Changes to superannuation - what it means to you



The government has announced last week that it will delay the phase in of the increase of the compulsory superannuation contributions to 12% and repeal the Low Income Super Contribution. They have also previously proposed an increase to the Age Pension Age. But before we go getting too upset at the current government, the previous Rudd/Gillard government reduced the concessional contribution caps, halved the superannuation government co contribution and also increased the Age Pension Age.

So what does all this mean?

It basically means that if you want a financially comfortable retirement, you need to take some responsibility yourself to plan and accumulate funds. I can think back just 5 or 6 years where we had concessional contribution caps of $100,000 and salary sacrificed contributions didn't count towards other government income assessment such as Centrelink entitlements and government co contributions.  Providing the person was earning a reasonable income, they would be able to accumulate a decent portfolio in only a few years. Now, with concessional contribution caps $35,000 or $30,000 and all the other reduction in benefits as well, people need to plan many many years in advance to give themselves a comfortable retirement.

Lets take a 25 year old. Earning $60,000 per annum and say their income will rise at 4% per year. They currently have no superannuation and we'll say they'll retire at age 60. We'll also assume that the employer contribution rate is 9.5% and stays at that throughout. If the average superannuation earning rate is 7% (net of fees and tax) per annum, they will end up with $1,223,558.

Seems like a lot! But if we discount for inflation at 3% it is the equivalent amount of $434,832 in today's dollars. With modern day life expectancy, this is really not enough for a comfortable retirement considering the governments moves to reduce the welfare available to Age Pensioners.

If that same person was to be able to save just $50 per week from the start from their cash flow and salary sacrifice the grossed up amount to superannuation, they'd end up with just over $2,000,000 in super which is about $712,050 discounted back to today's dollars. That is significantly more and would provide a much more comfortable retirement income stream. It's $50 per week. Most people spend much more than that on non essentials.

Do people do that? No. Why? well, I guess they want to spend the $50 per week now and hope for money later on. Or maybe complain when they reach retirement that the government doesn't do enough. Or maybe they'll try to create wealth very quickly near retirement through very high leverage and lose even more (ie. Storm Financial). As a financial adviser, I can't help anyone who doesn't want to help themselves.

We have been through a period where the generosity from governments in terms of concessions to build for retirement savings has been quite high, and now when the budgets tighten, the responsibility falls back to each and everyone to do something about their own future.  It's so easy to ignore wealth creation and perhaps for those around 25 to 30 or even 40, there is a lot going on. House, marriage, children etc, but don't wait until you are 55 or 60 and then think, I should really do something about my retirement because with all the changes happening to super, there will probable be less there than you think.

No comments:

Post a Comment