The Australian Government is planning to distribute one-off cash payments of $250 to pensioners to help them with the cost-of-living pressures.
Government pensions and allowances are the number one source of income for millions of retirees across Australia. However, it is not clear if the payment will be delivered to anyone on part-pension or only those who qualify for a full pension.
The one-off payment being discussed of $250 is designed to ensure the cash bonus is not so generous that it puts pressure on inflation.
Last month Josh Frydenberg outlined that the cost-of-living relief is a top priority and is planning to assist low income earners.
“I understand that prices have been going up. And my focus right now is to address those cost-of-living pressures,’’ says Federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg.
Josh Frydenberg revealed he has relatives who are living on the pension and he accepts that “prices are high”.
“Firstly, we are focusing on low- and middle-income earners. And that’s important with the cost-of-living pressures. You will see that on budget night. We’re going to look in this budget at how we can provide temporary income support, which doesn’t overstimulate the economy that actually tries to alleviate some of the pressures,” says Federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg.
Furthermore, Josh Frydenberg is considering a temporary cut to the 44-cent fuel excise that could deliver immediate relief to motorists.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison outlining that “we’re very conscious of the cost of living impacts, particularly caused by the war in Europe, which has obviously driven petrol prices (up) very significantly,’’ says Prime Minister Scott Morrison.
“We know that people are feeling that. We know that it won’t go forever, spikes in petrol prices, but we know they’re having a real impact on people right now. What we’ll seek to do in this budget is to provide some cost-of-living relief. We’ll do that in a number of ways,” continued Mr. Morrison.
The Australian Government Is Being Encouraged To Put a $5 Million Cap on Super Balances
The Australian Government is being urged to put a $5 million limit on the balance of superannuation accounts which are in the name of an Australian worker.
The recommendations are being made by asset management firm Mercer, the firm also wants to force all Australians aged over 75 to draw down their super assets. They believe that having a cap on a superannuation balance should be justified for the sake of fairness, sustainability and equality.
Mercer believe that its recommendations will be beneficial in helping address inequality in Australia’s super system that it argued had an inherent bias towards high-income earners.
According to figures published by the Retirement Income Review outlined that the total number Australian workers who have a super balance that exceeds $5 million total stands at over 11,000 individuals. Mercer wants Australian workers to have their balance below the proposed $5 million cap by the time they reach the age of 70 or 75.
To prepare Australian workers for this change, Mercer believes that it would be appropriate for a three-year transition period to undertaking to make sure that the sale of assets that are not able to be sold quickly.
“We know that the biggest beneficiaries of the current super tax concessions are in fact those that need it the least – high-income earners. While there has been no shortage of commentary that lower-income earners need greater concessions, we must find a way for reforms to be financially sustainable and place no added financial strain on the federal budget,” says Mercer senior partner Dr David Knox.
Under the asset management group’s bold proposal, all Australian workers would also be forced to draw down their super assets at a minimum rate once they reach 75.
“Currently, there is no requirement for individuals to draw down their super assets during retirement, outside of what’s placed in a tax-exempt pension product, capped at $1.7 million. This means that most of the investment income from these assets is subject to just 15 per cent tax. That’s less than the lowest personal income tax rate,” says Dr. Knox.