The Australian government is considering a radical overhaul of the superannuation system.

A new proposal from the government suggested that retirees' super funds could be used to cover their aged care expenses.

This move is aimed at easing the financial burden on the Commonwealth's budget and ensuring the sustainability of the aged care sector without introducing new taxes.

The proposal is based on a government-commissioned report by the Aged Care Task Force, which indicated that due to the superannuation system, future retirees are likely to be wealthier than previous generations.

'Over the next 20 years, the number of people with superannuation balances at age 85 will grow considerably, with a greater proportion of people having significant funds available,' the report read.

The government has proposed a radical overhaul of the superannuation system. Image source: Shutterstock.

The report suggested that these funds could be better utilised to support individuals' health and aged care costs in retirement.

This shift in policy could have significant implications for Australians planning for retirement.

The task force's findings show that the proportion of people over 65 relying on the aged pension or other income support is projected to decrease by 15 percentage points by the early 2060s, thanks to the growth in superannuation and assets.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has emphasised that the proposal is not intended to penalise hard-working Australians but to create a more sustainable system for the future.

'We'll consider the recommendations, we know that it is a difficult time for people when you have a loved one who requires care who's unable to continue to live at home,' he said.

The report also highlighted the need for the Commonwealth to maintain a significant role in funding aged care services.

It also recommended a robust safety net for those with limited means to meet their costs.

Catholic Health Australia has urged the government to act quickly on the report's recommendations, pointing out the financial strain on most aged care providers and the necessity for responsible reforms to ensure continued investment and quality care.

'With most aged care providers running at a loss, these sensible and responsible reforms are urgently needed so they can continue to invest and provide quality care for all Australians,' CEO Jason Kara said.

'The fairest way to deliver extra funding is to ask people who can afford it to contribute more for their accommodation and living expenses, costs they have covered over their adult lives.'

The Council on the Ageing Australia has also called for ambitious action to address the challenges posed by an ageing population and the growing complexity of aged care needs.

'The conversation about the long-term financial sustainability of aged care is a crucial one, and one which we can't afford to shy away from,' CEO Patricia Sparrow said.

The task force, led by minister Anika Wells, put forward 23 recommendations, all of which are currently under government review.

Key Takeaways

• The government has recently proposed the use of Australians’ superannuation to fund aged care costs to ease the financial pressure on the Commonwealth.
• The government has ruled out introducing a new levy or tax to fund the aged care sector.
• The Aged Care Task Force report indicated that the proportion of people over 65 relying on the aged pension is expected to decline, in part due to better superannuation and asset ownership.
• Prime Minister Anthony Albanese asserted that using superannuation for aged care will make the system sustainable, as the report called for the government to continue playing a significant role in funding aged care services.

Members, what are your thoughts on using superannuation to fund aged care? How do you believe these changes could affect Aussies’ retirement plans? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below.

 

[Robbo3006]

ANd again we' re the ones paying, when they introduced superannuation into the workforce we were half way thru our working lives and had fuk all in there to retire with, especially when some invested in government crap that went broke and took our money without disclosure. Stop life pensions for politicians and make them Work for their money.

 

[JedCorella]

Well said Bill Mcl but I have to say, Alboneasy isn't a c--t, because they are useful

I actually call out Prime moron I'll B Sleazy because he couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the worst PM we've had in decades and that's saying something when you put Scomo, Rudd, Gillard and Turdball in the mix. It is obvious that they live in a different universe and don't care about Australians at all.

 

[AlanQ]

The goverment can stay the hell away from my superannuation i earnt it and I will use it as I see fit .....damn socicilist!

That is the literal opposite definition of a 'socialist'. The whole idea of super was to live off it, that is exhaust it and then if necessary the aged pension. Super is not a tax scheme or a fund to leave as an inheritance. Spend it while you are still capable of enjoying the lifestyle it could provide. Once people reach a certain age, they don't won't to travel for 3mths of the year, more likely to be concerned about facilities to look after (potential) declining health and be close to family and friends. Like the NDIS, the amount being paid out in welfare in this country is out of control. Millennials already think the boomers are the reason for their current situation. Most are the architechs of the own destiny and look for every excuse to blame boomers as it is. Why is there this obsession to leave a small fortune when it will just be frittered away on trips to Bali twice a year or that over sized yank tank that they all seem insistent on driving all potentially courtesy of their parents primarily untouched super fund(s)?

 

[AlanQ]

ANd again we' re the ones paying, when they introduced superannuation into the workforce we were half way thru our working lives and had fuk all in there to retire with, especially when some invested in government crap that went broke and took our money without disclosure. Stop life pensions for politicians and make them Work for their money.

If you don't have sufficient super balance you're not EVER going to be a target of this report and recommendation to govt. Politicians that entered parliament from 2004 DO NOT get a pension for life on departure, they are also required to wait until they hit 60 to access (without tax penalties).

 

[AlanQ]

I actually call out Prime moron I'll B Sleazy because he couldn't lie straight in bed. He is the worst PM we've had in decades and that's saying something when you put Scomo, Rudd, Gillard and Turdball in the mix. It is obvious that they live in a different universe and don't care about Australians at all.

IT'S F*@KING REPORT TO GOVT, it's not a policy of the govt. Like every report to govt, only 1% of the recommendations will be taken up.

 

[JedCorella]

Controlled in so many aspects of our lives these days. No more freedoms! I feel sorry for younger generations! A bit like the banks & govt trying to force a cashless society- we should have a CHOICE!!

And what happens if you need a care home sooner than the age they'll allow us to access our super for it? Or other dire circumstances arise?
Young people cant even afford housing these days in the here & NOW, but expected to fund their own distant future Aged Care, seriosly?

They need our money because, even though the country is in an ever growing debt they keep borrowing and spending like drunken sailors. In real life you would be declared bankrupt and suffer the consequences of bad management. Take our money and spend it on refugee criminals and release them in society, send money to Ukraine and to the genocide that the jews are committing in Gaza.
As a "responsible" government shouldn't we be looking after our own first?

 

[Darkwing]

So the leaners can waste more money and be assured of a good retirement lifestyle paid for by the savers

 

[Catherines]

It is very sad to see so many of our SDC members using abusive, derogatory language on this site. Please keep your abuse& foul language in your own homes. I'm sure there are thousands of us who do not want to read it here. There is a better and polite way of expressing your disgust.

On the issue at hand - my husband and I cannot access our super in any other way than to use it to draw down regularly, me every month & him every 6 months as we are both 83 & 78 now. We cannot withdraw as and when we feel. As most of you say, we have saved all our lives for our futures, many have paid off their homes and this appears to be another way of getting at our savings.

Whilst humanitarian issues do come into play, having a yearly number of migrants enter the country is not the way to go, simply to show the world Australia is taking people into the country and being shown as a humanitarian country. They have to be fed, clothed, housed etc and all at huge cost to this and previous governments who now want to penalise us to pay for that. Any country that helps legitimate migrants by taking them in needs to first make sure their own are taken care of.

We have thousands of the existing population sleeping and living on the streets because they cannot get affordable housing whilst the richer (so called) migrants are snapping up available housing because they can afford to do so. Then they are allowed to bring in their extended family from overseas because they have the money to do so - and eventually these migrants' extended families are able to claim allowances of all kinds whilst our existing population goes without.

Where is the justice by our present and past governments? Cut the baby bonus, payouts to those too lazy to work, and all the other rorts being handed out without proper checks. Then cut your own big wages and pensions for life just because you were a politician. Cut your own wages & pensions first, Ministers. We've all worked hard to save and you should also, not get the handsome payouts you walk away with.

 

[Catherines]

It is an employer's responsibility to hire and fire. If they do not want to hire a woman who might be willing to work in a particular job don't be so critical of women, it is not necessarily her at fault.

Most women struggle to bring up their children AND hold down jobs. Men seem to think women have babies by some stroke of a miracle. No, it is a two person act that produces children - not just by the act of a woman. Or haven't you discovered that yet? Get your head out of the sand and accept what happens in this scenario and stop looking down at women, many of whom struggle with important things in life - jobs, running a home AND having and bringing up children all at the same time.

This wage disparity between men and women is a load of BS! Feminism has created so much friction between men and women and that is done on purpose.
Women, as a general rule, don't spend as many hours at work as men. It is a fact. I am sick and tired of women crying about inequality. Where are the women working in construction or as sewage workers? How many are climbing up electricity poles after a natural disasters? They just want the cushy office jobs just in case they might break a fingernail at a job that requires to get your hands dirty.
Don't cry inequality until you get off your collective arse and do the same jobs that men do. If you do as good a job as men you do deserve the same pay but not if you aren't capable but don't be part of a quota that employs because of your sex instead of your ability.
Men and women are build differently and just don't have the strength that men do. That is why they had to change the criteria for entering the armed forces, the police and firemen.

 

[roamin]

Ccommunism by stealth there is no incentive for younger generations to contribute because you are going to loose your savings to a mis managed profit making business

 

[Mina vriesekolk]

The sooner the better we are getting rid of Albo and the left wing parties . All they want to do is share your hard earned money with the ones that did not feel the need to go to work or spend it at useless stuff and never even try to to think of saving a bit for a rainy day . Stay away from our Super .

 

[Bert from Betoota]

“Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has emphasised that the proposal is not intended to penalise hard-working Australians but to create a more sustainable system for the future.
This shift in policy could have significant implications for Australians planning for retirement.”
This is what you call a pat on the head and a kick up the arse at the same time, but what else could you expect from the bumbling idiot.
Unfortunately no amount of money however gained is going to change Aged Care for the better until they change the attitudes of the people who supply and provide the care, all the commissions of enquiry are a waste of time and money unless the government is willing to follow up the recommendations to the letter of the law.
Would be better off employing independent Aged Care home inspectors who turn up unannounced and see what is happening in the real world.
But I guess that you get what you vote for.

 

[Seioner me]

It is an employer's responsibility to hire and fire. If they do not want to hire a woman who might be willing to work in a particular job don't be so critical of women, it is not necessarily her at fault.

Most women struggle to bring up their children AND hold down jobs. Men seem to think women have babies by some stroke of a miracle. No, it is a two person act that produces children - not just by the act of a woman. Or haven't you discovered that yet? Get your head out of the sand and accept what happens in this scenario and stop looking down at women, many of whom struggle with important things in life - jobs, running a home AND having and bringing up children all at the same time.

When women came into male dominated industries the first were men hating radicials and at their say so your could lose your employment which fed your family we just gave these people a wide berth because of the damage they could do to your employment an income of your family its not like that so much now but in the eighties it was a real threat I was in heavy transport at the time

 

[Annie]

My first thought upon hearing of this plan is why should I be penalised for living a frugal life and being careful with money only to have to pay more for aged care than those who spent their life splurging on drinking and smoking and gambling and living a more extravagant life. Those who have not been careful with their money will get the same level of care as those who will have to pay more. There’s no fairness in that. This would prompt people to spend all their money before giving the government the chance to take it. This would also prompt more people to choose suicide rather than aged care.
My second thought is that this a plot to make more people spend their retirement savings. There have been a number of articles in recent times trying to encourage seniors to spend their money to move the economy along. A great many of us baby boomers have spent our lives being careful with money and living frugally , going without to provide for our retirement. Now we are being told that we are going to be penalised for it. My observation is that the younger members of our society are not so willing to live frugally to pay for their mortgages as boomers were. I know I didn’t have a car till the mortgage was paid. There was no going out to dinner, no takeaway food, no holidays, no new clothes or shoes , no alcohol, smoking or gambling till the mortgage was paid. I don’t see young ones these days going without.
My third thought is that this will encourage people to spend everything because why should we save for retirement if we are going to get our aged care if we have no money? Or haven’t they thought of those implications?

 

[Ronnaldo]

I am caught out for being too old (85). When I was a young teacher in SA in the 1950's I began paying into the state superannuation scheme which did not give me a physical balance I could draw on. My money went into government funds and now, in retirement I am paid a so-called superannuation amount from government funds which is fully taxed as if it was income. This will continue until my death. At that time there were no superannuation schemes such as we see today. I am being penalized for being too old. What does this new government proposal mean for me?

 

[Seioner me]

“Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has emphasised that the proposal is not intended to penalise hard-working Australians but to create a more sustainable system for the future.
This shift in policy could have significant implications for Australians planning for retirement.”
This is what you call a pat on the head and a kick up the arse at the same time, but what else could you expect from the bumbling idiot.
Unfortunately no amount of money however gained is going to change Aged Care for the better until they change the attitudes of the people who supply and provide the care, all the commissions of enquiry are a waste of time and money unless the government is willing to follow up the recommendations to the letter of the law.
Would be better off employing independent Aged Care home inspectors who turn up unannounced and see what is happening in the real world.
But I guess that you get what you vote for.

Like Albo and Chis Bowen said you can drive what you like but in reality the are pushing you into electric vehicles which wont do what we want so I for one dont want them

 

[Nigel G M]

No Way! The government has already lined it's own pockets from the taxes I've paid on what I've earned. Tax that they have taken even before I even got it in my account. Then the government taxed those earnings again at Tax time (and I've gotten precious little back). I pay tax on everything I buy food, clothing, car rego, driver's licence, home etc. Now they want my hard-earned super to fund my aged care? Again No Way! My super will be spent HOW I CHOOSE TO SPEND IT. The government will not have ANY MORE of it. I would suggest the government look at lowering the pollies wages and tax the outrageous payouts they get and be like the rest of us mere hard-working mortals, once they leave their position that's it. They shouldn't still be receiving the perks and $$$ that went with the position for the of their lives just because they held that position. That, to me, would be a much more reasonable and sensible way to obtain additional funding for aged care.

 

[Ian Crane-Luff]

With people on the age pension at least 80% of the pension goes to the age home so why shouldn't people on super pay a similar contribution, most already do although the age home is usually of a much standard than government homes

 

[wendell]

Why scrimp and save your whole life only to now have to pay for something that was previously supplied by the government. The government is full of corruption. Once you get rid of the corruption and pocket lining in government you will find their is enough money to support all Australians in Nursing homes. I am not going to use my super fund to pay for my nursing home just so the government can spend the money elsewhere or waste it on their own political agendas.

Exactly as I saw it , they are asking people to use their saved super that they try to live off the interest and then there is none left either to pass to children. The government are into all the tricks so they don’t pay to the people . Of course they pay themselves highly , and on retirement huge sums then don’t forget all the perks while they are in office dinners , wine , accommodation , dry cleaning even . Read that article and really see what they are proposing , taking all the heat off the Government,pass the buck again . Thanks solider 1964

 

[abbey girl]

My children do not live a high life, very few holidays, older cars, work 6 days a week so I resent when others say why should our superannuation be left to our children to spend on overseas holidays or big SUV's....we have worked hard to accumulate a good superannuation so we control our last years on this earth, not the government....we have never had a penny from any government, our children and grandchildren all work without any government handouts, we get no discounts, pay all our utilities without special rates and yet now they want us to spend hundreds of thousands when others get it for free, our taxes have supported many unemployed who have never worked a day in their lives, my husband at 75 is still a working electrician because he enjoys it....

I am now encouraging those in their 40's or 50's to forget paying any extra into super, enjoy your lives because the socialist government will just see you as a cash cow....how about unscrupulous family members who will now encourage their elderly relatives to stay in their homes, long after they should be there so that the family home will at least be there for them to inherit....for me, I am spending as much as I wish to now because I am damn sure the government is not going to get my hard earned and sacrificed so called wealth....I will take those grandchildren to Disneyland, buy my grandkids their first cars, take my grown up grandchildren on that overseas holiday they cannot afford whilst at university ...stuff you Albo and your greedy mates who have no idea of what a hard days work is like or where to find the mortgage payment or feed the kids or pay the electricity bill....the pension is looking good at the moment (after I have spent my money on a damn good time overseas and cruising) and of course I forgot the modest rental property we maintain so that a family has a roof over its head, no thanks to the lefties who hate us landlords ...we have had the same family for more than 10 years with only modest increases because they are such good tenants