Bleak new data from comparison site Finder reveals how critical tax returns are for Aussies during cost of living crisis
Fresh research from comparison site Finder shows how Aussies plan on using their tax return – which is estimated to be more than $1500 for those expecting a refund.
Of those anticipating a refund, 52 per cent said the cash injection will go straight into their savings while 19 per cent said they would use the windfall to pay for household bills.
Just seven per cent said the cash was going towards a holiday, while six per cent were paying off their mortgage and five per cent were going shopping.
It comes as 47 per cent of Australians expect a return – equivalent to more than 10 million individuals – after July 1.
Finder's personal finance expert Sarah Megginson said households were focused on covering the essentials with their tax return as price pressures ate into budgets.
"It's been a tough stretch for households, and many are counting on their tax refund to ease the pressure on their budget just a little,' Ms Megginson said.
"For a lot of people, a refund acts as a kind of forced savings – especially when they're only just making ends meet each month."
Many Aussies also anticipate using their tax return to pay off debts.
About four per cent plan to pay off credit card debt with their return while one per cent said the cash would be used to pay off Buy Now Pay Later loans.
Another two per cent said they would invest their return in shares.
Ms Megginson said many families had eaten into their savings over the past few years amid struggles with soaring inflation.
"Millions of Australians have had to dip into emergency funds just to pay for basics like petrol and electricity,' she said.
"A few thousand dollars back at tax time can be a real lifeline for families working to rebuild their financial footing.
"The peace of mind that comes with having an emergency buffer can't be overstated – so using a tax windfall to rebuild that safety net is always a smart move."
The cumulative impacts of inflation over the past three and a half years means things are about 17 per cent more expensive than in late 2021.
Finder's new research on how Aussies will use their tax return follows the comparison site revealing a total of $15.3 billion will go back into the pockets of everyday shoppers across the nation after tax returns are issued.
Almost one in four respondents to Finder's survey said a tax refund was very important to their financial health while 41 per cent said the cash was somewhat important.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
3 hours ago
- West Australian
Productivity roundtable final day: Tax reform up for discussion as summit eyes negative gearing
An overhaul of how Australians could be taxed will be put in the spotlight as a productivity roundtable draws to a close. The third and final day of the federal government's economic reform summit in Canberra will focus on tax reform and budget sustainability on Thursday. The government went into the federal election in May promising not to make changes to negative gearing and the capital gains benefit, but forum attendees are still expected to make the case for the reforms. Unions are set to argue for a full suite of tax measures including limiting negative gearing to one investment property, with existing laws allowed to stay in place for the next five years. A minimum tax rate of 25 per cent for people earning more than $1 million per year has been pitched by union attendees. Capital gains and negative gearing reform needed to be considered by the government to take to voters, tax expert Dale Boccabella said. 'Aspects of the tax system is just unfair and the big one is the capital gains tax discount,' the associate professor of tax law at the University of New South Wales told AAP. 'If you look at who gets the benefits, it goes to the top end, they don't need a 50 per cent tax break.' Assoc Prof Boccabella said sustainability of the tax system needed to be front and centre during the final day of the roundtable. 'Sustainability and fairness go hand in hand, and underlying that, of course, is generational unfairness,' he said. 'The government should not be criticised for acting on (negative gearing), it should be done in a sustainable way.' The third day of the summit will include a presentation on budget sustainability by Treasury secretary Jenny Wilkinson. A pitch on a better tax system will be delivered by Grattan Institute chief executive Aruna Sathanapally. Discussions on how to make government services and spending more efficient will be another topic for debate. The roundtable had produced consensus for areas of economic reform, Treasurer Jim Chalmers said. 'We've already got a big agenda to ease the burden on businesses, cut red tape and build more homes but we're keen to do more where we can,' he said.
The Age
5 hours ago
- The Age
The act of bastardry that's hurting young generations
So post-tax income and pension payments have gone up relative to the overall population, but not all parts of the population. Older Australians have a post-tax income one-third higher than someone aged between 18 and 30. They used to be around the same. The change has been caused by more tax on the younger cohort and less tax (and larger income streams) for the older bunch. Before the turn of the century, retirees received relatively little in the way of income, relying largely on the age pension to get by. Superannuation was created to ensure older people did not have to rely on government support. It was all aimed at giving retirees dignity in their later years. But along the way, it's gone way beyond dignity. In too many cases, it's become estate planning, tax management or wealth transference. The average 60-ish retiree drawing tax-free income from their super plus a bit of the age pension is getting the same income as an average working 40-year-old. But the spending pressures on a retiree and someone in their early 40s are very different. The retiree doesn't face the 'pressures of saving for the future or supporting a growing family'. They've probably paid off their mortgage while they spend far less than someone of working age. One of those saving pressures is finding a deposit for a home. In 1990, to buy a median-priced house in Sydney required almost seven times the median income. It's now more than 13 times the median income. That's a big factor in the collapse in home ownership among under-35s. That fall in ownership is one of the factors contributing to the drop-off in fertility rates among younger couples. We're asking younger Australians to pay huge amounts for their higher education, leaving many in debt for longer (another issue making it more difficult for this group of people to save for a deposit). Breunig and his team point out that we have a tax and welfare system which rewards people who move their wealth into income-generating low- or no-tax asset classes. About two-thirds of income is captured by the tax system. That's great if you have assets not attracting tax. But for those who don't, like most people under the age of 40, that translates into paying more tax. And that tax is probably going towards services (the health system, aged care) used by older Australians. This is why Breunig and his team believe the intergenerational contract is broken. 'The current tax and transfer system, with its growing obligations to the growing cohort of older Australians and shrinking resources from which to meet those obligations, is spiralling down and unsustainable,' they found. To resolve this problem, you could slash spending. The second-largest expense for the federal budget is the age pension, at $66 billion a year. That's followed by the NDIS ($51 billion), aged care services ($41 billion), medical benefits ($35 billion) and assistance to the states to run their hospitals ($34 billion). Loading The largest expense in the budget world is actually the GST at $101 billion, which goes straight out the door, mostly to fund state hospitals. Combined, that's about 40 per cent of the budget, much of which flows to the old, the sick, the disabled and the young. Another option is to increase taxes on older Australians. That would be the bunch of politically important voters who have managed to move the tax system in their favour over the past 30 years. The economic roundtable was all about finding ways to lift our nation's collective living standards while also fixing the budget bottom line. When it came to tax, the usual ideas such as company tax or the GST dominated discussion.
Sydney Morning Herald
5 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The act of bastardry that's hurting young generations
So post-tax income and pension payments have gone up relative to the overall population, but not all parts of the population. Older Australians have a post-tax income one-third higher than someone aged between 18 and 30. They used to be around the same. The change has been caused by more tax on the younger cohort and less tax (and larger income streams) for the older bunch. Before the turn of the century, retirees received relatively little in the way of income, relying largely on the age pension to get by. Superannuation was created to ensure older people did not have to rely on government support. It was all aimed at giving retirees dignity in their later years. But along the way, it's gone way beyond dignity. In too many cases, it's become estate planning, tax management or wealth transference. The average 60-ish retiree drawing tax-free income from their super plus a bit of the age pension is getting the same income as an average working 40-year-old. But the spending pressures on a retiree and someone in their early 40s are very different. The retiree doesn't face the 'pressures of saving for the future or supporting a growing family'. They've probably paid off their mortgage while they spend far less than someone of working age. One of those saving pressures is finding a deposit for a home. In 1990, to buy a median-priced house in Sydney required almost seven times the median income. It's now more than 13 times the median income. That's a big factor in the collapse in home ownership among under-35s. That fall in ownership is one of the factors contributing to the drop-off in fertility rates among younger couples. We're asking younger Australians to pay huge amounts for their higher education, leaving many in debt for longer (another issue making it more difficult for this group of people to save for a deposit). Breunig and his team point out that we have a tax and welfare system which rewards people who move their wealth into income-generating low- or no-tax asset classes. About two-thirds of income is captured by the tax system. That's great if you have assets not attracting tax. But for those who don't, like most people under the age of 40, that translates into paying more tax. And that tax is probably going towards services (the health system, aged care) used by older Australians. This is why Breunig and his team believe the intergenerational contract is broken. 'The current tax and transfer system, with its growing obligations to the growing cohort of older Australians and shrinking resources from which to meet those obligations, is spiralling down and unsustainable,' they found. To resolve this problem, you could slash spending. The second-largest expense for the federal budget is the age pension, at $66 billion a year. That's followed by the NDIS ($51 billion), aged care services ($41 billion), medical benefits ($35 billion) and assistance to the states to run their hospitals ($34 billion). Loading The largest expense in the budget world is actually the GST at $101 billion, which goes straight out the door, mostly to fund state hospitals. Combined, that's about 40 per cent of the budget, much of which flows to the old, the sick, the disabled and the young. Another option is to increase taxes on older Australians. That would be the bunch of politically important voters who have managed to move the tax system in their favour over the past 30 years. The economic roundtable was all about finding ways to lift our nation's collective living standards while also fixing the budget bottom line. When it came to tax, the usual ideas such as company tax or the GST dominated discussion.
