So Cynical - is that figure $488K the average super at 51? Or something else?
Average of all SMSF accounts...not by age though figures by age bracket would be interesting...also of interest is the fact that SMSF's have over 1 third of all super moneys while representing only 3% of the total number of super accounts....talk about the rich getting richer.
Average of all SMSF accounts...not by age though figures by age bracket would be interesting...also of interest is the fact that SMSF's have over 1 third of all super moneys while representing only 3% of the total number of super accounts....talk about the rich getting richer.
Unless we're talking about the average balance at a particular age group, such a figure is imo pretty meaningless. Obviously someone in their early 20's will not have accumulated as much as someone at or close to retirement.
And to roll your eyes and make a snide remark about the rich getting richer smacks of simple envy.
Because rich people have been taking advantage of the generous tax concessions for many years and by greatly reducing the contribution limits the Govt hopes to levels the playing field somewhat and help the people who need it the most....not greedy rich people who have too much money anyway?
This is the correct answer.
The superannuation system in Australia is basically the lower and middle classes getting fleeced by the financial services industry while the rich exploit super to lower their tax bill. For those who are complaining about the contribution limits there is nothing stopping you from saving for your retirement outside of superannuation.
Exactly.Anyone earning a salary can 'exploit super to lower their tax bill' by making salary sacrifice contributions. I fail to see how it's 'confined to the rich'.
You can establish an SMSF and take matters into their own hands if you are concerned about being fleeced. You don't need a large balance.
Anyone earning a salary can 'exploit super to lower their tax bill' by making salary sacrifice contributions. I fail to see how it's 'confined to the rich'.
You can establish an SMSF and take matters into their own hands if you are concerned about being fleeced. You don't need a large balance.
I accept that not everyone is going to have the capacity to do this, but dispute that it's the majority. I know plenty of people, intelligent, well educated, successful in quite demanding careers, who agree that they should spend some time educating themselves and taking charge of their own financial outcomes, but they just 'don't get round to it'. It is not lack of time. We can always make time for what is important to us.In theory yes, in practice no for most people. Most people have neither the time, skill or knowledge to do so.
No, what I'm suggesting is that sufficient competence to run one's own SF is not that difficult to achieve. There is plenty of education freely available.What you are arguing is that people that are being forced to into a situation (ie super) deserve to be fleeced unless they spend a lot of effort not to be taken advantage of.
Anyone earning a salary can 'exploit super to lower their tax bill' by making salary sacrifice contributions. I fail to see how it's 'confined to the rich'.
This is the correct answer.
The superannuation system in Australia is basically the lower and middle classes getting fleeced by the financial services industry while the rich exploit super to lower their tax bill. For those who are complaining about the contribution limits there is nothing stopping you from saving for your retirement outside of superannuation.
Dude seriously...you cant see how someone on 200K a year has 4 times the potential to pay money into anything when compared to someone on 50K?..you seriously cant see how that works?
There are some dozzy posts getting made in this thread.
Dude seriously...you cant see how someone on 200K a year has 4 times the potential to pay money into anything when compared to someone on 50K?..you seriously cant see how that works?
There are some dozzy posts getting made in this thread.
But like the average person earning $50k, you fail to ask WHY someone is earning $200k and they are only earning $50k.
Might like to ponder that a for a bit over your evening beers, instead of still being at work, or, as in the case of doctors, training for 13 or so years.
This is a red herring, no one is arguing whether people deserve a low or a high income. You have not justified having taxation rules that allow high income earners to lower their tax while not giving the same opportunity to everyone else. You might as well argue that 13 years training and having a high income makes it right for doctors to take kickbacks from pharmaceutical companies.
A person who earns $50k has a tax rate of approx 17% (before government handouts/middle class welfare)
A person who earns 200k has a tax rate of approx 32% (before government levies)
So salary sacrificing at 15% tax means that for $25k the high income earner is effectively paying the same amount of tax on that $25k as the $50k earner.
Some prior posters need a reality check for the real world.
WHERE is this advantageous taxation area??? I fail to see it.
If anything it is unfair for a $200k earner to pay $63k + tax for working more than the person who pays less than $8500 per year.
.... awaiting the "we deserve to be subsidised by high income earners" posts by the middle class welfare posters.
Some people make their own "luck", others whine about it.
A person who earns $50k has a tax rate of approx 17% (before government handouts/middle class welfare)
A person who earns 200k has a tax rate of approx 32% (before government levies)
So salary sacrificing at 15% tax means that for $25k the high income earner is effectively paying the same amount of tax on that $25k as the $50k earner.
Some prior posters need a reality check for the real world.
WHERE is this advantageous taxation area??? I fail to see it.
If anything it is unfair for a $200k earner to pay $63k + tax for working more than the person who pays less than $8500 per year.
.... awaiting the "we deserve to be subsidised by high income earners" posts by the middle class welfare posters.
Some people make their own "luck", others whine about it.
touche , its amazing how many capitalist socialist traders are out there LMAO ... what an oxymoron ...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?