Editor's Choice
Cbus rolls out death benefit nomination changes
Cbus will roll out changes to death benefit nominations, which include scrapping nominations that expire in three years.
Guardians farewells head of asset allocation
The Guardians of NZ Super has named a new head of asset allocation to replace Charles Hyde, who is leaving to take up a role abroad.
IFS recovers record $250m in unpaid super
Industry Fund Services (IFS) has recovered a record $250 million in unpaid superannuation in the 2025-26 financial year, bringing its total recoveries to $2.5 billion since the service commenced.
Betashares launches diversified ETF suite
Betashares has expanded its core investment range with the launch of four diversified exchange traded funds.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile

Andrew Gregory
CHIEF ADVICE OFFICER
UNISUPER
UNISUPER
After 25 years, Andrew Gregory remains motivated by the impact financial advice can have on Australians' lives. As UniSuper's chief advice officer, he is not slowing down on any of his current ambitions. Matthew Wai writes.







Keating is spot on, except he does not go far enough. The first element of "overhauling" the current Superannuation system is for compulsory contributions by employees. The billions of dollars held in "lost" Superannuation accounts demonstrates that the majority of people do not really see it as their money as they have put no evident skin in the game. Having the contributions made solely by employers gives this impression. Certainly a case can be put 100% that salaries and wages have been and are "adjusted" to allow for the cost of the contributions which could then lead to an impression that the employee is paying. The important issue is the impression & they do not really see this.
The second element is increasing the employer component. I would leave it to someone with superior knowledge like a Paul Keating to accurately (??) determine what is needed. The third element is that there are hundreds of thousands of self employed (sole traders and/or those operating under a partnership) who are not compelled to contribute for their future.
They should have to pay a prescribed higher rate of tax with the increase going towards Superannuation. Little Johnnie was indeed kind with the halving of the Assets Test, but one must also consider that Politicians on taxpayer funded Superannuation (and others) became substantial beneficiaries of the removal of taxation on pensions or moneys extracted from Superannation after age 60. A fourth element should be increasing the age that one can access Superannuation monies. Those who perform heavy duty manual work need to be considered carefully in whatever changes take place as they generally have shorter working capabilities.