Australia's Future Tax System

Consultation Paper Summary

5. The retirement income system

Overview

Australia has a three pillar retirement income system:

  • a government‑provided Age Pension;
  • compulsory savings enforced through the superannuation guarantee (SG); and
  • voluntary savings (both through superannuation and other sources).

The Age Pension provides a guaranteed income based on means, while the income generated from the second and third pillars depends on the amount invested and returns on these investments.

The retirement income system has developed over time. The SG pillar will not mature until 2037 when employees retire after a full working life (35 years) of compulsory superannuation contributions of 9 per cent.

Submissions to the Panel support the structure of the retirement income system. Common themes in the submissions concern the current rate of the SG and the level of concessions provided to encourage additional saving. Other themes relate to how the system should deal with individuals outliving their savings and the way the system treats individuals with different circumstances.

Key considerations about the retirement income system are whether it is broad and adequate, acceptable, robust, simple and approachable, and sustainable.

Another aspect to be considered is the role of the retirement income system in providing health and aged care services.

Consultation questions

Q5.1 In considering the future of Australia's retirement income system, which objectives are relevant in setting retirement income policy? Does the current system of the Age Pension and compulsory and voluntary savings meet these objectives? If not, how should the system be changed to meet these objectives?

Q5.2 As the SG system matures, it will become a greater part of an employee's retirement income. What are the implications for individuals partially or fully excluded from the mature SG system (the self‑employed, individuals with broken work patterns such as carers, women and migrants), and how can the retirement income system best accommodate these groups?

Q5.3 Noting that the adequacy of the Age Pension is being considered by the Pension Review, what is an appropriate concept of adequacy for the retirement income system? Should it be to ensure there is a minimum level of income in retirement, to replace a proportion of income earned prior to retirement, or some another alternative?

Q5.4 What should the role of the government be in assisting individuals to meet their retirement income expectations in relation to the support provided by the Age Pension, the level of compulsory savings and incentives to make additional savings? Should the role of government change as an individual's income increases over their working life?

Q5.5 Do the settings of the retirement income system, such as the level of SG and access to concessions, adequately consider the needs and preferences of individuals both before and after retirement?

Q5.6 Is the current level of superannuation income tax concessions appropriate and sustainable into the future? Are the current concessions properly targeted and, if not, how should they be reformed?

Q5.7 At what age should an individual be able to access their superannuation and at what age should they become eligible for the Age Pension?

Q5.8 What is the role of individuals in dealing with investment and longevity risk in accumulating and drawing down their retirement income? Do financial markets provide the means to deal with these risks? If not, is there a role for government to address these shortcomings?

Q5.9 In what ways does the retirement income system impose undue complexity and cost on retirees and workers? How could this complexity be reduced?

Q5.10 The Age Pension serves two roles, as a safety‑net for individuals who are unable to sufficiently save for their retirement and as an income supplement for many individuals who do save. What should be the role for the Age Pension and means testing in a future retirement income system and what impact does this have on its sustainability into the future?

Q5.11 In what ways does retirement income policy affect workforce participation decisions and what, if any, changes might reduce disincentives to work? Does the sustainability and cost of the retirement income system affect the workforce decisions of younger generations of workers?

Q5.12 What impact could financial intermediation have on the effectiveness of retirement income policy?

Q5.13 The cost of providing health and aged care to older Australians is currently met by government through the health sector. Should retirement income policy take into account projected increases in health costs for older Australians? If so, what would be the most effective mechanism and how might the transition to such a system be achieved?

Key messages in submissions

While supporting the three pillars system, many submissions propose changes, such as increasing the level of compulsory saving and altering the way the pillars are integrated.

Many submissions discuss the effect of the ageing population and the need to decrease the disincentives for older Australians to remain in the workforce.

Many submissions consider that the retirement income system will need to better deal with the risk associated with people outliving their assets. A common solution is requiring individuals to take all or part of their superannuation as a guaranteed income for life.

Access to concessions is raised in many submissions, in particular: greater deductibility of contributions; the length of time individuals can make superannuation contributions; and the treatment of non‑superannuation income of members of taxed and untaxed funds.