I was just looking at the Budget changes to be made to Asset Testing of Age Pension but I would question why wait for 2 years?

It quite sensibly increases the retraction rate for people on a part pension ie the UPPER limit of the Asset Value at which the Pension cuts out totally.

This helps restore the Age Pension to its proper role as a safety net for those who for whatever reason have no other way to support themselves in retirement while discarding those who in reality HAVE adequate funds to live a very adequate retirement, ie maybe the Rhine Cruises will be cut from 4 to 3 per year.

LittleOzemailPensioner,

The taper rate has been very generous, but you have to question how much this measure will really save. The higher range of excluded part-pensioners would only be getting a few dollars a week anyway, and the ones closer to the cut-off can just go on that cruise or pay for that kitchen or bathroom renovation to put them back below the threshold. I have been trying to find an estimate of the average value of the pensioner concessions. It is hard information to find, but one study from 2010 estimated it at $2,000. The people who will be losing their part-pensions will all get Commonwealth Health Cards, so they will still keep a good deal of this benefit.

I think that the Abbott government wants to create the impression of fairness, so it is a good look to go after middle income people who have managed to save a few hundred thousand dollars. The rorts that benefit the genuinely rich, such as overly generous superannuation tax concessions, etc. have been left untouched.

Well I am a retired Professional Engineer so still need to maintain ETHICS - ie not as for the so called "Financial Advisors" which the Murray Report found to be "severely lacking".

But the budget SAYS some $2.5 Billion saving over 5 years, which is peanuts

I only deal in FACTS for the individual who uses my services, and today I spent some hours updating my software [gosh I can now call it an APP] to be able to give 2015 vs 2017 accurate Reports on such comparisons.

I have already done one such Report and the lady would be $105,852 WORSE off over 20 years. So to my thinking that says the new taper is fairly severe for cases such as hers. That is she would need to burn $200,000 on Rhine Cruises by your reckoning and that smells like about 20 cruises so I don't dig your "solution".

If you want an actual Report on your own case just ask.

Has anyone explained why most of the proposed changes in the budget don't come into effect until 2017? How does the income and incentives taking effect in 2017 improve anything in 2015? Talk about smoke and mirrors... I'm baffled there hasn't been more focus on the dates.

I don't think the 2 year wait is a good idea.

It took 4 years to cement Grandfathering into legislation and 25 years to get the female retirement age raised from 60 to 65