There are many holes in the Government's budget bucket. Many are exploited by the very well off in society, eg the cost of negative gearing on property is $11bn pa., and that is with low interest rates. It is much higher when rates increase. 90% of the benefits go to the top 10% of the most wealthy people.

This, and other rorts such as family trusts and diesel fuel rebates, should be the first focus of KPMG in addressing the structural budget deficit, rather than the very pointed attack on super.

It is now very difficult to build up a reasonable amount in super due to the contribution limits of $36,000 for concessional contributions. This should not be attacked as we want people to retire with dignity and not be a burden on society and their children.

Super and particularly the SGC, is for middle Australia, the 80-90% of ordinary working Australians. We focus too much on the extremes, the poor and the wealthy. Get it right for Middle Australia and then address the extremes.

The first area to be tackled is the inequity in SMSFs, which are not supervised and have rorted the system. Next is the massive SMSFs with over $5m per member.

These should be reduced to a max of $2.5m within 3 years. The new limit of $2.5m (a new RBL) should be introduced.

Our problems with super stem from ill informed "experts" butting in to a very complex subject.

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.