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
ART strikes $883m QLD Westfield deal
Australian Retirement Trust (ART) has agreed to acquire a 50% interest in Brisbane's Westfield Mt Gravatt from Scentre Group for $882.5 million, in what is expected to be Australia's largest single-asset retail transaction this year.
HESTA reduces fees, minimum balance for income stream
HESTA will reduce administration fees and lower the minimum balance required to start an income stream account from September 30.
Trustees, platforms, cyber risk under APRA spotlight
Superannuation trustees, platforms and cyber resilience will be under more scrutiny in the 2027 financial year from the prudential regulator.
Nanuk lands AustralianSuper investment heavyweight
Nanuk Asset Management adds serious firepower to its investment team when it appointed Oliver Johnson, formerly at AustralianSuper, early this month.
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.