Wealth Navigator principal, Wayne Wanders has hit out at the Grattan Institute’s latest report on superannuation, showing that analysis of the research house’s proposals proved that they would actually harm more women than they would help.
The paper proposed that one of the best ways to close the gender gap in retirement was by targeting superannuation tax breaks. It suggested reducing the maximum contributions from pre-tax income to by 56 per cent and limiting lifetime contributions from post-tax income to either $50,000 a year or $250,000 total.
As men are by far the greatest beneficiaries of tax breaks from the current higher contribution levels, this proposal would result in men having lower super balances at retirement.
While this would technically close the gender pay in retirement incomes, as women would have about the same superannuation as men as men would have less, it would ultimately still hurt women overall, according to Wanders.
Wanders said that women in heterosexual marriages would have less super as, in reality, they have a chunk of their husband’s superannuation in addition to their own.
Should the husband’s superannuation drop by 25 per cent as the Institute suggests, both his wife and their household would also experience losses in retirement income.
Wanders said that the proposal also offers no benefit to single women or women in same-sex marriages. Although it decreases men’s superannuation, it would not actually increase theirs’.