Financial Standard Comments - Super not "a top-up" for Age Pension: FSC Superannuation should no longer be considered "a top-up" for the Age Pension and the tax treatment of super debate can't be brought up in isolation, the Financial Services Council (FSC) chief executive Sally Loane said in her inaugural speech. https://www.financialstandard.com.au/feed/latest?story=47945348 Thu, 26 Feb 2015 13:58:29 +1100 Thu, 26 Feb 2015 13:58:29 +1100 en-AU Copyright 2026 Financial Standard 5 Comment by R B (.)

Let's make it easier for those who have a genuine desire not to have to rely on an aged pension, to get money into superannuation.

The other option is that everyone spends all their money living for today and then sees the social security system as their god given right.

Which option do you think is sustainable?

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> R B (.) Thu, 26 Feb 2015 13:58:29 +1100 Comment by Tim Kirwan (Tim Kirwan and Associates)

A married couple can have over 1.2 Million dollars excluding the family home AND STILL RECEIVE A PART PENSION and I, as a Taxpayer pay for it and as time goes by I will have to pay more and more. And we criticise the GREEKS!

How it ever got to this is an indictment of sucessive Governments being either asleep at the wheel, totally gutless or both! Give a bit more to those that need it and slash the figure down to $750K maximum now and leave Super alone so that people in the future will not need to be on the pension.

But of course that would need a bipartisan approach by Parliament and neither party has the courage to work toward securing the future of the next generation.(Perhaps Mr Abbott's sucessor just might have a go.) This is absolutely a NOBRAINER!

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> Tim Kirwan (Tim Kirwan and Associates) Fri, 27 Feb 2015 07:26:23 +1100 Comment by R B (.)

A married couple with assessable assets over $1.2 million will NOT get a part pension UNLESS they don't own a home. If they don't own a home, they most likely will have a rent obligation.

It seems that Tim only has an issue with the thresholds. He agrees they "leave super alone so that people wont need to be on a pension".

No, make sure easier to invest into, so that people wont need to be on a pension.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> R B (.) Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:31:57 +1100 Comment by Tim Kirwan (Tim Kirwan and Associates) Your right RB and I should have checked out what I heard. However I believe it's $1.14 million and lets not forget the fringe benefits!

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> Tim Kirwan (Tim Kirwan and Associates) Fri, 27 Feb 2015 23:38:06 +1100