Appropriate comment that the Govt needs to compromise Mike. Now I know all the Political Party's and probably all the independents currently in Parliament support the $1.6m limit on Super, but I've been trying to make the point for some time now, that $1.6m is appropriate for people who own a house (or 10)! But some of us don't own a house and choose to pay rent of maybe $50k a year for a decent house in which to live personally. So our earnings on $1.6m, in some years, and last year is a reasonable example, cover our rent and bare living costs. Now I know I could spend my Super assets and buy a house and then claim a Govt pension, but surely wouldn't the Govt be better off encouraging me to not claim a Govt pension and instead allow non home owners a reasonable amount extra, say 400-500k in addition to the $1.6m limit?