There’s a lot happening with the Age Pension at the moment.
In less than two weeks the scheduled March 20 increases to the base rate will be announced and implemented.
And on March 29 the Federal Government will hand down its FY 2022-2023 Budget. With an election scheduled for May, many commentators believe that there will be extra long-term changes to the Age Pension rules.
These commentators suggest that the rules concerning income should top the list of these changes.
Why?
Because relaxed income thresholds for Age Pension entitlement and retention could help address three national challenges in one stroke of the pen.
These challenges are severe labour shortages, a need for productivity gains, and retirement funding adequacy.
The Covid pandemic has had many lasting effects on our society and economy, but one of the more pressing challenges facing the government is the national labour shortage, with 73 per cent of Australian businesses expecting to have difficulty finding and retaining skilled labour in 2022. Australia’s international borders may have (largely) reopened, but it will take a long time to attract workers who can fill the current gaps.
Enter the need for older workers. However, the nearly 70% of over 66s on an Age Pension are currently penalised if they earn more than $240 a week (which includes the work bonus) as a single person ($12,480 per annum). From that point each additional dollar earned results in a loss of 50 cents of the Age Pension, until it is finally withdrawn.
So effectively, we are ‘locking up’ the skills, experience and expertise of nearly 4 million people by creating a disincentive for them to continue working.
The effect on national productivity is huge, with a report from Deloitte Consulting projecting an extra three percentage points on participation among workers aged 55 and over would result in a $33 billion boost to GDP – or around 1.6% of national income. A five percentage point lift in participation among this group would see around $48 billion in extra GDP – or 2.4% of national income.
It’s not just about work and capping Age Pension costs. It’s also about important individual benefits, in particular the health gains and a boosting of the ability of pensioners to lead a reasonable life on the Age Pension.
What a higher income threshold – specifically removing the salary or wage component of the income threshold – would do, is allow a higher contribution from thousands of older Australians, increasing their sense of self-worth and social connection significantly. Everyone benefits when people are allowed to contribute. And as a preventative health measure – reducing poverty, isolation and depression – this measure would deliver even more rewards. Trying to make ends meet on a full Age Pension continues to be a challenge. Recent Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) findings show that there is a major difference in living standards for those aged over 65. The poverty rate for older home-owners is (12%) but the risk of poverty is nearly one in two for older people who are renting (43%). Imagine how this might change if those on an Age Pension could suddenly earn more than $240 a week without the current penalty.
So is an increase in the income threshold likely?
The short answer is yes. It’s not as though the Australian Government would be conducting a risky experiment. An unlimited work scenario has already been tested in New Zealand and resulted in measurable boosts to the national economy.
And then there’s that ‘small’ matter of the Federal Election due to be held by 19 May this year.
With $5 Billion in unannounced funding decisions, giving Australia’s 3.9 million Age Pensioners an election eve sweetener makes a lot of political sense.
Watch this space. Retirement Essentials will continue to report on all aspects of the Age Pension and retirement income to keep you fully up to date.
What do you think?
Is a lifting – or removal – of the current income threshold something you would like to see? If so, why?
We’d love to hear your thoughts.
And if you are unaware of how this threshold works in your particular situation, check out Retirement Essential’s Age Pension Eligibility Calculator to get the answers you need.
This article is provided by Retirement Essentials Representative Number: 001260855. We are an authorised representative of SuperEd Pty Ltd ABN 88 118 480 907 AFSL #468859. This information is not intended as financial product advice, legal advice or taxation advice. It does not take into account your personal situation, goals or needs and you should assess your own financial situation, consider if the information is suitable for you and ensure you read the relevant Product Disclosure Statement (PDS) if you choose to make any changes to your financial situation. It is always advisable to consult a financial adviser before making financial decisions.
If New Zealand are doing it so should we in australia.The government would gain more tax revenue which would help pay for the cost.
I agree 10000000% with your printed article. Excellent TRUTH.
I do ho p e the federal government allows the lifting of the ridiculous weekly allowed earning. We baby boomers and above are resilient,hard working, ethical and give a good days work without being on mobile phones. I for ONE have still do much life and energy and workskills gleaned over 48 years of working life.
I have just gone on the Australian Age Pension 2 weeks ago and I REALLY hope the current Australian Government make some logical sensible adjustments to their current Age Pension scheme and give us an opportunity to put some more income in our pockets and pay them some more tax.
I can only earn $180 per fortnight above the pension before losing 50 cents in the dollar… WHAT A JOKE!!!
Why not just have the Tax Free Threshold on the Pension(s) Rate (i.e. 0% tax) then start paying tax at the current: i.e.
$0 – $Pension Payment Nil
$Pension Payment – $45,000 19% for amounts over the Pension Payment
$45,001 – $120,000 $5,092 + 32.5% for amounts over $45,000
They would have heaps of us coming back to the work force overnight!!!
100% agree with comment made regards to increase in the income threshold.
older Australian should not have a limit on working hrs in order not loose there pension it is good for the country and solve the skilled shortage issue.Also keep the retire fit so less burden on the health service
Personally I’m believing all aussies that have worked an paid taxes in this country for say 20 years or more should be entitled to the basic pension . If that were the case , then anyone who worked could and pay taxes as long as they wished. Complete personal choice without discrimination age sex married single . Bottom line complete fairness for every one . Less rules less administration costs less humbugging an annual promises from all sides of politician parties fiddling with peoples lives. People would have clear direction from the moment they started work till the day they passed away.full stop.
Here Here! In the UK everyone of Age is entitled to a pension. Those who have access to financial resources or work beyond the pension age are then taxed accordingly. Seems a much fairer system when you accept the proposition that is is those of us who have worked all our lives or wish to continue work to refund retirement, are the ones who basically fund social security benefits in the first place but are effectively denied the fruits of their labour once they become eligible for the pension.
It seems incongruous to me that we should even be talking about an increase in earning capacity before the age pension cuts out when a significant number of people of age eligible Australians are disqualified from receiving a pension and thus any of the other benefits attached to a pension simply because they have accrued a level of assets that impact on their entitlements. Lets face it if you work hard you should be entitled to enjoy the benefits of your labour. Just ask any politician if they have an entitlement to a pension when they retire from 8 years of doing pretty much nothing in most cases after being fortunate enough to be one of the few “elected” to govern! Sure those who have significant financial assets they can call upon to fund their retirement should be disqualified or have the amount they receive in a pension but why should Australians who have acquired a number of inanimate objects of value due to hard work be penalised in the munt they receive or have their eligibility for a pension affected when those items are incapable of funding retirement other than if they are sold? One argument is to require income tax to be paid of the sale of assets rather than, as is presently the case, imposing an a pre determined impediment to the pension?
This is what happens in UKI believe. It’s a no brainer. Especially needed if you have to rent so your whole pension isn’t just paying for the rental property. It would enable pensions to carry on working and enjoy a better lifestyle which benefits everyone.
Let’s run with the NZ system! I’m an age pensioner working casual 30 hours a fortnight driving a tourist train because my wife works part time ( not a pensioner) i rarely receive any pension funds.
I’m not taking someone else’s job I’m doing it because of labour shortages and to help the business function it would sure be nice to get some financial reward!
In my view if you had contibuted tax all your working life you should get a full pension and this can be proved from records from the ATO. If you havent then you should get a reduced pension in either case we should get the pension and work full time. I have currently been awarded the pension and before that I had worked for a large oil and gas company who cannot get skilled technicials to fill skill gap. They asked when I am available for work and I said it is not worth me returning to work it would affect my pension . One less skilled worker .
I agree with the raising of income thresholds 100% indeed I would abolish them completely, after all people on work are still paying taxes on that income which puts revenue backing govt coffers that wouldn’t ordinarily be there, allows older Australians to plug the gap between the pension and a liveable income and provides a feeling of self worth in people. Additionally it solves the problem of older people becoming isolated and keeps them active and healthy.
Everyone of a pension age should be entitled to the pension regardless, they have worked and paid taxes etc all their lives and they deserve to be able to see out their remaining years in some level of comfort
Totally agree with Will Timmins. If people have paid taxes all their life, why penalise them because they may have worked hard all their life. I would say it is almost impossible to live off the age pension even if a person owns their own home, as other costs such as rates, power and maintenance still need to be paid.
Maree 9/3/22
I agree Janet. I am still working part-time, and I am not on a pension, although am of an age eligable for the pension. I mix with people. Some people cannot afford to go out or persue their hobbies as pension payment falls short of enabling an adequate and enjoyable lifestyle. More so especially if people have little or no savings or super.
Yes, lifting is beneficial to all Australians. At the moment there is no incentive to work once you have hit pension age. Go over $320 for a couple and your income you start working for 50%. They say out of one side of their mouths they want us to keep working but then take it away on the other side. I at the moment are 3 weeks from retirement age. Want to keep working for awhile. But once I worked out what I lose from the pension I could say forget. Not worth standing up 7.5 hours a day being tired. Not worth it.
I think it is disgusting that nurses wanting to work can’t for fear of losing their pension!!
Wake up Australia, I am currently working as an Immunisation RN, but I have to stop working because of reaching a threshold while registered nurses are in such short supply Australia-wide!!
A bit of common sense wouldn’t go astray in government.
Absolutely 1000% Yes, should have been implimented 10 years ago, it is a no brainer.
Less shortage of experienced workers, more productivity, huge increase in taxation for the government and more money for people to retire with-out costing Government any extra from other taxpayers. Win Win situation !!!!
I know the quality of politicians trying to run the Country at the moment are the lowest level I have ever seen in my lifetime.
Kerry Packer was correct when He said, quote; Why pay high taxes on your money an give it to fools who don’t know what they are doing !!!
All moot for older Australians if there aren’t jobs. Or government policies that support employers to employ older Australians.
New Zealand has always had Universal Age Pension entitlement, I could not understand why Oz doesn’t! Considering the significant benefits for all!
I am 73 and still working- but limited in the hours I can do due to the pension limits. At my age I do not want to work full time but live the energy I get from interacting with a variety of people!
Me and my wife are already over retirement age and still working full time we are not entitled to any age pension as we earn to much its a disgrace I am a Manufacturing CNC programmer my wife is a age community worker but thinking of retiring very soon even though employers are crying out for people to work in our professions and cant fill the positions we are both willing to work part time but its not worth it some body please wake this or any other government up to reality its a no brainer stop punishing us older workers
I left school at 12 to support my parents and siblings as my father had broken his back. I have worked hard all my life paying my taxes and bringing up 3 children of my own. My wife passed away from cancer last year and now at 70 I am told that I cannot get the pension the assets that my wife and I built up over the years are too much for a single pensioner to qualify. As a couple we would have both qualified as the assets were shared. Now I have not only lost my wife of 50yrs but have to sell off the life we built together and live of the proceeds until I get below single pensioner assets to qualify . Talk about kick you when your down. The government has steadily lowered the thresholds and included superannuation as an asset . If politicians had to pass the same criteria as the rest of us ,there would not be a single one of them on the pension. The whole system needs to go back about 7 or 8 years when it was a lot fairer.
There was a time in Australia when we did get the pension regardless of income and assets. I can’t remember when that stopped or which Government brought this in but it was controversial as you can imagine. Does anybody know?
Age Pension in Australia has always been means tested.
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/1011/SSPayments1#_Toc286050326
I receive a part age pension, my wife who is younger than me and not eligible for the age pension for another 10 years works as a nurse part time in age care nursing home, the more hours she works the more tax she pays and the less pension I get, sometimes nothing,they are always ringing her to work more hours,I do not think I should be penalised if my wife works more hours, I get less or no pension and the age care patients are not receiving the proper care due to staff shortages
You should receive the pension automatically after qualifying at the right age (referred to as retirement age) and not be penalized if you wish to continue working. Some people after going thru recent financial losses find themselves back in debt (Mortgage etc) and struggle to retire. I am working full time and I am 68 and under current conditions I will hopefully work until at least the age of 72 ish. Paid taxes for 51 years (so far) and never been unemployed or on benefits. Receiving the pension would at least allow me to work part time.