The $1.6 million transfer balance cap revisitedBY KIMBERLEY NOAH, WILLIAM FETTES | VOLUME 11, ISSUE 4![]() The $1.6 million transfer balance cap (TBC) imposes a limit on the total amount that a fund member can transfer into an exempt (retirement phase) pension. The TBC was introduced ... Get articles like this delivered to your email - Sign up for the free weekly newsletter More Articles |
Latest News
AusFood Super looks to revitalise member engagement
The $3.5 billion super fund has partnered with InvestStream to launch RetireSmart+, becoming the first super fund to bring an AI-powered engagement experience to some 66,000 members.
Super funds fail customer service test: SCA
Superannuation funds are apathetic, dismissive and continue to fail members at the most basic service level, a new investigation from Super Consumers Australia (SCA) reveals, which slapped the industry with an overall failing grade on customer satisfaction.
Aware hikes fees for former TelstraSuper members
Following the merger of the two funds, Aware Super has informed former TelstraSuper members' death and TPD insurance costs will rise as much as 53%.
Hostplus delivers double-digit FY26 returns
Hostplus Balanced (MySuper) option delivered members 10.8% for the financial year 2025-26, while the Indexed Balanced option and the High Growth option returned members 11.06% and 12.61% respectively.
Further Reading
Cover Story

Leading the way
SHARON DAVIS
NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
FUTURE GROUP AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS PTY LTD
NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
FUTURE GROUP AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS PTY LTD
Sharon Davis has always been fascinated by the human condition; it has driven her passion for people, her career, and building a better future for the next generation and beyond. Eliza Bavin writes.










You have correctly addressed certain aspects of the TBC which could be regarded as unfair or at best applying unequally to persons on a Super related Pension. However, I would like to raise another issue resulting from the introduction of the TBC which I regard as unfair and which only applies to persons who do not own a home. As no consideration is given to such persons in deterring their TBC this results in a situation where such persons are in my opinion grossly disadvantaged in comparison to those who do own a home. There are many persons who have for example just about their TBC or not much more in their Super savings but have always rented or chosen to rent in preference to home ownership. Now, if those people purchased a home and consequently reduced their Pension they would be eligible (given all other factors are equal), to claim up to a full old age pension from the Government's coffers. So I believe one can fairly argue that such persons are grossly disadvantaged in comparison to people who for example own a $2M (or more), home but still get the benefit of the full TBC.