The Retirement Income Review should undertake modelling from an individual member’s perspective over a lifetime to fully capture a member’s interaction with the system, according to PwC.
In a submission to the review, PwC said the model needed to allow for a proportion of taxes paid to be treated as a “contribution” to the retirement incomes system and should also examine cohorts to examine potential intergenerational inequities.
“Much of the current modelling conducted measures the impact on Government finances separately to the outcomes an individual is likely to achieve,” it said.
PwC said this could lead to sub-optimal policy decisions as it did not measure the relative efficiency of saving in retirement in advance (through the superannuation guarantee (SG)) versus contributing on a Pay As You Go (PAYG) basis (through the Age Pension).
“Comparison of the Net Present Value (NPV) of payments in, against benefits received would allow for an improved public debate and could measure:
The submission noted that the panel needed to consider gender, marital status, longevity, health and aged care costs, and accommodation costs (for non-homeowners) when assessing the adequacy of the retirement income system.
“We encourage the Panel to also consider when assessing adequacy:
A member body representing some prominent wealth managers is concerned super funds’ dominance is sidelining small companies in capital markets.
Earlier this month, several Australian superannuation funds fell victim to credential stuffing attacks, which saw a small number of members lose more than $500,000.
Small- to medium-sized funds have become collateral damage in an "imperfect" model for super industry levies, a financial institution has said.
Big business has joined the chorus of opposition against the proposed Division 296 tax.