Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 107

Labor is proposing a complex ‘new tax’

(Editor's background comment: Stuart Forsyth is a former Assistant Deputy Commissioner for the Australian Taxation Office. While at the ATO, his responsibilities in superannuation included managing the active compliance and risk and compliance areas. He left in November 2014 to become a Director of McPherson Super Consulting and SuperIQ. He wrote the following letter to The Australian Financial Review on 24 April 2015 but it was published in a highly abbreviated form. This is the full version provided to Cuffelinks. It's important to know this background because Stuart was at the ATO when the previous version of the Labor Party policy on taxing earnings on super funds in pension phase was considered.

Note the importance of understanding the difference between earnings in pension phase, and pension payments from the fund. The two tax implications are often confused.

A reminder of the Labor Party proposal: "Ensure earnings of more than $75,000 during the retirement phase are taxed at a concessional rate of 15% instead of being tax free.")

______________________________

In your [The Australian Financial Review] headline article on 22 April 2015 there is the following statement: “The reintroduction of tax on earnings, which was abolished by the Howard government in the 2006 budget, would raise about $1.4 billion a year and $9.2 billion over a decade”. This statement is wrong. There has never been a tax on earnings of superannuation funds that are in pension phase. This would in fact be a new tax. It is important that we get the detail right as this affects not only the retirement income of pensioners, but the complexity of what is already a very complex system.

There is some excuse for your correspondent in the fact that the Labor Party seem to be the origin of the error as they say in their Press Release:

“In particular, the tax-free status of all superannuation earnings, introduced by the Howard Government in 2006, disproportionately benefits high income earners and is unsustainable.”

What the Howard government did in 2006/2007 was to make most pension payments received by those over 60 years of age tax free.

When previously in government, the Labor Party proposed a similar change to the current Press Release and industry advised them that it would be complex to administer and impossible to understand at the member level. What they seem to be proposing is a new calculation of a notional share of the taxable income of the fund that could have applied to a member’s account as if it was not in pension phase. This would then be adjusted for capital gains and then aggregated by the ATO. Any liability would somehow be advised to multiple funds and amended potentially on multiple occasions. In other words, this is close to being beyond rational explanation and would create a new and somewhat strange compliance burden. Nothing in superannuation is simple and this policy although it sounds simple would in fact be extremely complex to implement. Costs to implement would be prohibitive both at the Government level and the industry level.

By rushing to announce this recycled policy the Labor Party has locked in behind a poor option when better options exist which would produce less complexity while still meeting the policy outcome of collecting more tax from pensioners with higher balances.

 

Stuart Forsyth is a Director of McPherson Super Consulting and SuperIQ.

 

  •   1 May 2015
  • 5
  •      
  •   
5 Comments
Bill
April 30, 2015

I heard that comment about reintroduction of tax on pension earnings and could not recall for the life of me when that was ever the case. Thanks to Stuart for confirming it was never the case. The fact that Labor doesn't know the difference between tax on earnings within pension phase and tax on pension payments is scary. It's a pretty good retirement system right now. We're lucky to have it with this ageing population crisis looming, but watch the tinkering to make it more complex and further out of reach for the average person.

Damien
April 30, 2015

I recall Bill Shorten making a comment in the last few months of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government that they were either looking at or had introduced legislation that would restrict ongoing changes to the superannuation system.

Stuart Forsyth
May 07, 2015

Damien that was proposed but never put in place. The detail as I recall it was to have custodians that would oversee policy in this area and provide a buffer to knee jerk change. Good idea as it would add certainty especially if we could set some principles.

Leon
April 30, 2015

To me the problem is that the proposed policy clouds investment decisions. For example, if I had a hefty capital gain in a share portfolio and wished to take some profits I may decide against it because to realise the capital gain would push me over the threshold.

Peter Lang
April 30, 2015

Excellent explanation. Thank you. I guess this proposal is highly unlikely to get legislated.

The only sensible change I can see would be to change the superanuation system from taxing contributions and zero tax on pension payments to zero tax on contributions and include pension payments in taxable income like any other income. That’s how Canada does it and it seems much simpler to me.

But I think any change would have to apply prospectively only, not retrospectively. If a significant change is to apply retrospectively, then all defined benefit schemes should be converted to defined contribution schemes and included. The defined contributions schemes should be valued at the member contributions plus earnings on contributions at the long term government bond rate.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

How to shift into pension mode

Are you paying tax by not starting a super pension?

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

Testamentary trusts have secured the CGT exemption

Treasury’s latest CGT reform draft delivers a win for testamentary trusts and deceased estates, exempting estate-derived gains from the 30% floor. However, questions on death and divorce rollovers remain unresolved.

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

Latest Updates

Planning

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

Superannuation

There's a reason why your super is locked up until your 60s

For decades, it seemed settled. Then one controversial idea reignited a debate that could reshape the financial future of millions. The real question isn’t who’s right or wrong, but whether a long-held assumption deserves another look.

Property

The housing slide could become a crash

House prices are sliding across Australia, yet the most dangerous ingredient for a housing crash is still missing. If job losses surge amid growing economic risks, today's correction could become a historic property downturn.

Retirement

Under-retiring: The greatest retirement risk in a generation

Two retirees. Similar savings. Completely different lives. New research from Challenger reveals why some Australians confidently spend in retirement while others hold back and the overlooked factor shaping retirement decisions.

Five risks to watch in markets

Things you may often hear are: a recession is around the corner, markets are overpriced, the AI sector is about to flop at any moment. It’s like the never-ending laundry pile that sits in my house, it never really disappears.

Investment strategies

Do you qualify as ‘rich’?

What does it mean to be 'rich'? For something so universally desired, it is surprisingly difficult to define. That ambiguity creates a challenge for investors and raises a bigger question about what financial success really looks like.

Investment strategies

If you’re worried about your bond portfolio, you’re missing the point

Most investors think they know what bonds are for. But when markets turn volatile, a surprising misunderstanding can lead to costly decisions. Here’s the overlooked lesson that could change how you view your portfolio.

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.