The Albanese government seems determined to destroy personal wealth in line with the Great Reset, which advises that we will 'own nothing and we will be happy' - except for the billionaires and the political class, that is.

ttbn,
A tax change that slightly adversely affects the richest half percent doesn't seem to fit that description. So what exactly are you referring to there? The interest rate rises do seem to be destroying personal wealth, but unfortunately they're the result of a bipartisan policy, and started when Labor was in opposition. And they're certainly not making anyone happy.

If the Albanese Govt were to be truly committed to improve Superannuation they wouldn't start at 3 Million Dollars. By just dropping that benchmark to 2.5 Million they'd get twenty times more revenue but they'd lose voters. And, voters are more important to them than making things better for the economy i.e. people !

Keeping all workers active in the workforce much longer than current retirement age, is a solid practical plan which would have savings to Government far past the use superannuation currently serves in avoiding the strain on welfare budgets.

Superannuation is pretty much worthless to most of the working class, and like negative gearing tax avoidance schemes, is a huge tax dodge benefiting the wealthy end of town far too much!

Maybe, but it's tinkering at the edges when what is needed is a vast overhaul and reform. We have over a trillion in debt need reform and a return of equitable treatment.

If the highest tax rate on anything or anyone was an unavoidable 15% with no allowed offsets or exclusions, then the net tax take by the ATO would more than double. This rate would be a 2% increase on company tax given nobody pays more than 13% after allowable offsets and exclusions, with many paying as little as 4% and around 40% paying no company tax to anybody.

It has been said elsewhere that only 2 companies in Australia pay the net 13%. And that more than 64 billion are avoided via the vagaries of the global marketplace.

Will anything change apart from various politicians waxing lyrical at the dispatch box. Methinks not given, I believe, they're in it up to their eyebrows?
Alan B.

Does anyone know what the total Bureaucrat cost is in Australia ?
By that I really mean bureaucrat, not Public Servant workers who actually provide a service !

With Australia's ageing population, something has to be done to overhaul both superannuation, and the rapidly rising aged welfare bill, which is expected to hit an unsustainable $72 billion by 2025/26 and grow exponentially from then on. Sustainability in retirement should be the objective. Tax concessions for those with superannuation funds above that which can provide a retirement income equal to average earnings should be abolished completely, and the tax concession for income below the average threshold should be tapered to reflect community standards.

Aged welfare is more difficult to control, with both income and non income producing assets needing to be scrutinised. The "family home" and its worth, and how that should effect welfare is a thorny question, but still needs to be examined. One possibility is for the "family home" be treated in a "reverse mortgage" fashion and repayment of welfare only be required on the death of the recipient through the sale of that asset.

One of the problems with Superannuation is that retirement Super is offering more than their employment ever did for many.
It's a dangerous imbalance !

I'm getting worried, so much so I've booked a doctors appointment. I am really worried I must be loosing it when I agree with 2 of Albo's lot policies, subs & super.

Even worse I'm agreeing with Paul. I can see nothing wrong with retirees funding their retirement out of wealth invested in the family home. This agreement can only apply if all ex bureaucrats, laughingly known as public servants, from all levels of government, are switched to the same system. They should at least be reduced to the age pension immediately. It is ridiculous to over pay this lot during their working life then continue after retirement, another Whitlam rort.

This of course requires that the bludgers who have lived off the taxpayer most of their lives are given very little. You can't expect the thrifty to pay their own way, & the bludgers to live comfortably off them for ever. Forced work maintaining remote national parks after a years dole sounds about right.

I dont think many aussies realise how this will affect more than 80000 people. Many small business owners have paid tax all their lives and will be using their business as their super fund. So Jo bloggs has built up a small business and purchased the building in his SMSF, now because the business and building is worth more than 3 million, he now pays 30%.
How is that fair?

It would be far more equitable to increase the tax on all super accounts to 17% (from 15) and pay off our debt in 5 years. But that wont happen as the average person votes and as long as it does not affect them, they dont care.

This is the tip of the iceberg, future governments will reduce it to 2 million then one million.

How is that fair?
kirby483,

Blue collar workers pay 40-47%

This is the tip of the iceberg, future governments will reduce it to 2 million then one million.
kirby483,
It's really the ONLY way to save the Nation. God only knows how many business people & contractors I have witnessed to ask for receipts for fuel for fishing or travel to some do, entertainment etc. etc. All to be written off for "business expenses" !
New cars 'leased' every year or so, family trusts yet workers don't get their measly wages when one of these 'businesses' goes bust only to start another one not long after. The system is more crook than a Mafia benevolent outfit !