Oz Federal Election 2013 - Discussion and Comments

[medhead]

If they don't want to pay the 15% tax i suppose let them keep the money out of the system and see how it works for them... Something tells me they would spend it all and have to rely on the pension for the rest of their days and p!ss and moan about how little it is....

So what's the answer, tax them when they get the super at the lowest tax rate they were at during their lives but kept putting their super away like good boys and girls... or do the people who made something of themselves some how have to share some more of their hard earned?? Again and again etc...

The problem is for low income earners that is definitely not the question. Super was introduced as a forced savings plan. It was also part of a trade off against wages increases/productivity gains so it is all of our income. The point is to make people save their money for their retirement and reduce reliance on the public purse. So what you're suggesting is rather counter intuitive. Make them save their money and then they don't need the pension.

The point is that is is much harder for someone on $18000 a year or $30000 a year to save for their retirement. So they need every dollar they can get, and there is a much greater chance that the government will save having to pay a pension in the future by forgoing tax from low income super accounts now. Oh and these people have no choice, if the 15% is reintroduced, the problem is that it really isn't a smart move.

At the other end above $300000, or whatever, there is a much greater capacity to save. Someone earning that level are unlikely to leave themselves relying on the pension. So even if more tax is charged now, there is not much chance of them actually calling on the pension later. Now some may call this class warfare, but I just see it as each paying according to their capacity to do so.


The thing that I don't understand is the Super guarantee cap for people on high incomes. How is it fair and equitable to have compulsory super payments above $25000 taxed at the penalty rate. Surely it would be more sensible to exemption employer super payments from the penalty tax impose but also charge people about [whatever income] 30% on super.

 

[cove]

Wealthy folks can leave Australia just like is happening in France.
Australia has to have a world competitive tax system.
Screwing around with Australians long term superannuation savings of 1.4 trillion is only because our Treasurer cannot help himself.
He never lived within his means and now someone needs to pay.

 

[Hvr]

So will Abbott rescind these changes? Like hell. He knows they're needed but doesn't have the courage to do it himself. Much rather leave it to the Labor party to do it for the benefit of the country which will reap the economic benefit, and claim the Liberal party makes hard decisions whilst deriding those who actually made the hard decision.

 

[medhead]

Wealthy folks can leave Australia just like is happening in France.
Australia has to have a world competitive tax system.
Screwing around with Australians long term superannuation savings of 1.4 trillion is only because our Treasurer cannot help himself.
He never lived within his means and now someone needs to pay.

Surely, we're a long way from the French welfare state.

There hasn't been any indication that they are going to screw around with anyone's savings. More that they are going to increase tax on future savings. Retrospective taxing seems far fetched to me.

 

[Moody]

Wealthy folks can leave Australia just like is happening in France.
Australia has to have a world competitive tax system.
Screwing around with Australians long term superannuation savings of 1.4 trillion is only because our Treasurer cannot help himself.
He never lived within his means and now someone needs to pay.

Here's your hat, what's your hurry?

 

[whatmeworry]

Wealthy folks can leave Australia just like is happening in France.
Australia has to have a world competitive tax system.
Screwing around with Australians long term superannuation savings of 1.4 trillion is only because our Treasurer cannot help himself.
He never lived within his means and now someone needs to pay.

C'mon Cove stop being so overly melodramatic!
Australia's tax rates are no where near the French.
Long term super savings you say, don't you really mean people over 55 funnelling their wages into super, owners reducing their wages to under 50 grand? Using every tax loophole under the sun? Whereas those earning under 50 grand should really be the ones to be encourage to save as they will need help later unlike those that can afford to funnel their wealth in super and thus avoid their fair share of tax.

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

You shouldn't penalise those saving to self-fund their own retirement, while others will suck off the pension teat for the rest of their days at taxpayer's expense.

 

[Deleted member]

Superannuation in this country was a labor initiative.
However it has had unintended consequences.
By making it compulsory for everyone it has meant that those with means and motivation have taken to it with gusto.
As a practitioner in this area I can say with confidence that a very large number of the people it is designed ( originally ) to help are either ambivalent about it or ate actively negative about it.
Moreover there are a large number of unscrupulous employers who do not pay it , if the current government wants more revenue , then getting off their rear end and actually responding to this under and non payment of SG would likely improve ( tax revenues) things. But once again the soft target is the easy target.

 

[Mal]

You shouldn't penalise those saving to self-fund their own retirement, while others will suck off the pension teat for the rest of their days at taxpayer's expense.

Isn't this labor through and through? The amount of tax I was being Shafted for was stupid. My issue was that I wasn't born female, and didn't pop out money factories. Or, wasn't unemployed and living the life.

I'm glad I left Australia. While I'm still liable for some taxes, I'm not handing over ligaments to pay.

 

[medhead]

You shouldn't penalise those saving to self-fund their own retirement, while others will suck off the pension teat for the rest of their days at taxpayer's expense.

Every employee in Australia is saving to self fund their retirement. If their employer is paying their SG. If the lowest paid in Australia can actually get decent savings in super they won't need the pension.

 

[medhead]

Isn't this labor through and through? The amount of tax I was being Shafted for was stupid. My issue was that I wasn't born female, and didn't pop out money factories. Or, wasn't unemployed and living the life.

I have to laugh at the misinformed views people hold about the financial benefits of children. You should have asked me. I would have been more than happy to loan you my money factories and give you the associated government payments. Provided you also cover their expenses. Of course, then you might realise they are money destroying factories.

 

[Mal]

I have to laugh at the misinformed views people hold about the financial benefits of children. You should have asked me. I would have been more than happy to loan you my money factories and give you the associated government payments. Provided you also cover their expenses. Of course, then you might realise they are money destroying factories.

Oh come on. I'm sure you earn a very decent wage which makes you ineligible for many benefits. But with popping out babies being a career for some in Australia, I don't think you understand how lucrative it can be.

 

[cove]

It is true that Paul Keating helped in the creation of our current employer levied superannuation system and apart from the occasional fraudster the system has mostly worked. There are many employees who do not open nor read their superannuation statements and that is disappointing. Many delete the life cover option and never really think about the consequences even when they start a family.
i do hope this attitude can change in the next 10 years.
Getting to 15% of salary into superannuation will be a hard task from 9% but it is the only way old age pensions could finish for our children.
We have encouraged our children to put 20% of salary into superannuation.

 

[drron]

Superannuation was not a Labor initiative.Compulsory super and the SG levy were.I had a superfund from 1980 ie BK.

 

[Mal]

Many delete the life cover option and never really think about the consequences even when they start a family.
i do hope this attitude can change in the next 10 years.

My super fund removed life cover options when I ceased employment in Australia. I suspect that is short sighted by them - but, understand how others whinge about super funds being stripped of funds etc.

 

[medhead]

Oh come on. I'm sure you earn a very decent wage which makes you ineligible for many benefits. But with popping out babies being a career for some in Australia, I don't think you understand how lucrative it can be.

I only got cut off from Family tax benefit last year because of a large capital gain. This year on gross pay I shouldn't get it, but it all depends on my final tax outcome.

Children are expensive. I'd easily spend $5000 a year just on food for the children. Even on a very modest income when my first child was born I have never got more than what they cost. There is one parent at my kids' school who seems to keep having children. But it's a Ponzi scheme at best. The oldest child has been an absolute terror at school but she is now suffering from neglect. Who makes a 12 year old catch 2 buses to get to school? That mother, even with all the benefits, is not getting enough to take the child to school. But at least the child is going to a decent school, thanks to benefits. She has a lot of work to make her well adjusted, but hopefully she has a chance.

There is no clear answer on to this question. Certainly I see one person who seems to have children for money. But she is so silly/ignorant/dumb (I can't think of the right word here) that she would have got pregnant regardless.

 

[casanovawa]

Hmmm, i don't think i have seen a statement from my Super provider for years.. Probably got an old address or stopped sending them out...

Hoping the money is actually going into an account with my name on it, but as its with the super provider of the State Government i'm assuming everything is ok...

Should probably check on it one of these days so i don't hit 55 or 65 and i'm in for a surprise...

 

[Pushka]

Hmmm, i don't think i have seen a statement from my Super provider for years.. Probably got an old address or stopped sending them out...

Hoping the money is actually going into an account with my name on it, but as its with the super provider of the State Government i'm assuming everything is ok...

Should probably check on it one of these days so i don't hit 55 or 65 and i'm in for a surprise...

I've had a Self Managed Super since before they became popular and I know where every cent is! Just wish there were more.

 

[Moody]

Superannuation was not a Labor initiative.Compulsory super and the SG levy were.I had a superfund from 1980 ie BK.

Ahhh - the good old days when Super was only for the rich. Don't you miss them, drron?

 

[Pushka]

Ahhh - the good old days when Super was only for the rich. Don't you miss them, drron?

That's nonsense. My father had a managerial role in the 80's and certainly wasn't rich. In fact he qualified for a full pension when he retired but he still had a Superannuation policy. He didn't have many years to contribute to it as he retired in the early '80's but it certainly existed.