Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 482

Meg on the Federal Budget: what's changed with super?

I don’t recall a Federal Budget with less to say about superannuation in my career of over 20 years.

However, it did confirm some changes already in train:

  • The age at which members will become eligible for downsizer contributions will reduce from 60 to 55. But those with more than a passing interest in the subject will know that legislation for this change is already making its way through parliament. While it hasn’t passed yet, it’s sufficiently well progressed that we expect it to become law in the current financial year.

  • Digital currency will not be taxed as foreign currency. This is important for all taxpayers that hold (say) Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, not just SMSFs. It had already been announced and draft legislation released for consultation (which closed in September 2022). So again, this move seems reasonably well progressed.

  • While not specifically superannuation issues, there are two other changes that are very relevant to retirees, often including those with SMSFs.
    • Very significant increases to the income test thresholds for the Commonwealth Seniors’ Health Card (CSHC) – up to $144,000 for couples and $90,000 for singles. Again, these are almost law already. The change to the thresholds themselves has been agreed by both Houses of Parliament, the Bill has just been held up by a proposed change to the start date – again, we expect this to come soon.

    • Changes to the assets and income tests for the age pension when a recipient sells their home. Currently the sale proceeds are excluded from the assets test for 12 months if they will be used to buy a new home. This is to be extended to 24 months. In addition, there will be a special rule to calculate “deemed income” on the proceeds at the lowest possible rate for 24 months. Again, both changes are already well progressed – with legislation in parliament and seemingly not contested by either side.

While all these are important measures and to be celebrated, they are definitely not news.

What was (somewhat) new

The Budget also confirmed some things announced by the last government but not specifically endorsed by the new government until now:

  • Relaxation of the residency rules for SMSFs (see our last blog here). While the new government confirmed its commitment to this change, the start date won’t be July 1 2022 as originally planned. Instead, it will be the July 1 after the relevant legislation receives Royal Assent. Since there’s been no legislation put forward yet – even in draft form for consultation – it’s likely that this is still a little way off.

  • Funding for the “Modernising Business Registers” program. While that might not be a household name, it’s the program that includes director identification numbers (director IDs). Like Heffron, we expect many practitioners are still struggling to mobilise all relevant clients to apply for a director ID by 30 November 2022. Unfortunately, we will have to keep pushing because it’s definitely not going away.

And finally, the Budget ruled out one very bad idea that the previous government announced but never got to implement: replacing annual SMSF audits with a three yearly cycle. Given the important role audits play in supporting the ATO to manage compliance, it was always a mystery to me why this was ever suggested in the first place. A great example of a solution looking for a problem.

What the budget left out

Often with a Federal Budget there’s as much interest in what is not said as what is included. Since there was nothing new this year, it’s worth briefly reflecting on what might have been.

There was nothing on:

  • The amnesty for legacy pensions proposed in May 2021 which would allow members with these pensions to terminate them relatively painlessly (see our blog at the time). The loud silence on this issue suggests it is simply not on the government’s radar. This is bitterly disappointing. It’s a change that is long overdue, creates no great revenue leakage for the government, recognises that the tax and regulatory environment has moved on enormously since people put these in place (they haven’t been an option as a brand-new pension since 2007) and is simply…. the right thing to do. The fact that it hasn’t been done yet beggars belief. Hand me the keyboard and I will write some draft legislation to release for consultation tomorrow. Who’s with me?

There have been some changes on these pensions that help those with very large legacy pensions improve their position (even potentially exit them entirely). But the change comes at a cost – most people need to accept a short-term additional tax bill to make the change. An amnesty might not change the eventual outcome, but it would remove the cost. The failure to even mention this amnesty does suggest that some clients who can improve their situation already should look to do so now rather than wait.

  • Non-Arm’s Length Income & Expenses (NALI and NALE). This has been a festering sore since the ATO first publicised its controversial view back in 2018. The last government accepted that it required a legislative fix. The current government has yet to formally commit to that fix and an announcement in the Budget would have been reassuring.

  • Simplifying the transfer balance cap regime – there is a great opportunity to strip out some complexity from the system here. It wasn’t taken in this year’s Federal Budget and hopefully it will be in a future version.

  • Some of the scarier kites flown in recent weeks – changes to limited recourse borrowing arrangements (to be fair, this is raised every single year as a possible change), a $5 million cap on superannuation balances, halting indexation of the transfer balance cap etc. We were very glad that none of these saw the light of day.

All in all, a quiet night for those of us in super. And perhaps that’s a good thing – there will be another one at the usual time in May 2023, so we don’t have too long to wait.

 

Meg Heffron is the Managing Director of Heffron SMSF Solutions, a sponsor of Firstlinks. This is general information only and it does not constitute any recommendation or advice. It does not consider any personal circumstances and is based on an understanding of relevant rules and legislation at the time of writing.

To view Heffron's FREE Post Budget Webinar for specialist SMSF accountants and advisers, click here (requires name and email address to view). For more articles and papers from Heffron, please click here.

 

15 Comments
Action Man
November 05, 2022

Very significant increases to the income test thresholds for the Commonwealth Seniors’ Health Card (CSHC) – up to $144,000 for couples and $90,000 for singles.

At first glance the changes seem generous, but come 30 June 2023 the drawdown rates will double and many who are eligible this year wont be next year!

Giving with one hand and taking with the other.

John
November 03, 2022

The $5 mil account balance cap is not a bad idea. Allows for most to build an ample balance for income options during the retirement period and puts a blocker on the greedy. Surplus above $5 mil per account can be invested in elsewhere than super. $5 mil is in fact probably generous and does not impact most.

Ian Radbone
November 03, 2022

Hear hear

Robert
November 05, 2022

$5 million cap still provides for a very generous superannuation system.

Mark
January 24, 2023

Well it looks like some sort of Cap is going to come in. The final amount and how the implementation of it will be interesting.

The Definition of the purpose of Superannuation discussion and legislation is to be talked about and likely brought in this year, maybe even this half year.

Some sort of moves on High Balance Superannuation Accounts to follow.

Will they just introduce higher tax rates above a certain limit?

Will they make people take the excess out or give them the option of taking it out or leaving it there under a higher tax rate?

What if you're under preservation age? Will you be able to take the extra out if you wish? Does it still stay there and cop the extra taxes with one not being able to do anything about it?

Employer payments, once you reach the Cap, can you take the employer SG as wages or Salary if you wish as you have reached the cap, or will they still be subject to being compulsory paid to your fund, possible getting taxed at a higher rate than your marginal rate had you taken it as income.

The $5M figure has been spouted a lot but I think it will be set lower. At that level it only affects around 11000 people they say and by limiting it to that amount the Government could (not likely as people would still look for tax minimisation outside Super if forced) save around $1.5B

Drop the Cap to $2.5M and they nearly triple the return and affect about 100000 accounts. Not enough to swing an election result by those affected and likely gain votes by those that rich* people should pay more tax blah blah.

Rich* being defined as people with more money than them. If they suddenly had more money, they would say but I'm not rich, it is still for people with more than me even though I have more now than I did.

AlanB
November 03, 2022

Thousands of retiree husband and wife SMSF directors are going to be caught out by a major looming ATO debacle.
An ABC NEWs report of 4/11/2022 is headlined:

"More than half of Australia's 2.5m directors could become ineligible to run companies by the end of this month"
"Company directors scrambling to get ID or face $13,000 fine in bid to stop 'dummy directors'"
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-11-04/director-ids-dins-tax-dummy-directors-phoenix-ato-asic/101608094

The ATO should blame itself for setting up a difficult DIN system and failing to write to Directors to advise them of the new director identification number requirement, instead of threatening fines and telling Directors to "get their skates on".
The need to apply for director identification number using Google Playstore and a mygovid app on a mobile phone is creating confusion and resentment. Some people don't use mobile phones for banking etc, preferring a computer. Those who apply by phone encounter long delays. There are reports of frustrated applicants for DINs experiencing lengthy delays, frequent dropouts, confusing error messages and problems with establishing identity, particularly when there are variations in names, which the DIN system has trouble recognising.

The ATO deserves a roasting at the next Senate Estimates Committee.

SMSF Trustee
November 03, 2022

Huh? Been plenty of notice and warning from all service providers in the industry. My wife and I got our IDs a while ago.
If an SMSF operator didn't know about this then perhaps they shouldn't be SMSF operators. You are supposed to be awake and stay informed.

AlanB
November 04, 2022

Just because some didn't have a problem with the DIN does not mean the problem doesn't exist for many others, or can be dismissed by blaming those others. The ABC is not in the habit of spreading fake news, or living in a bubble.

SMSF Trustee
November 04, 2022

Can't agree AlanB. You take on the role of Director you take on a duty to stay up to date and informed. Anyone who didn't know about this has already failed in that part of being a Director. It's not up to the ATO to reduce the obligations and make it easy!
As for the ABC, I think you're being naive.

Jim
November 07, 2022

Without a passport, I concluded that it was impossible to obtain a DIN on the website.
These are my notes from a long time ago -
"Driving Licence and Medicare only gave me Standard security so I tried adding my Certificate of Australian Citizenship which was not accepted - "Could not verify details The details you entered do not match the record. You have 1 attempt remaining 45049 (422)"
Max reached. Try again in 24 hours.
I tried and tried. I now will have another go.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.

AlanB
November 07, 2022

Jim:
The ATO has created an extremely difficult online access mechanism for the DIN.
One company had a problem with the mygovid app whose director is a Japanese national with only an Australian drivers licence available, no medicare card or Australian passport.
A paper application for a DIN allows a foreign passport, or if no passport, an Australian birth certificate as a primary identity document.
However, for some reason the ATO unhelpfully removed its web link to the paper application.
But try this:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220331022037/https://www.abrs.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-10/Application_for_a_director_identification_number.pdf


David
November 03, 2022

Perhaps there's a future article on "legacy pensions" by someone?

I, for one, have no idea at all what such a beast is in any detail at all, and thus what the comments above are about.

Tom Alford
November 02, 2022

Me too. We have been waiting on a decision since the Actuaries Institute raised this with Treasury 17 Feb 2020.
go for it Meg, both barrels. Our alternative seems to be to shift our LTCs to Annuities. I believe Challenger has one recommended by our financial advisor some time ago.

Peter B
November 02, 2022

Meg
Thank you for the legacy pension commentary. We find simply that we are limited in our access and our adviser suggests it may be on the horizon for May 2023. We live in hope.

Jenny Winthrop
November 02, 2022

Meg, I'm with you on legacy pensions!

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Reports of the demise of SMSFs are unfounded

A capital gains tax discount is legitimate but how much?

New tax gives incentive to move money out of super

banner

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.