More Articles |
Latest News |
BT Super has announced a new admin fee schedule for BT Super and Asgard Employee Super members. | Two of Australia's largest industry superannuation funds have joined forces to purchase a South Australian wind farm capable of generating enough energy to power more than 140,000 homes each year. |
A $3.3 billion industry superannuation fund revealed it has put an investment adviser on watch in relation to ESG concerns. | A $100 billion industry superannuation fund is the latest to make an end-of-year adjustment to its fees. |
![]() GREGORY CANTOR CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AUSTRALIAN CATHOLIC SUPERANNUATION AND RETIREMENT FUND Dignity is important for Greg Cantor. It underpins who he is, and it's what he has strived for 30 years to provide fund members each and every day. Harrison Worley 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.