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

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

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.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

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.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

Sponsors

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.