News

NewsSome winners and some losers, but vast majority of pensioners might ask ‘What happened?’
Some winners and some losers, but vast majority of pensioners might ask ‘What happened?’

Some winners and some losers, but vast majority of pensioners might ask ‘What happened?’

Us over 50s may feel overlooked on occasions but pensioners are at the very heart and soul of next week’s Budget. 

Controversial plans for changes to pensions including indexing, taper rates, assets tests and proposals to raid healthy superannuation balances have dominated the run-up to Tuesday night.

On Thursday the government unveiled its changes to the eligibility criteria for the pension which saw the better-off lose access to the part pension, and an increase in the pension for others.

In our pre-Budget survey, answered by a record 13,000 of you, an overwhelming majority or 74% rejected proposed changes to tighten the assets tests for pensions agreeing ‘these people are not necessarily well-off’.

Contrast that to last year, when we asked if a couple with a family home and $1 million in other assets should get a part-pension, and 71% of you said “no”.

On the plus side under the new government plan some 50,000 on low to middle-incomes, who were on the part-pension, will now be eligible for the full pension.

And those who don’t own their home will be allowed more assets before they lose access to the pension.

You might have done the sums by now in the great pensions reshuffle to see if you fall into the winners or losers basket, although looking at the various tables be warned; it can be complex.

In general terms, and relying on the figures in Thursday’s Daily Telegraph, of the four million-strong pensioner population the ‘losers’ include:

  • 90,000 or two percent of pensioners with assets of more than $823,000, apart from their homes, will say goodbye to all of their part-pension .
  • 236,000 or six percent of the group, which have considerable assets, will have their part pensions reduced.

The ‘winners’, whose pensions will increase, are listed as 172,000 or 4%:

  • In all about 500,000 pensioners will find their incomes changed up and down, which is 12%
  • 88% or 3.5 million will not be affected by any of these changes

Yes, for all the hullabaloo the vast majority will see no difference up or down.

However the big news, which ironically produces the smallest difference in dollars to ALL pensioners in the short-term but the largest in the long-term, is the end to plans around the indexing of pensions.

It was a very unpopular Budget measure from last year to limit pension increases to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which would reduce payments in real terms over time. It’s now bitten the dust.

Now the detail is out and the Budget fact and fiction can be separated, the real debate will begin. And as ever we welcome your perceptive and provocative comments.

Originally posted on .

Join the conversation

FiftyUp Club
Some winners and some losers, but vast majority of pensioners might ask ‘What happened?’

Share your views with other members. 

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

Wonder if for those a few years off pension age and with a bit in the bank should start taking a greater interest in art, coins stamps and other bits and pieces that gain in value without being too conspicuous? Should take a little time to ensure that one has a fair idea of the area in which one is investing and do not over do it. 

Emily
Emily from QLD commented:

I feel the whole system has to be revised. Our taxes paying for all these immigrants when our people are overlooked. These pensions to ex prime ministers and pollies must be changed. It is not a privilige to be a politician but a job and they should not be treated as if they have earned the pensions and perks. Abbott and Hockey may not know that it was their government in 1975 who put all the monies the workers had accumulated in pensions since 1945, they took it and put it into consolidated revenue. We ordinary Australians need to fight for the return of that money, Our pensions we have earned it. Emily Qld. 

Noel
Noel from NSW commented:

WE had two prime minsters stressing while your working to put as much as you could afford away for your Retirement . now we have a treasurer saying pensioners have too many benefits they don't need and we are going to take them away. Cutting out the Pensioners rebates on council rates electricity etc. your only have to see from Mr Hockey's first budget what he has in mind for the future you cannot trust this government if they are returned to government Noel 

John
John from NSW commented:

This government has made me feel like a criminal. I'm on the DSP. I didn't mean to lose a leg or destroy my right arm to the point where I can hardly lift anything with it or injure my back, giving me some grief, in a motorcycle accident. But I did. I've worked all my life and I'm doing volunteer work now, when I can, doing what I can. I can probably do some light work for 15 hours a week but, living on the NSW north coast where unemployment is high, who's going to employ me. I'm 58 years old. It's fine for Hockey and Morrison to call us bludgers and we should be contributing. Where am I going to find an employer who will accept that I may need to take time off work due to arthritis in the arm, back aches etc. No one in this area is going to take a chance on a 58 year old in this area. I'm such a low life that I don't warrant a mention in the budget. So I don't know what my future holds. All I know is that I'm on the government's target list which just increases my stress and anxiety. Will I vote for a government that is happy to discard me??? 

Lesleigh
Lesleigh from QLD commented:

many pensioners will be dead by Jan 2017, they need financial assistance ASAP. Mr Treasurer what good is saying to a hungry person I will ease your hunger if you wait until Jan2017 PLEASE GET A GRIP ON REALITY IF YOU CAN. 

Rosemarie
Rosemarie from QLD commented:

Agree with Alan from Qld. Worked for 44years, paid taxes, no unemployment benefits ever claimed, no baby bonus, no child care, no first home buyers grant. For last 6 years of work put 50% of pay into super to ensure a good retirement. took our funds out of super when we were losing a lot and put into bank deposits. Downgraded the family home to one worth about $250,000 and added the balance to our retirement funds. Husband the same. Very few holidays and my highest rate of pay was just over $40,000 per year. The very small part pension we received brought our income up to just over $30,000. Now to lose this little bit of help from the government. Was not worth it when we see some who always earned a lot more, and spent most of it getting a full pension. Have advised my kids to not to do the same. 

Lesleigh
Lesleigh from QLD replied to Rosemarie:

You have commented what many think how can this message get to the right people. Australians ideas of she"ll be right mate is a thing of the past, together we stand divided we fall should now be our catch phrase. 

Stan
Stan from NSW commented:

As a part pensioner I stand to lose part of my pension as a result of the budget and I certainly dont mind this if it contributes to the benefit of the country and helps us move forward after the disaster of the Labor government. 

Lesleigh
Lesleigh from QLD replied to Stan:

Iam pleased that you don't mind losing some of your part pension unfortunately many are not in your financial situation the pension is all they have. 

Jeanette
Jeanette from QLD commented:

Do people who lose their pensions under the new asset rules also lose their concession cards? Our assets put us over the limit, but at 2% RBA interest, are not earning a great income! 

Carole
Carole from VIC commented:

I am still trying to work at 61years old with health issues no partner no super to speak of and not old enough for oap.hard work in a cafe kitchen and cleaning,unable to take care of my home and health too sore and tired.no social life to speak of.what kind of life is this while young people drink smoke do drugs and bludge.how utterly maddening!!! 

Desley
Desley from QLD commented:

I think it is grossly unfair that a person who has worked hard, paid taxation but decided to save their money instead of going on holidays, not drinking or smoking and did not have children actually get punished in retirement. No concessions and higher fees on prescriptions etc. How unfair is that. 

Comment Guidelines