News

NewsTreasurer has his eye on older Australians
Treasurer has his eye on older Australians

Treasurer has his eye on older Australians

Last updated by Chris Zinn on
Older Australians are wary of the new Federal Treasurer’s talk of tax reform, research by the 130,000-member FiftyUp Club reveals.

Treasurer, Scott Morrison MP, has set himself the task of convincing ordinary Australians that we need tax reform. 

The Treasurer is particularly focused on older Australians and unlocking their capital to increase retirement incomes.

Take part in the poll and tell us if you think retirees have the option to sell the family home and downsize without affecting their pension?

A recent survey of almost 18,000 older Australians provides insight into the very demographic the Treasurer is appealing to. The study of the over 50s has found;

  • almost half (45%) think tax concessions for people with large super balances should be wound back, however 34% disagree with this and another 1 in 5 don’t know;
  • the low interest environment has been a disaster for half of older Australians getting lower interest on their savings;
  • they are not convinced that a change to the GST is necessary (46% do not support any change, while 46% would support an increase in rate/and or broadening of the base).

The FiftyUp Club nation-wide study into cost of living pressures highlights why the budget needs to be carefully balanced with a particular focus on the ageing population.

One of the billion-dollar questions for the government is how Australia is going to support the growing numbers of retirees. The survey found;

  • 2 out of 3 Australians have or will retire on $300,000 or less because superannuation was not compulsory in their day.
  • 75% of older Australians, are, or will be, dependant on the full or part-time pension

“The challenge for government is about getting the balance right between supporting the older Australians and ensuring retirement incomes policies are sustainable,” FiftyUp Club spokesperson Christopher Zinn said.

It’s important politicians start to understand the pressure older Australians face. The study found 85% said these issues were either important or very important to their vote at the next election, and that could be any time soon.

We'd love to read your comments about how you feel about proposed changes.

Originally posted on .

Join the conversation

FiftyUp Club
Treasurer has his eye on older Australians

Share your views with other members. 

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

I disagree. Why should someone with a $2M home be able to downsize to say a $500,000 age care unit and still get the same amount of pension? I do agree however that stamp duty should be abolished for this. 

Barry
Barry from NSW commented:

I’m 75 and in 4 years the last of our super disappears. So yes, it is important that the family home allows us to downsize without any pension penalty. On the Politicians salary, we do need to be able to attract good people but I suggest a good fully taxable salary and no perks. 

MARGARET
MARGARET from NSW commented:

When you work in Australia until you are 65 and pay your taxes I think you should be entitled to at least a part pension or health. Older people should not be penalised just because they have saved for an investment property. The government have to look at long term welfare recipients and long term government housing tenants. I think it is good to help people who really need it but for government housing to be generational is not fair, especially when you are denying a pension or health card to people that have worked all their lives and never been reliant on the government prior to their retirement. 

Gary
Gary from NSW commented:

I would not trust this traitorous excuse for an elected representative with anything affecting the aged. Hopefully he and the rest of those with the back stabbing of Tony will reap their reward in 2016 or sooner. 

margaret
margaret from NSW commented:

Pension, super for women, well most of us stayed at home to raise our children. That was how it was. Then one is pushed out of the work force due to age= discrimination, so tell me how can one have enough super when we are part of the age group. It is o.k. for the Polititions, they get a great pay each year even when left. 

BRIAN
BRIAN from NSW commented:

Our last 20 years has been a circus of ""this will be good for the country and you!!!""When the GST came....did all promised tax relief come back to the population>>>>no! NO!! If the move is 10 to 15% and again some taxes will be terminated. wanna bet!! Well I don't ! as, all...yes all;, are incapable of delivering the total package. Sadly not smart enough. By far the majority have never held a real job. So like good unionists....never give anything back....love being 80 plus as I've seen it all.......so many times. 

anneliese
anneliese from NSW commented:

Mike from NSW. Joe Hockey once said that we all have to SUFFER a little to help the economy. Well we retirees have suffered enough in our life time in putting as much as the government would allow in to our super account so we would not be a burden on the future taxpayers and the government. To the point that if we miscalculated and saved too much that we would be taxed for saving for our future after retirement and not a burden on the pension scheme. The Treasurer has to understand that we are not the criminals as the taxation department thinks but people that have worked most of their lives and have p[aid taxes during that time. Most retirees only require the concession card that helps them with their major costs during the year such as Rates, energy costs and transport costs. It is about time that the government started to show some example of what they are going to give up to help the economy. 

Helen
Helen from NSW commented:

I've been saying for a long time that we should all still be allowed to retire at 65. None of this sliding scale rubbish about when you were born. That would make way for those who are whinging that they don't have a job to finally get one. We could than draw a pension which would be nowhere near the pension that a family with three, four or more children would be drawing every fortnight. The unemployment rate would drop as a result as well. The way I see it is a three-way win all round. 

margaret
margaret from NSW commented:

The cost of an over 55s downsizing isn't cheap anymore. With the cost of downsizing costing more than ones existing property unless it is over $1million , plus the added cost/expenses it really is not feasible to downsize. The $5,000 stamp duty cost deduction is for properties under $65,000 Most properties today off the plan are in excess of that amount. Margaret 

Michelle
Michelle from NSW commented:

We have worked since leaving school. We almost own our own home and have sacrificed holidays and personal spending to do this. Our plan is to hold on to our home as an asset and downsize when we have to, to supplement our small super funds, as we did not have one when we were younger so the balance is low. I also note that we did the self managed super fund route some years ago and the govt of the day changed the rules so that we could not make the investments where we could make money as the new rules deemed that these needed to be arms length. Once again we are to be "screwed" by the govt! 

Comment Guidelines