There's a new push on now for slowly raising the preservation age in private superannuation from 60 years to 65 years. This would be for people born after 1965.
If it happened, I assume it would increase in the same way as 55-60yrs; one year more for each year born after 1960. For example with me I was born in 1962 (2 years after 1960) and so my preservation age when I can freely access my super is 57. Someone born in 1963 it would be 58. And so on until it reaches 60.
However for nearly half of all people who retire between 45-70yrs old do so involuntarily. They're forced into it by ill health or redundancy (in my case both).
This is from the new report out from the Productivity Commission into retirement. Buried in volume two. Page 211.
In effect the preservation age is meaningless. People like me have to live off something. If we can't access our super we're forced to rely completely on gov benefits (which we've paid tax for BTW).
My point is that cutting off access to private super for another 5 years until you're 65, then nearly half of those 60-65 people will be having to rely completely on the gov for money when they retire involuntarily. Whereas before they could use their private super in an income stream, maybe in some cases not needing any gov assistance at all. It may well end up costing the gov much more to increase the age to 65, saving nothing.
Update: apparently god doesn't want you to retire. Just ask the christians :s
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment