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.
Christine
Christine from NSW commented:

There is no incentive to work hard and save for your retirement. My husband and I have done just that....and what do we get NOTHING!! We receive very low interest on our savings, receive no benefits and are expected to fund ourselves completely. We are looked upon as RICH. I know there are a lot of genuine people in need...and I also know there are many people out there that have been rorting the system. I think the government should play fair and perhaps give some incentive to the people that try and help themselves and take benefits off those that do not want to contribute. 

Greg
Greg from VIC commented:

As always the pollies have got it wrong again. We have worked hard to better ourselves, pay off a home, save hard and go without while others spend their little hearts out. All of this so that we would be less of a burden, live a comfortable life which we have earned, gain a reasonable benefit through the health care card system and most importantly of all be able to leave our kids with something which will in turn make them less of a burden on the system in the years ahead. But NO. Pollies are incapable of thinking that far ahead. Their new rules mean that we will spend down our capital faster just to survive leaving the kids with less or nothing meaning that they will be a heavier burden on the system in future. How do these dills get these jobs. We now have a situation where people who have not prepared themselves by sacrifice through their working life get more and those who have get nothing. Send your Pollie a message (I have). My question is what do we do about it. If this goes ahead (and it will) I will be spending like a drunken sailor and living for the moment and I will never vote again. Unfortunately this great country has become a land that does all that it can to throw money at illegals, useless overseas aid and the lazy while actively discouraging hard work and self improvement. I feel sorry for the kids coming through. 

Hans-Dieter
Hans-Dieter from VIC commented:

I have no problem with the reduction in the asset base but how do we catch those people who put their holiday homes in their children's name in order not to exceed the figure so that they can collect all or a part pension to which they are not entitled? How do we detect those people who are collecting multiple unemployment benefits? There are a lot of schemes out there that cost the government huge sums of money that need to be collected or not paid and then we may not be faced with the problems that they are trying to address at the moment. During my working life I was never unemployed, I have paid my fair share of taxes and have been fortunate enough to put away enough in superannuation to be self funded but it would be nice to receive the health card as the bare minimum. 

June
June from NSW commented:

We are losers, but we've benefitted since John Howard increased the asset level. It's now reversed and I'm sure we'll survive quite comfortably. The pension started off in 2007 with a pittance, which we were quite happy with as we've received the perks mostly from NSW Govt. The pension has been increased considerably since, we would have been quite happy still with the pittance pension so long as the perks remained. Guess we've lost both now, but we're not complaining. 

Peter
Peter from QLD commented:

Hello everyone I have posted a comment earlier and read many of the other comments. Where do we go from here? Can we create a Tsunami? We grey people are generally down to earth, we don't march the streets holding placards and chanting the old tired slogans(what do we want, when do we want it etc. etc.). We love this country and the flag, where we have been and what we have achieved. Below is the contact details for the country senators. Please hit them with a TSUNAMI. If we don't the polies will tread all over us with their gold plated retirement cards. http://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian_Search_Results?q=&sen=1&par=-1&gen=0&ps=0 

Lesleigh
Lesleigh from QLD replied to Peter:

Go Peter grey hair does not signify lack of grey matter.It would appear that in tis wonderful country of ours the squeaky wheel gets the attention. 

Allan
Allan from NSW commented:

I agree with most of the comments against the proposed changes to the assets test for the pension and it seems unfair in that the majority of us have worked to the rules as presented to us and saved and prepared for our retirement, we have built up assets to allow us to enjoy our remaining days and not be too much of a burden on the economy. It is also to be remembered that when the politicians and senior public service pensions or super entitlements are changed they are only in place for new participants not like they want to do to us to be retrospective, and I think the government can make substantial changes and savings in the economy ie wind electricity subsidies for one, removing the useless and very costly Senate in both Federal and State parliaments instead of picking on a group that have helped Australia and not been a burden on the community. 

Geoffrey
Geoffrey from NSW commented:

house prices on the rise pension going down assets test should go up. Glad I have never voted Liberal in my life 

frank
frank from QLD replied to Geoffrey:

Geoffrey, Don't put to much faith into the current labor mob,I have never voted liberal,but this Morrison is on the right track,I will be thinking hard. 

Lesleigh
Lesleigh from QLD replied to Geoffrey:

Mr Hockey may find many very discontented liberal voters next election. 

Gregory
Gregory from NSW commented:

A couple with a home worth $300000 and $850K of Super and savings are now classed as wealthy as a couple with a home worth $2million and $850K of savings and super. these Politicians should pull their head out of their ---- and look at all angles of their arguments, not just the ones that pop into their minds which have no idea of working and saving to make life easier in retirement. 

cathy
cathy from NSW commented:

Increasing the threshold to $250,000 sounds good. However hand in hand with that the taper rate is reported, though not widely, to increase from $1.50 to $3 per thousand. I've done the sums and it seems for me & others like myself, who are not wealthy - just worked hard and saved, will be in detriment i.e. significant reduction to an existing part pension when the new taper rate is introduced. I would love to be totally financially independent in retirement, however that will not be the case.. There is no incentive for me to continue to be frugal. Seems it is time for me to start taking those 'holidays of a lifetime' and eating steak instead of mince. Anon 

Kerry
Kerry from NSW commented:

I thought the government made a promise not to reduce any pensions? If the Government wants to save money here are a few ideas Abolish the Senate- a total waste of money Cut out rorts in Government spending eg. excessive living away from home allowance for Politicians, Tax payers funding politicians superannuation, additional excessive payments to Politicians on committees, overseas holidays masquerading as fact finding trips, have they not heard of the internet. These are just a few of the ways to save money, there are plenty more but are they listening no I don't think so. Kerry 

Comment Guidelines