Labor justified its franking credits policy based on the cost rising 10-fold since 2001 and heading towards unaffordable levels. But were the numbers right and would the savings ever have eventuated?
Tag Archives | policy changes
Rarely do we go into an election with such contrasting policies from the major parties, and no more so than in superannuation. The nation’s decision on 18 May will have a big impact on retirement savings.
In the 2019/2020 Federal Budget, the Government made few changes to superannuation rules to assist retirement planning.
The two major political parties have opposing views on whether SMSFs should be allowed to borrow, but what is the clear argument that there should be a limit on SMSF opportunities?
Amazingly, SMSF pensioners invested in Australian shares will be much worse off under the Labor franking policy than in the ‘bad old days’ when their pensions were taxed.
This week we have a short survey on your attitudes to Labor’s franking credits proposal. It should take less than two minutes to complete, unless you want to have a rant.
Investors whose income may be hit by Labor’s franking credits proposal can reallocate away from fully franked dividends to other investments to maintain their income, but it will involve different risks.
Where once it was difficult to differentiate between the superannuation policies of the two major political parties, the 2019 Federal Election will deliver some stark choices for voters.
One person’s unjust retrospective policy change is another’s overdue and necessary reform. Did people objecting about unfavourable policy retrospectivity complain when they benefitted from a retrospective change?
The 1 July 2017 changes have caused huge shifts in SMSF assets out of pension mode, and Labor’s proposed franking credit refunds policy is a further hit to self-funded retirees.
When rules are changed, behaviour changes as well. A future Labor government should not be surprised when SMSF trustees and self-funded retires minimise the impact of the removal of imputation credit refunds.
There were two camps in the ‘leave’ campaign, and the one negotiating with the EU should be pro-immigration. While this increases the chance of the UK retaining access to the common market, will the other camp allow flexibility?
In recent months, both sides of politics have explained what they mean by ‘retrospective’ changes to policy, and their new superannuation rules fall into their own definitions.
Among the Budget’s proposed super changes, little has been said about the broad impact of the new transition to retirement rules. Those who intend working beyond the age of 60 may now pay tax on their entire balance.
SMSFs transferring funds to a tax-free pension account under the proposed cap of $1.6 million will not need to sell or segregate assets from an accumulation account for the same member.
Although the proposed changes to superannuation might be worryingly detrimental to retirement outcomes, super will remain the most tax-effective retirement saving vehicle for the majority of people.