News

NewsTime to give the over 50's a voice in budget debates on tax, retirement and work
Time to give the over 50's a voice in budget debates on tax, retirement and work

Time to give the over 50's a voice in budget debates on tax, retirement and work

As debate hots up before the Federal Budget, it’s time to gauge the views of those most affected by the hip-pocket issues being discussed – the over-50s.

The 120,000-member FiftyUp Club has today launched its second annual pre-Budget survey, asking the over-50s what they think about:

  • Pensions and superannuation
  • Negative gearing,
  • The GST and
  • Working to age 70

Consumers over 50 can now give their views HERE on big questions such as whether access to the pension should be more strict, the GST should be extended, or negative gearing should be ended.

They’ll also be asked about work experiences ahead of the inquiry into discrimination against older workers, announced this week (see Appendix).

Last year’s FiftyUp Club Budget Survey attracted more than 6,500 responses on pensions, Medicare and other issues and was presented to the federal government. The same will be done this year.

“Big decisions in these areas affect us not just now but well into the future and will impact on how we plan, save and prepare — so it’s vital we have a voice in these debates,” says FiftyUp Club guest commentator Christopher Zinn.

“As a group with age and experience, but not always money and influence, we need to let decision-makers know what we think before it’s too late.”

The FiftyUp Club has over 120,000 members and uses their buying power to negotiate special offers and lobby on their behalf. It’s free to join at FiftyUpClub.com

Click Here to take our 5-Minute Survey

 

 

APPENDIX

Recent Budget Related News

  1. ‘Stop rich from using negative gearing to offset wages, save $1b : ACOSS’, Sydney Morning Herald, 16 April 2015 by Nassim Khadem Read Here
  2. ‘How a 12 per cent GST could deliver a $100,000 earner an income-tax cut of $34 a week’, News.com.au, 1 April 2015 by John Rolfe Read Here
  3. 'Tony Abbott pledges to protect our superannuation: No changes during his term of government and beyond’, The Daily Telegraph, 16 April 2015 by Simon Benson Read Here
  4. ‘Age Discrimination: Federal Government inquiry to examine barriers older workers face in finding jobs’, ABC Online, 15 April 2015 by Nick Dole Read Here
  5. ‘Opinion: Politicians can’t be trusted to make decisions about superannuation’, Courier Mail, 15 April 2015 by Jeff Kennett Read Here
Originally posted on .

Join the conversation

FiftyUp Club
Time to give the over 50's a voice in budget debates on tax, retirement and work

Share your views with other members. 

Want to leave a comment? or .
Read our moderation policy here.
Carol
Carol from NSW commented:

I am in my late 60s and am still working. My superannuation I have had to use and only have a little left. With my wage and part age pension I still live below the poverty line. I don't own my unit and pay half my wage in rent. My savings are just enough to cover my funeral and I'm worried that will be taxed along with everything else. I firmly believe we have to do something drastic to get this country back on top after the stupid actions of the Labour Party. I am more than willing to help where I can, politicians should think and act on Australia's behalf not on whether they will win the next election. 

Jim
Jim from NSW commented:

I personally believe the politicians should look after them selves after leaving politics. The burden is excessive , and ,we the tax payers , fund their excesses. 

Robert
Robert from QLD commented:

We talk, the politicians talk, the pensioners talk but in the end NOBODY DOES ANYTHING! It seems pretty obvious to me that politicians should not receive anything further from their ex-employers when they have finished their job. It should also be obvious that people should pay taxes on ALL money they make from either investments, earnings or trading and that taxes should be lower on lower returns, higher on high returns and significantly higher on significantly higher returns. It should also be obvious that health and education services should be charged at a FAIR rate. What is a FAIR rate you ask? How about a rate that is based on a person's ability to pay without damaging their lifestyle or placing their future in doubt. The weakest link in a losing team is found at management level. 

Someone
Someone from VIC commented:

I would like to see a cut in the government pension funding scheme. Seems to me it far out ways the average persons pension scheme. 

Mark
Mark from NSW commented:

The biggest problem we have at the moment is the "spending" by all governments on themselves. This needs to be severely regulated by a 3rd party to stop the elected, (by us) government giving to themselves over and above what the rest of the population gets. And, once people reach 60yrs, the tax rate drops to a 5% flat rate tax. 

John
John from NSW commented:

I plan to work till I am 67, 6 years from now. I have 1 son at Uni, 2 at sports high schools. After paying my mortgage, education, sporting fees and maintenance I have almost zero left once bills are done, life insurance and I am on good money. Tax breaks for those staying at work past 65 is a great incentive. I already access my deferred super and would not survive without doing so. Pity the people on low salary in similar situation. John 

wendy
wendy from NSW commented:

I think people working after 70 years of age should be given their super directly , as one has to open a super account then if you only work twice a year , you can withdraw money then have to open a new account , most of the money is lost in administration fees . This annoys a lot of my co workers ( exam invigilators ) Thank you 

Leo
Leo from NSW commented:

It is time that we had politicians interested in governing to benefit the nation & the people & provide for our needs not solely for the benefit of the politicians retaining their jobs & the party needs as their priority 

Leo
Leo from NSW commented:

Politicians should be on the same superannuation & retirement benefits & limitations as all other workers. The original special benefits were to attract high quality proffessionals but now we are getting low quality candidates with no competency or experience to contribute, they are chosen for party priorities. 

Someone
Someone from QLD commented:

I have no issue with politicians being paid a good wage my issue is they should not be paid any more once they are no longer in politics. When the rest of the population change jobs our former employee no longer pays us a wage and the job of a politician should be treated the same way, any privileges we had with our job also ended the day we left. So why are we continuing to pay huge amounts to people who no longer work for us. 

Comment Guidelines