Super tax concessions not overly generous: Mercer

  I think it's ridiculous that the Government set such low contribution caps for people - why would you want to stop people putting more money into super? Particularly older workers who have not had the benefit of super throughout their working lives.

It is now even more imperative that people start saving early...but apathy and mistrust are high just as job security is low. With the SG increasing, I hope that we will start to see a shift in engagement and then have the ability to warn people ahead of time that they must start early as they won't be able to play catch up later.

  Over 60 ok
But what about the under 60 retirees and especially the Transition to Retirement.
Looks like thats under a big cloud.
If she wasnt going to tax that then she would have already said so.
The fact that its been left out means its almost certain it will be taxed.

So will Transition to Retirement be affected in the future?

  It appears from much of the research, combined with on the ground experience with individuals, that the vast majority of Australians 50 years and over will not be able to fund even a modest lifestyle in retirement (ASFA Retirement Standards). If that's true, then it begs the question "why is the government taking the opposite view?". There doesn't seem to be a coherent and logical argument from the Labour party to support reducing the concessions around superannuation.

In the abscence of any real argument, one is left to assume there are other motivations.

If as a result of "Award Modernisation" and other legislative change, Industry funds are the recipient of increased inflows, you could come to a conclusion that those controlling them have more influence while the resulting increased tax revenue contributes significantly to a government being able to balance their books.

To be blunt, controlling the purse strings of the superannuation system and maintaining power at the expense of retirees (ultimately, all of us).