Speaking on Sky News today (24 April), Hanson-Young said the Greens have “been back and forth” with the government over this piece of legislation.
“In the new parliament, of course, we will be pushing for making sure that there is a fairer share of these things,” she said. “In a minority government we will negotiate with Labor to make things better, to make them deliver on their promises and to keep them honest.”
When asked about the taxing of unrealised gains, Hanson-Young added: “You need to look at this through the lens of what’s fair across the board”.
“People who have … millions and millions of dollars in superannuation being able to have special tax settings versus … the rest of the population who are struggling and worried about what their super balance is going to look like at retirement, is there even going to be enough in there,” she said.
“My focus is everyday hardworking Australians wondering if there will actually be enough money in the bank, and that’s the bulk of workers. The people who are retiring on $2 million or $3 million is small.”
Interestingly, asked about his thoughts on what Hanson-Young had to say, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he would not bend to pressure.
On the other side of the aisle, Kevin Hogan, shadow minister for trade, said taxing unrealised gains is an “extremely dangerous policy”.
“Taxing unrealised gains will actually make superannuation in this country an unsafe investment for a lot of Australians,” he said. “This is taxing the mums and dads of Australia who are trying to save for their retirement.”
Analysis from an industry group, which asked to remain anonymous, revealed this week that if the Division 296 tax is lowered to $2 million, it would impact more than 1.8 million Australians.
The Australian reported that the analysis, based on modelling using ASIC’s Moneysmart calculator and data from the ATO, revealed 47,860 people aged between 55 and 59 will pay 30 per cent total tax on their super earnings and unrealised capital gains if the threshold is lowered.
Peter Burgess, chief executive of the SMSF Association, said although he had not seen the analysis he had “no reason to dispute the figures”.
“If the threshold is reduced, many more people will be impacted,” he said.
“I’m not surprised the Greens would propose this reduction, and if the polls are right, we are heading towards a minority Labor government and the Greens’ position on this tax is very relevant,” Burgess said.
Looking st this from outside the square, with Chalmer’s aim also to air the current superannuation system in the general community, maybe its time to think about winding superannuation down?
At the end of the day, there are many that work diligently to save with an eye on their retirement to be as self-sufficient as possible and not wanting to worry about finances overly in their golden years, those that as soon as they retire want to withdraw as much as they can to pay off a mortgage, go on holidays, get a new car and new furniture, then get a pension, and those that just live for the day and don’t think about it until they reach their golden years, possibly/probably with nothing much saved, as they only saved the minimum and lived a life of travel and fun with not much thought of the future.
If all that is left at the end of the day is a honey pot for the government, why are we bothering? People will still need financial advisors – I can’t see that changing. There won’t be billions/trillions to manage, but also not billions/trillions for the government to eye as their own, creating draconian law that passes to suit their purposes and make any theft completely legal.
I don’t know about you, but this whole exercise has been terribly depressing and disheartening.
It appears that many just want a simple life with the government handing out funds along the way and for those that wanted to look after themselves, they are now facing one of the biggest threats to their independence as thinking is moving so far to the left, that everyone wants the government to look after them.
Covid made so many not want to work. With handouts and WFH, or not being able to work at all during Covid but getting government assistance (as they should have because that’s what governments should be there for – to help when people cannot help themselves), productivity is at it lowest. And everyone expects more from less – hence why our superannuation funds are just too tempting.
We are in the minority and hardly anyone cares. They care only for us to pay the highest taxes of anyone and for us to pay way more than our fair share. I feel like all I am is a slave to the government. Sorry.
Sorry – I feel deflated. What’s the point anymore of working hard? This is not what Australia is anymore.
Concerning times.
So Albo says he’s pro-aspiration. So taxing nothing which is what Div 296, is Albanese’s idea of being pro-aspirational. There is no hope left in this country if that his idea. No hope with Labor. He is for success until he deems you too successful – then you’re left behind. $3m is the cut-off folks for being too successful. After that you’re stripped of your hard-earned savings and left behind. Watch out for the flood gates tgat this will open. He showed all of us that he is a liar and can’t be trusted.
Albo – PLEASE STOP THE ROT. Your treasurer created this mess – tell him to let it go. He wanted it aired – it got his wish. Enough is enough. This is our money that we sacrificed during our working lives and worked hard to look after ourselves. It was a fanciful formula based on nonsense. It has been aired and pulled apart as the affront for which it is.
We already pay most of the taxation from individual revenue. This is not your money or anyone else’s to split and divvy up as they wish. It is not. Stop the rot! Enough is enough!
Please, no more grief on this issue. Taxing nothing tangible is nothing short of disgusting.
Albanese has not said a word against this Greens proposal, confirming that he will support it if required to form minority Labor government. No Treasurer would speak against a new tax. If legislated, it will be a bonanza for financial advisors to ensure it won’t raise anything like the tax Labor/Greens/Treasury think it will. Obvious workaround: geared property outside super, raising house prices for those mostly young voters and future FHBs who vote Green, implicitly supporting the Greens anti-semitism, anti-capitalism and anti-Western liberal democracy. Good luck with that.
Of course the watermelons would love to redistribute wealth from those trying to look after their retirement and staying off the Aged Pension to those lazy bludgers who do bugger all and waste what they get on tattoos and whatever and don’t give a bugger about their superannuation.
ok if you want to do that then opting out of super should then be an option for those under 60. Bear in mind that super is merely deferred wages, so what would otherwise go into super would then be taken as wages and taxed at the individuals marginal rate.
Why have your savings tied up in an idealogical and political football.
Hanson-Young – not a clue and still totally deluded about this issue! Along with the rest of the Greens – economic neanderthals all.