Toss out the rule book on tax planning and start again

[Krusty the Klown]

Hmmm.

I'm unemployed and can access my super at 59. What happens if they increase access age to 67? Potentially, I have 8 years between 59 and 67 living in poverty on the dole whilst waiting for my super access date to arrive. What's the point of that? Hoping I'll get a job soon as only 46 now, and a bit early to take forced retirement, particularly with three young kids.

But lots of people are on the scrap heap at 60 employment wise - it does not make sense to make them wait to 67 to access super.

I agree, but that doesn't mean they won't do it anyway, they are more thinking about how they have to fund welfare. So if they make us work longer then we also pay more taxes.

LOL - I am a soft assed accountant

Me too!!!!

Ever thought about hanging out a shingle Gooner?

 

[gooner]

I agree, but that doesn't mean they won't do it anyway, they are more thinking about how they have to fund welfare. So if they make us work longer then we also pay more taxes.

You are probably right. The stupid thing is that I have enough in my super right now for retiring at 59 without putting in any more money. And yet potentially I could end up being poor for most of my 60's due to not being able to access it and then flush with cash at age 67, when I suddenly get access to it. And reality is that for a lot of people, their health has started to deteriorate by the time they hit 67, so it can be too late to enjoy it.

Me too!!!!

Ever thought about hanging out a shingle Gooner?

Started in Chartered and done fairly specialised work in banking for the last 15 years, so skills are not a great fit for doing general accounting work. Would need to get my tax skills up quite a few levels as IMHO that is what most are looking for when they see an accountant. I'm also fairly laid back, so I think being an employee probably suits me better than running my own business. There again, never say never, have to see how the job search goes first. Got a decent payout from my employer so fortunately no worries on the money front for quite a while.

 

[Julia]

Do you really think they will implement this one?

that would be incredibly unpopular, unfair and retrogressive, imo

I think they will, progressively, but there will be the same loopholes and exclusions as apply now.

Hmmm.

I'm unemployed and can access my super at 59. What happens if they increase access age to 67? Potentially, I have 8 years between 59 and 67 living in poverty on the dole whilst waiting for my super access date to arrive. What's the point of that? Hoping I'll get a job soon as only 46 now, and a bit early to take forced retirement, particularly with three young kids.

But lots of people are on the scrap heap at 60 employment wise - it does not make sense to make them wait to 67 to access super.

Hope something turns up for you soon, gooner, that's really difficult for you.
You're too young to start 'retirement' yet.

You are probably right. The stupid thing is that I have enough in my super right now for retiring at 59 without putting in any more money. And yet potentially I could end up being poor for most of my 60's due to not being able to access it and then flush with cash at age 67, when I suddenly get access to it. And reality is that for a lot of people, their health has started to deteriorate by the time they hit 67, so it can be too late to enjoy it.

Ah, but by that time medical science will have advanced still further and will unwisely be keeping us alive even longer, so the pension age will be pushed further and further out. Maybe not.

I'm pretty sure it's possible to get full access to your super at preservation age if you can demonstrate you had to stop work for medical reasons.
Might be something to investigate if you felt so inclined.

Best of luck, gooner.

 

[gooner]

Hope something turns up for you soon, gooner, that's really difficult for you.
You're too young to start 'retirement' yet.

Thanks Julia. Am actually enjoying the time off with the children - are 4, 2 and 2 months so lots of stuff to do with them. And being home most of the time makes it a lot easier stress wise on my wife - three children under 5 are pretty hard work. I know that retrenchment can hit people pretty hard, but it was actually a desired outcome for me due to some major differences with my employer, so I'm still very positive, despite the slow search for work.

Also have time to do more company research, which has been put to good use in the market.

 

[Krusty the Klown]

Ah, but by that time medical science will have advanced still further and will unwisely be keeping us alive even longer, so the pension age will be pushed further and further out. Maybe not.

I'm pretty sure it's possible to get full access to your super at preservation age if you can demonstrate you had to stop work for medical reasons.
Might be something to investigate if you felt so inclined.

You can access your super before preservation age in full if you qualify as being totally permanently disabled - ie can never work again.

And reality is that for a lot of people, their health has started to deteriorate by the time they hit 67, so it can be too late to enjoy it.

very true

Started in Chartered and done fairly specialised work in banking for the last 15 years, so skills are not a great fit for doing general accounting work. Would need to get my tax skills up quite a few levels as IMHO that is what most are looking for when they see an accountant. I'm also fairly laid back, so I think being an employee probably suits me better than running my own business. There again, never say never, have to see how the job search goes first. Got a decent payout from my employer so fortunately no worries on the money front for quite a while.

Yes there is too many specialties these days