Despite submissions from various industry bodies, associations, and individuals highlighting the unintended consequences of certain key measures in the bill, the Economics Legislative Committee’s report on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Better Targeted Superannuation Concessions and Other Measures) Bill 2023 [Provisions] and Superannuation (Better Targeted Superannuation Concessions) Imposition Bill 2023 [Provisions] [May 2024] remained unchanged from previous drafts. It is now slated to proceed to the Lower House for consideration.
The 106-page report said that “without appropriate targeting, superannuation tax concessions disproportionately benefit Australians with very large TSBs at a significant cost to the federal budget”.
“The committee welcomes that tax concessions will continue for all superannuants to encourage the contribution to superannuation balances to deliver income in retirement,” it said.
The committee added the changes to the legislation are consistent with the original intent of the superannuation system – to provide all Australians with a sustainable and comfortable income in their retirement.
It said “the minimal impact that these changes will have to the majority of superannuants”, citing that the changes would apply to only 80,000, or approximately 0.5 per cent, of all superannuation account holders.
The committee acknowledged the various opinions expressed by inquiry participants regarding the indexation of the $3 million threshold. However, it said that it is “appropriate for the Parliament to be responsible for setting this threshold, which is a common feature of the tax system.”
On the taxation of unrealised capital gains, the committee stated it understands views shared by inquiry participants but believes, on the balance of evidence, that the approach taken in the bill is “designed to be applied consistently across all superannuation funds in a sector-neutral way, making it the most appropriate way to reduce compliance burden and costs to funds and their members”.
“The committee also highlights evidence that the taxation of unrealised capital gains is not unknown to the Australian tax system,” it said.
It continued that measures in the bill provide taxpayers 84 days to meet tax liability, considerably longer than the standard 21-day period, and that interest charged on outstanding division 296 tax debts will be lower than the general rate for unpaid debts.
In response to concerns that the taxation of unrealised capital gains may present difficulties for account holders with a high proportion of illiquid assets, the committee said there is evidence that all superannuation trustees have an obligation to keep sufficient liquidity within their account to meet their APRA obligations.
I suspect the majority of super members with over 3m would have gone along with the extra tax on the proportional INCOME that represented the amount attributed above 3m as the government suggested when they first floated the idea. It is the stupid and unreasonable change from the original proposal to tax unrealised capital gains that is the problem. It may result it the recenting of the act at the next election. A 2m or 3m non indexed cap will ultimately destroy self funded superannuation for workers starting now and wanting to retire in 50 years time. Simple dumb economics on the part of the politicians desperate for short term funds and an ALP favouring funding from industry funds via union donations.
They need the funds to balance their budget, No fairness comes into it. remember they wanted to stop negative gearing and got booted at the next election. No this, at least they can be almost certain not many blue collar workers will be caught.
Still just a cash grab same as everything else. Excise going up all the time. A tax indexed to inflation ensures inflation.
How profoundly disappointing. It was always clear that the government was driven by ideological motives, but I never imagined that they could treat this sector with such contempt. They have listened to nothing and made no changes, even to the patently silly things.
Just an echo from Treasury, unfortunately.
Can only assume, despite the enormous efforts to build their understanding, they have “not got it”