Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 6

Is a ‘transition to retirement’ pension worthwhile?

In an earlier Cuffelinks article (Edition 2: The superannuation essentials), I covered the basic concepts of superannuation and its tax advantages. One of the breakthrough government initiatives was to allow people to access super whilst still working. This has created three broad financial planning strategies:

  • work less hours, and top up your lost income by drawing down from a pre-retirement pension
  • continue working full-time, but restructure your salary and super to give the optimum split that maintains your after tax income whilst tax effectively boosting your retirement savings
  • keep working full-time, maximise your salary sacrifice and convert the bulk of your super to the pension phase to avoid paying tax on performance returns.

The attraction of the pension strategies depends on the amount you have in super and your PAYG marginal tax rate, and crucially, whether you have reached your preservation age. For people born before 1 July 1960 the preservation age is 55. People born after 1 July 1964 have to wait until age 60. There is a sliding scale preservation age for people born between those two dates - either 56, 57, 58 or 59. This is one of the many complexities caused by ‘grandfathering’ where governments try not to disadvantage existing superannuants.

Strategy number one is what the government envisioned when they allowed people to access their super whilst still working. The other two were created by the financial planning and wealth management industry which spotted an opportunity to save their clients tax.

There are a number of iterations of the transition to retirement strategy. In its purest form it comprises three steps:

  • converting most of your super to the pension phase
  • increasing the amount you salary sacrifice
  • drawing down a monthly payment from your pension.

In this way you are creating sufficient after-tax income, but because of the preferential tax rates in super and pension, you are better off from a tax perspective.

I say ‘most of your super’ because having set up a pension you can’t add your future super contributions to it. Consequently, you have to leave a small amount in your super account.

The transition to retirement initiative has opened the door for many people who are still working full-time. Some people do not need to maintain their income as they have sufficient to cover living expenses and emergencies. They are already maximising their salary sacrifice contributions, and are looking for ways to save more tax. For these people, the potential benefit of a pre-retirement pension has nothing to do with maintaining income. The attraction is that superannuation assets in a pension pay no tax on performance returns, whereas in accumulation the tax can be up to 15%.

Furthermore, although it’s paying no tax, a pension fund can still claim back its franking credits. For example, if the fund receives a dividend of $700 from an Australian company with a franking credit of $300, it will pay no tax on the $700 dividend but receive a tax refund for the $300 franking credit, giving a total cash return of $1,000.

So should everyone be converting their super to a pension once they reach their preservation age? Well, in at least two circumstances, the benefits significantly outweigh the disadvantages:

  • you are aged 60+
  • you are exclusively using non concessional contributions to start the pension.

In both these instances there’s no tax on pension payments or the performance returns in the pension. The only downside is that legislation decrees that you have to withdraw between 3% and 10% of the pension balance each year, so you are lowering your eventual retirement nest egg. But this is not a major problem as you can simply put it back into super tax free (provided you do not exceed your $450,000 non concessional limit over three years). The minimum pension payment rises to 4% next year so you need to take that into consideration.

If you are between 55 and 59 it all depends on a complex set of variables – your super balance, the split between tax free and taxable component, performance returns, the split between income and capital growth, the amount of share transactions, the pension payment amount and your marginal tax rate.

Let’s say you have $300,000 in super, totally invested in cash deposits that deliver 4.5% interest and your marginal tax rate is 38.5% including Medicare. The contributions in the fund comprise 100% employer and salary sacrificed contributions (to use the industry jargon, it is 100% taxable component). If you leave it in super, the interest earned is $13,500 which is taxed at 15% ($2,025).

If you convert the super to the pension phase, you will have to withdraw 4% in the 2014 tax year ($12,000). As the money is 100% taxable component you will pay 23.5% tax on the pension (38.5% less 15% tax rebate) which is $2,820. So in this example you are $795 worse off by converting to a pension, and you’ve taken $12,000 out of a concessionally taxed environment.

Once you start increasing the return, the position starts to favour the pension option, but there may be a joker in the pack if your super fund invests in a managed fund with active share trading. It is common for a fund manager to sell half the companies in the portfolio over the course of a financial year. This often creates realised capital gains that are taxed at 10% in the accumulation phase, but not in the pension phase. This activity could well swing the decision, but it’s very difficult to assess.

The variable that really changes the ball game is the split between taxable component and tax free component. The tax free component comprises the after tax contributions you have made to super. Let's say the split between taxable and tax free component is 50/50. Keeping the other assumptions constant, there’s still not much saving with $300,000 invested in cash deposits with a 4.5% return. But if you either increase the balance or the return, the picture changes significantly. With a balance of $300,000 and a return of 7%, you are $1,740 a year better off converting your super to a pension. With a balance of $1 million and a return of 4.5%, you are $1,950 better off.

Can’t be bothered with the hassle? Well, a 55-year-old couple with $1 million each in super which delivers an average return of 8% per annum could pay an unnecessary $73,000 more in tax over the five year period by waiting till they reach 60 to convert their super to a pension.

So my advice is to get out the calculator, or better still, consult a financial adviser who has access to modelling software. You may get an early Christmas present from the Tax Office.

 

  •   12 March 2013
  • 3
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Does an American retirement rule work for Australians?

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

When losses in super become irreplaceable

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

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?

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.

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.

The retirement scorecard: how many of these questions can you answer?

From the maths of retirement, estimating spending and picking the right asset allocation to survive a poor decade, here are the questions every retiree – current or future – should be able to answer for themselves.

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.

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.

Latest Updates

Testamentary trusts: Treasury has picked the wrong reading

A decades-old estate planning tool has survived one tax crackdown only to be caught by another. The surprise isn't who the reform is targeting, but who could end up paying the price for drafting choices made years ago.

Latest from Morningstar

Does an American retirement rule work for Australians?

The 4% rule has survived decades of scrutiny, but Australia's retirement system changes the equation in ways most overlook. Before accepting or rejecting this rule of thumb, it pays to understand what really drives retirement outcomes.

Shares

Glencore lands on the ASX. Should BHP and Rio shareholders switch?

A coal-heavy miner with governance concerns isn't the obvious choice for investors. Yet, Glencore's ASX listing may offer something BHP and Rio can't. The challenge is working out whether the opportunity outweighs the risks.

Why does the system treat capital gains and losses differently?

Investors are often told not to let tax policy drive their investment decisions. Yet, under the new CGT rules, portfolio construction, volatility and even how assets are owned may have an outsized impact on their final outcome.

Economy

Three common sense reforms that Australia needs

What do frozen bank accounts, mortgage traps and pension penalties have in common? They're all symptoms of a system that makes life much harder. Yet the obvious solutions seem to have escaped the attention of Canberra.

Shares

The hidden cost of government debt for investors

Some of the important effects of rising public debt never make the headlines. Research shows the immediate effects may already be unfolding, influencing corporate behaviour in ways that many investors would never suspect.

Investment strategies

When do fundamentals matter?

Is fundamental investing losing its grip on markets? Investors continue to search for valuation-based explanations for every price move, but the dominant force behind short-term returns may be something else altogether.

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.