Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 254

Budget's focus on retirement’s next challenge

Changes announced in the 2018 Federal Budget take us a step forward in ensuring the superannuation system achieves what it was set up to do: provide greater security of income for people in retirement while reducing the burden on taxpayers of supporting retirees.

The Budget promised a new retirement income framework which aims to boost living standards for retirees and expand the options available to them by requiring super fund trustees to offer new comprehensive income products.

A framework is needed because our defined contribution system asks individuals to manage financial risks beyond their capability. Despite the complexity involved, Australians have proved reluctant to pay for advice, a prospect that only looks unlikely to diminish given revelations at the Royal Commission.

Help needed when employment income ceases

The irony is retirees have never needed more help managing the heightened risks they face without the security of employment income. These include unfavourable investment returns close to or in retirement (sequencing risk), outliving their savings (longevity risk), loss of purchasing power (inflation risk) and unexpected health and aged care needs (event risk).

Managing these risks involves complicated trade-offs that are highly specific to each member’s circumstances and preferences. Yet most are ill-equipped to do this. And the system is focussed on the accumulation of assets with little support during the drawdown phase.

Compulsory super and default funds were designed to overcome behavioural and other barriers that prevented people from saving. But those biases do not suddenly self-correct when people reach retirement age. After all, having been in default vehicles throughout their working lives, why would people suddenly be able to switch on and navigate even more complex variables?

The answer is to develop our contributions-based system so that it delivers outcomes akin to a defined benefits framework designed around individual needs. At a minimum, a mass-customised solution will take account of each member’s age, gender, health status and debt, while providing couples the option of a reversionary benefit. To ensure income stability over retirement, the solution also should take into account pension entitlements.

Given limited access to financial advice, trustees will need improved products and a scalable process to guide or nudge members towards better retirement outcomes. To ensure members’ interests are served, super funds will have to make major investments in governance, people, systems and technology, including decision support systems.

It’s arguable that our intensely regulated industry, conceived via government mandate, lacks the required level of innovation, entrepreneurialism and vision to meet the needs of the bulge of baby boomers now entering retirement. So, again, there is a role for the government to facilitate market development by setting the rules of the game.

The Budget is a step in this direction

The Budget means superannuation fund trustees will be required to consider the retirement income needs of their members and develop a strategy to help members achieve their retirement income objectives.

Alongside the requirement to offer comprehensive income products, the government also announced new means testing rules that remove important impediments to development of new income stream products to better manage longevity and sequencing risk. Not only are such solutions needed for disengaged super fund members, they may also provide an escape route for SMSF trustees looking for a set-and-forget secure income stream that kicks in during their advanced years.

For the nation, these changes represent a substantial, long-term investment in making our market work more effectively, making our retirement income system more sustainable and making the lives of millions of Australians better.

The CSRI Leadership Forum on 31 May 2018 will bring together leaders in public policy, industry and academia for detailed discussions about what these changes mean and how to take them forward.

 

Patricia Pascuzzo is Founder and Executive Director of the Committee for Sustainable Retirement Incomes (CSRI), an independent, non-partisan and non-profit think tank which is holding its leadership forum in Canberra on 30-31 May 2018 https://csri.org.au/events/2018-leadership-forum/

 

  •   17 May 2018
  •      
  •   

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

How decumulation in retirement differs from accumulation

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

Latest Updates

Exchange traded products

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Taxation

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Retirement

Three considerations before reshaping your legacy plan

Many retirees hope to leave a legacy. Proposed trust tax reforms could force families to rethink. The question is not how much to leave behind, but whether today's inheritance plans will still make sense as circumstances change.

Investment strategies

Why experienced investors still get markets wrong

Retirement is approaching. Markets are noisy. And every headline seems to demand action. The biggest investment risk isn't fear, greed or market volatility, it often arrives disguised as research and sensible risk management.

Shares

Why pay more for less?

Conditions were stacked in favour of professional investors in 2026. Most still fell short, raising questions about where investors should look for value. Meanwhile, an alternative strategy continued to make its case.

Investment strategies

Bleeding air out of the bubble

Equity valuations have fallen sharply over the past year, yet investors have largely been spared the volatility and losses that typically accompany a de-rating. What explains this unusually orderly reset? Here are five key drivers.

Strategy

Has AI gone rogue?

We worry about AI becoming conscious. But what if consciousness isn't the issue? The more unsettling possibility is a machine capable of pursuing objectives relentlessly, without motives, emotions, or awareness of any kind.

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.