A poll by YouGov, commissioned by the institute, found that 52 per cent of Australian voters supported the proposed tax, with just 26 per cent opposed. The strongest support for the proposed tax was from people between 25 to 49 years, as well as Labor and independent voters.
YouGov conducted the national poll of 1,535 voters between 6–11 June 2025 and said the poll was compliant with the Australian Polling Council’s requirements.
The survey also found that only one in five people expected a reduction in tax concessions for people with more than $3 million in superannuation to impact their income, and only 6 per cent of this group expected a major impact.
People over the age of 50 were the most likely to expect no impact, while people aged between 18 to 34 were the most unsure about what impact this may have on them.
The survey also revealed that half of Australian voters believed that the government collecting an extra $2.7 billion per year by reducing tax concessions for people with more than $3 million in superannuation would make no difference to who they vote for. Just under 20 per cent expected this to make them more likely to vote for Labor at the next election.
People aged 18 to 34 showed the highest likelihood to vote Labor at the next election off the back of this change, while people in South Australia and Coalition voters showed the strongest scores of being less likely to support Labor at the next election based on this proposal.
The poll also found that nearly three in four (72 per cent) Australian voters believed the main purpose of Australia’s superannuation system is to fund their retirement. Over half (53 per cent) believe that it was also there to reduce the reliance on the aged pension.
People aged 18 to 24 showed a higher likelihood to believe Australia’s superannuation system was there to create an inheritance for dependents (34 per cent) and to reduce the amount of tax paid on their income (21 per cent).
Australia Institute executive director Richard Denniss said the results of the poll are “not surprising” considering most people are well below the $3 million threshold.
“Despite this, people tend to overestimate the likelihood they will be affected by the change,” he said.
“The reality is only one in 200 have super balances above the level that attracts the higher tax rate.”
He added it was interesting that independent voters were the most supportive of Labor’s proposal.
“The polling suggests that, overall, the policy is a net vote-winner for Labor, especially among the young.”
“Yet after an election where record numbers of young people and women turned away from the Liberal Party, the opposition is choosing to make a big fuss about an issue that overwhelmingly affects older, wealthy men. An interesting choice by its newish leader, Sussan Ley.”
The results of the poll, he said, indicated that most people seemed to understand that superannuation was meant to help people have a dignified retirement, not to provide a tax avoidance tool for wealthy people looking to pass on money to their children.
The Austtralian Istitute running a Poll for YouGov !?
And you want people to believe it is “straight” down the middle and free from any BIAS ?
I got a BRIDGE, you might want to buy ?
Because if you believe this Poll, you are either a “true believer”, dyed in the wool labor supporter ( nothing wrong with that, by the wat ) of a truly gullible FOOL when the Labor has a super majority in thr House.
Most serious commentators have said the ISSUS which this so called “INSTITUTE” ignores is that the “method” of taxation is what is MOMUMENTALLY UNSOUND, and breaches the 5 Basic requirements of a sustainable taxation system.
Even The Honerable Paul Keating this !!
The real purpose is to push waelth accumulation out of super into the normal taxation system.
The Treasury, ( what’s his name again ) is now floating increasing taxation on family trusts !!??
Much fun coming our way for better or worse. Great business for all the Taxation Accountants and Lawyers !!
50% of Australians pay no nett tax once transfers (welfare) are considered. You would expect them to applaud taxing everyone else to the hilt, as they will never be called upon to pay tax (beyond GST).
Two things are important before relying on any survey
1) Sample Data – are the candidates aware of the problem = is it a true sample
2) How are the questions drafted – as mentioned above
If the candidates were one of the 80,000 – the ones who will pay the tax to respond – we know the outcome – they don’t mind paying the extra tax if the tax is calculated properly
Lastly, the word on the street is: monies over $3M has left and is leaving SMSF space – mostly been given away to kids to pay off their home loans. This means that the whole plan of getting more tax has backfired on labor
One by not collecting 15% tax on the amounts above pension phase and secondly once the home loan is paid out – banks will earn less income and will pay less corporate tax.
This is the response from the so called “Rich Australians” – Take That !!
This is what happens – when Govt. do not listen….
So funds have already been withdrawn and given to their kids to pay their mortgages. I told everybody so and they are listening. One guy even called it tax evasion which is rubbish. I also said that Labor has a habit of killing the goose that laid the golden egg. This country is run by economic imbeciles and the opposition is no better. I would have said the country is being run by The Three Stooges but that would be disrespectful to Moe, Larry, Curly, Shemp, Curly-Joe and Joe.
1535 ill informed responses….
Australia loves jealousy tax.
When you issue a survey the wording of the questions is critical.
If general, ie “Do you support taxing super accounts with more than $3million” might be supported.
If specific, ie “Do you support (a) taxing super accounts with more than $3million; (b) including unrealised capital gains in the taxable amount; and (c) maintaining the $3million limit unindexed so that the % of Australians paying higher tax on super will steadily increase until a majority will be paying the higher tax” would make more people think more deeply about the issue.
Retirees with defined benefit pensions do not have an actual super account balance. A formula is used “Pension income x 16” to calculate an implicit balance. This means that the average super return is assumed to be 6.25%.
So $3million x 6.25% = $187,500. Super account incomes including realised capital gains in aggregate above this could be taxed at 30% on the excess. A normal “progressive” tax regime just like current personal income tax. Nothing wrong with this, but taxing unrealised gains and allowing the indexed Transfer Balance Cap to inexorably rise to above the $3million unindexed limit is designed to simply wipe out the benefit of saving for retirement. The result will be that no-one will make personal contributions, only compulsory employer contributions will continue. Substantially more people will be eligible and will seek Government Old Age Pensions and eventually the cost will exceed the additional tax collected.
Consider the wise words of the fictional Forrest Gump: “Stupid is as stupid does”.
Well put!
Eye roll – so 1535 voters’ position is worth all of this statistical analysis? That’s why we are in this mess. There’s Chalmers “mandate” right there.
Give me a break.
The “wealthy” are now the New Age “slaves”. Forget about aspiration in this country. We’ll keep hitting you over the head until you have nothing more left to give.