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.
Les
Les from NSW commented:

I know what happened. I am one of the unfortunate ones who worked my arse off to provide a comfortable ( certainly not wealthy) life in retirement for my wife and I, but the lot in charge of this country have decided that it is more convenient to ensure that I go broke paying medical bills than it is to get their mining magnate, mewspaper publishing and other big end of town buddies to pay their fair share of taxation. I have now decided that it is a complete waste of time trying to support my wife and I in retirement and will now spend as I please and when we go broke will do what all the middle class welfare recipients do and get the Government to support us. 

Raymond ( Ray )
Raymond ( Ray ) from QLD commented:

For those age pensioners who know that they will be losing their current pension from January 2017 , if they are say $200,000 to $300,000 over now to the new asset limits , they should seriously consider to sell the current house asset that they live in , and go upmarket to a mansion , and that is one way that they can lower their cash situation , as your home is not included in asset test . No limit dollar amount for the house value that is yours , and that you live in . Withdraw from bank accounts first , due to the low interest , but super should be protected due to tax free and high interest earned tax free .You have at least 18 months to move to an upmarket luxury home which is not included as an asset for age pension purposes . raja Brisbane . 

Dana
Dana from QLD replied to Raymond ( Ray ):

I wish the govt. would not proceed with the $605 million aid to Indonesia; money which goes to the top levels of military and govt. officials, not to the grassroots who might need it. And to stop penalising pensioners. 

Raymond ( Ray )
Raymond ( Ray ) from QLD replied to Dana:

Dana , On those points of yours to my suggestion of how to possibly get around the situation in 2017 , I totally agree . I realise that it is hard for some elderly persons to give up the family home which they have lived in for years , but moving is up to each individual to get around the new system . 

terry
terry from NSW replied to Dana:

Dana I agree, only that America is our friend has stopped Indonesia invading Australia. The Government of this country is so corrupt not one penny should be given to them. Tony Abbott stop pussing around with Indonesia. They don't like us but only too happy to take our money 

Lesleigh
Lesleigh from QLD replied to Dana:

Could your comment be sent directly to Mr Hockey I don't think that he reads the peoples opinion polls. 

Emily
Emily from QLD replied to Lesleigh:

I agree Lesleigh 

Raymond ( Ray )
Raymond ( Ray ) from QLD replied to Raymond ( Ray ):

Just had confirmation by telephone from Centrelink re my letter to local Commonwealth member , that as we are partly self funded , our age pension will DECREASE BY 52% of what we are now getting per fortnight from 2017 . I am good with figures , and I told them exactly what we will be getting from 2017 , and they confirmed I was correct . Asset values of $700,000 . Suggest to any part age pensioners , that you contact your local federal member and get your new rates that you will receive per fortnight from January 2017 . Do not let them tell you they cannot do it due to changes etc ---- tell them to work on figures that you will have no changes between now and 2017 ---- keep it simple ( kiss ) 

Joseph
Joseph from NSW commented:

I have made one mistake of voting for the government. I'm pretty sure that pensioners will make you for this in the next election, this is a shame that pensioners are getting punished this way. The government thinks that having $825000 is going to be sufficient to live off. Well if you get about 4% interest you will only have $35000 to live on yet a couple on pension will receive more than $30000 plus the concession card. By having your own income you are worst off as a self funded retiree. How about a fair go and stop lying to pensioners and let them enjoy the final years of their life. 

Emily
Emily from QLD replied to Joseph:

Hockey should start at the top and not the bottom: he obviously doesn't know about the millions Malcolm Fraser pinched from the working Aussies superannuation from 1945 to 1975 and put this into consolidated revenue - that's about the time retired pollies started getting their pensions and perks. We must fight for the return of this money. 

Thomas
Thomas from QLD commented:

Thanks to the previous governments overspending, we now have the reality check. I bet most complainants have little idea of just what is happening. I you keep putting your spending on credit, there comes a time when you will receive no more credit and the bill has to be paid back. Look back to Jeff Kennet when he took control of Victoria. The state was bankrupt and the first thing he did was levied every household a sum of $100 and the pain of that got the state back in the black. There is so much more, but I am sure the majority agree the political super is quite farcical, and requires immediate change 

Roger
Roger from QLD commented:

I would like to see the government pensions and perks like travel under the microscope. Also it is beyond me how a future fund for Austalia is just for government and public servants,, it has made billions of dollars which should be used for all of us. It should be used to reduce the national debt. 

Someone
Someone from NSW commented:

We have worked for years paying our taxes etc. and they have the cheek and ordaci 

Narelle
Narelle from NSW commented:

I would like to know if people who receive State Government super have those assets assessed under the assets test or are they exempt from the assets test? I would also like to see politicians' super treated in the same way as the ordinary worker. What sort of medical scheme do they have....the same as everyone else. Let's see the politicians give a little too. Let's chase the tax dodgers more vigorously. I agree something has to be done to reduce our debt but spread the load more evenly. To see our country go from a surplus to this massive debt is heartbreaking. 

Judith
Judith from NSW commented:

Any asset test for our greedy politicians? Make them work till they are 70 and then and only then can they draw their pension! FAT CHANCE 

Lorraine
Lorraine from QLD commented:

We have worked for 100 year between the two of us and as the result of these changes our labours are now being severely disadvantaged. Does this change to pensions encourage people to work, save, not drink or smoke (or worse) away their incomes? Politicians are constantly changing the goal posts and making many people very unhappy with the results. 

michael
michael from VIC commented:

Like the majority of comment contributors I am well and truly disappointed with the pension changes. I think the time has come for us to have a political party that represents us.......it's obvious that the Libs, Labour and the Greens don't give a damn. There is going to be 320,000 adversely affected by these changes, so if we all vote for independents in the Senate and Rep's at the next election we can send a clear message that we had enough. I would even vote PUP if Clive would stand up for us. Mike from Vic 

Comment Guidelines