A reallocation of resources by the Government is needed to close the gender gap in superannuation, NGS Super believes.
While raising the super guarantee to 12 per cent will benefit members it does not address the gender issue, NGS Super chief executive Anthony Rodwell-Ball said.
"The Government and country can't afford to find more money to subsidise. It's a question of reallocation of resource," he said.
"If you're going to give people a baby bonus and family allowance, maybe divert some of that money away from that tax and towards super contributions as a consideration, but of course that needs to be modelled."
Rodwell-Ball also said super funds had the responsibility to help younger members leverage their money, especially if there had been a period of no contributions.
"If a 30-year-old female member has not made a contribution for a year and then comes back on half the contributions it doesn't take much brain power to work out that she probably had a baby," he said.
"Super funds need to write to that person and ask for a serious consideration from their member on salary sacrifice to make up the loss of contributions."
Comments
Do these super funds ever give thought to the fact that people may have priorities other than superannuation?
Super funds need to realise they are just products, write to the member asking for salary sacrifice indeed, who do you think you are? You guys aren't advisers, you have no idea of the clients personal situation, you are a product that's it. Write to the clients why not ask them to redraw the home loan and do a max non-concessional as well? Aaahhh this industry, so many experts so little thought processes
30 year old female who has just had a baby and spent time out of the workforce. I'm guessing that with one more mouth to feed and her income reduced cash flow may just be an issue. Salary sacrifice would be a long way down the list of suitable strategies.
and these are the guys pushing changes to financial advice laws and telling you how you should run your business...
Hang on- are they earning extra money from this advice. Then ASIC would consider this conflicted advice..... let them do it, but ban payments to funds based on Assets invested.
Add new comment