major infrastructure is the right call, and this spending review is the right time for the Chancellor to place a big bet on northern growth and begin to close this investment chasm. 'But it's going to take more than commitments alone – she'll need to set out a transparent framework for delivery.' Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, said: 'For too long, the North of England has been treated as a poor relation to the South when it comes to government spending on transport infrastructure, and this analysis makes stark reading – exposing the vast scale of underfunding over many years. 'The Chancellor's announcement of £2.5 billion funding for transport in Greater Manchester will be a game-changer for our city-region, enabling us to expand the Bee Network, and deliver the UK's first, zero emission, integrated, public transport system by 2030. 'We have also made the case for a new Liverpool-Manchester railway, which would further rebalance infrastructure investment, and could boost the UK economy by £90 billion by 2040.'

North missed £140bn of transport investment during last government
North missed £140bn of transport investment during last government

South Wales Argus

time31 minutes ago

  • South Wales Argus

North missed £140bn of transport investment during last government

Independent analysis by think tank the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) looked at Treasury figures between 2009/10 and 2022/23, during which time the Conservatives were in power. It reached the figure, which it said was enough to build seven Elizabeth Lines, by considering the amount of spending per person across the different English regions over that period. While England as a whole saw £592 spent per person each year, London received double that amount with £1,183 spent per person, the IPPR said. The entire North region saw £486 spent per person, with the North East and North West seeing £430 and £540 spent per person respectively. This amounted to £140 billion of missed investment for the North, more than the entire £83 billion estimate of capital spending on transport in the region since 1999/2000, according to the analysis. The region with the lowest amount of investment over the period was the East Midlands with just £355 spent per person. Among the most divisive transport investment projects for the previous government was the HS2 rail project, which was axed north of Birmingham in October 2023. Then-prime minister Rishi Sunak pledged to 'reinvest every single penny, £36 billion, in hundreds of new transport projects in the North and the Midlands', including improvements to road, rail and bus schemes. Earlier this week, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a £15.6 billion package for mayoral authorities to use on public transport projects across the North and Midlands ahead of the spending review. It is expected to include funding to extend the metros in Tyne and Wear, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands, along with a renewed tram network in South Yorkshire and a new mass transit system in West Yorkshire. Rachel Reeves has set out plans for new transport investment in the North and Midlands (Peter Byrne/PA) Marcus Johns, senior research fellow at IPPR North, said: 'Today's figures are concrete proof that promises made to the North over the last decade were hollow. It was a decade of deceit. 'We are 124 years on from the end of Queen Victoria's reign, yet the North is still running on infrastructure built during her rein – while our transport chasm widens. 'This isn't London bashing – Londoners absolutely deserve investment. But £1,182 per person for London and £486 for northerners? The numbers don't lie – this isn't right. 'This Government have begun to restore fairness with their big bet on transport cash for city leaders. 'They should continue on this journey to close this investment gap in the upcoming spending review and decades ahead.' Former Treasury minister Lord Jim O'Neill said: 'Good governance requires the guts to take a long-term approach, not just quick fixes. So the Chancellor is right in her focus on the UK's long-standing supply-side weaknesses – namely our woeful productivity and weak private and public investment. 'Backing major infrastructure is the right call, and this spending review is the right time for the Chancellor to place a big bet on northern growth and begin to close this investment chasm. 'But it's going to take more than commitments alone – she'll need to set out a transparent framework for delivery.' Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, said: 'For too long, the North of England has been treated as a poor relation to the South when it comes to government spending on transport infrastructure, and this analysis makes stark reading – exposing the vast scale of underfunding over many years. 'The Chancellor's announcement of £2.5 billion funding for transport in Greater Manchester will be a game-changer for our city-region, enabling us to expand the Bee Network, and deliver the UK's first, zero emission, integrated, public transport system by 2030. 'We have also made the case for a new Liverpool-Manchester railway, which would further rebalance infrastructure investment, and could boost the UK economy by £90 billion by 2040.'

Rachel Reeves to reinstate winter fuel payments for nine million pensioners
Rachel Reeves to reinstate winter fuel payments for nine million pensioners

Times

time44 minutes ago

  • Times

Rachel Reeves to reinstate winter fuel payments for nine million pensioners

Rachel Reeves has announced plans to restore winter fuel payments for all pensioners with an income of less than £35,000 in her biggest U-turn since taking office. In one of her first acts as chancellor, Reeves stripped ten million people of the benefit, worth between £200 and £300 per year, in an effort to balance the books. The decision was met with widespread criticism from cabinet ministers and backbenchers, and was blamed in part for Labour's poor performance in the local elections last month. The chancellor announced that the payments will be reinstated for nine million pensioners, with money clawed back from higher income households at the end of the next financial year. The Treasury said that only about two million pensioners would miss out. It is not clear how the government will pay for the move. Ministers admitted the new threshold would cost the government £1.25 billion — wiping out all but £250 million of the planned £1.5 billion worth of savings from restricting the benefit this year. However, the government insisted that even after the U-turn the policy would save £450 million. The Treasury said Reeves would set out how the shortfall will be covered in the autumn budget amid warnings that it would require tax rises in other areas in order for the chancellor to hit her fiscal rules. Ministers said that the cost of the change would not be paid for through additional borrowing. The delay to explaining how the policy change will be paid for is likely to lead to accusations that the chancellor is making an unfunded pledge, something she has repeatedly insisted she will not do. The government argues that it is right to defer the announcement until the autumn budget, when decisions on tax and spending are made. Reeves insisted that her original decision had been the right one. Economists pointed out that the fiscal picture is significantly worse now than it was then. She said: 'Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the winter fuel payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out. This will mean over three quarters of pensioners receiving the payment in England and Wales later this winter.' Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, said Starmer was attempting to 'clear up a mess of his own making'. 'This humiliating U-turn will come as scant comfort to the pensioners forced to choose between heating and eating last winter,' she said. Under the plans, the payments will be restored to all pensioners this winter. The government will then recoup the money from those earning more than £35,000 automatically through their tax bills. The announcement will be seen as an attempt by Reeves to clear the decks before the spending review on Wednesday. The review will allocate £113 billion on infrastructure such as public transport schemes and nuclear energy. It will also increase the NHS budget by about £30 billion a year and boost investment in the Ministry of Defence. However, there are likely to be some significant losers, as unprotected departments face real-terms cuts. Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, is still in negotiations with Reeves over her budget amid a row over police funding. The chancellor has offered the home office a real-terms increase in police funding. However, Cooper argues that this is not enough to cover the cost of meeting the government's flagship pledge to recruit 13,000 more neighbourhood police officers.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store