Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 498

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 498 with weekend update

  •   2 March 2023
  • 29
  •      
  •   

The Weekend Edition includes a market update (after the editorial) plus Morningstar adds links to two additional articles.

We were preparing to publish a special edition of Firstlinks on Tuesday afternoon, after the Treasurer announced the new superannuation policy, but there was uncertainty in the reporting and we needed to ensure the explanation was correct. Media coverage was ambiguous at least, wrong at worst.

For example, ABC News said:

"Australians with more than $3 million in their super will have their earnings taxed at double the current rate."

And David Crowe in the SMH wrote:

"People with more than $3 million in super will continue to gain a concessional tax rate on their fund earnings, but it will be 30% rather than 15%."

With journalists rushing to produce copy quickly amid new announcements, clarifications were understandably needed, such as this from the SMH:

To be clear, it's not individuals with super over $3 million that will have all earnings taxed at 30%. The earnings on the first $3 million will remain taxed at the current 15% (or 0% in pension mode) and only the earnings on the amount over $3 million will be taxed at 30%.

We decided to wait until we knew more and Treasury issued a Fact Sheet the following day, with a surprise in the way earnings will be calculated. Not only will the Australian Taxation Office issue tax liability notices to individuals in the 2026-27 financial year, but earnings will include unrealised capital gains. This will have significant consequences.

We take a dive into the politics of the rushed decision and how the tax calculation will be made, using Treasury's examples.

What happened to the 'conversation' Jim Chalmers wanted with the Australian people about the best way to tax superannuation? For two weeks, he said he was only opening the debate, then woosh! ... out came the policy. Labor is managing the politics as much as the policy.

It's always a magical mystery tour whenever a Prime Minister or Treasurer says they want to have a 'conversation' because conversations should include listening as well as speaking. A female friend who is currently dating online told me some blokes talk for 95% of the time on how good they are, thinking it's a winning strategy. It isn't. If Anthony Albanese and Jim Chalmers were initially simply flying a kite, it came crashing down like the 95% bloke. They even made a decision before considering responses to the consultation on the purpose of superannuation which was supposed to precede any changes to tax concessions.

A sign that Labor took a snap decision to avoid the broken election accusation is in the strength of the undertakings prior to the last election. We have uncovered the biggest. The promise of "stability and certainty" in superannuation was repeated four times by Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones in less than three minutes at the SMSF Association Conference in 2022, the super sector most affected by the proposed changes. Here's an extract:

Anthony Albanese wanted me to deliver a particular message to everyone in the (SMSF) sector today. And it's about stability and certainty ... So the message we want to send to you is around stability and certainty in an uncertain time. The last thing that we want the SMSF sector, whether it’s advisers, whether it's accountants, or the customers that you serve, the last thing that we want you worried about is the next regulatory hit coming out of Canberra. We want you focused on delivering great outcomes for members and for retirees themselves. We want you to have peace of mind in your retirement. We want to make the case that your nest egg, your retirement savings are always going to be safer under Labor."(my bolding)

It's no wonder Albanese called his troops together before such revelations gained a firm foothold. No weasly "intention" or "major change" qualification there, and even an extraordinary "the last thing that we want you worried about is the next regulatory hit coming out of Canberra".

Remarkably, it's exactly what Scott Morrison said to the SMSF Association in 2016, seven years ago, only months before he introduced the Transfer Balance Cap of $1.6 million. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton is loving the opportunity to accuse Labor of a new tax and broken promises, but Labor is simply playing the same political game as the Liberals.

Until the next election, Dutton will argue the changes are unacceptable, supported by the Murdoch media. It's not the only thing that's 'unnaceptable'.

We dissect the similarity between the two speeches and show that hypocrisy has no political boundaries, especially when it comes to superannuation. Now that's worthy of a conversation.

Anyway, Happy Birthday today to Anthony Albanese, reaching the big 60, and Jim Chalmers, a youthful 45. It's been a stressful week for you both and you should relax over dinner with a bottle of red.

***

In a previous life, a team of interest rate traders reported to me. I wanted to experience the ups and downs of making trading profits and losses based on my view on future rates, so I operated a proprietary trading account within the bank's system. I allowed myself a modest trading limit and I did okay on small positions.

Thank goodness I have not traded bank bill futures over the last 18 months. I would have lost plenty. While everyone knew rates would rise, the market has been well ahead of the Reserve Bank and most major economists, even to the point of Governor Philip Lowe saying some of the future rate levels were completely unjustified. But since proven correct. I did not expect cash to go well above 4% because hundreds of thousands of people on 2% mortgages would roll into 7%, and a 5% hit would cripple the future for many families. Where do most people find $50,000 in after-tax dollars on a $1 million mortgage?

There were signs of respite in the CPI this week when it increased by 7.4% in the year to January 2023, below expectations of 8.1%.The major contributors to the annual increase were food, housing, recreation and culture. The Cash Rate Futures fell by about 0.1% on the day. We also saw GDP numbers which, according to CBA economists:

"The 0.5%/quarter increase in real GDP over Q4 22 was weaker than the market median of 0.8% ... The tailwind of strong population growth in Australia means that the economy means that the economy must expand by ~0.4% per quarter to stop it from going backwards on a per capita basis. Indeed the ABS today reported that GDP per capita was flat over Q4 22. We expect a per capita recession in 2023."

The article by Ryan Wells this week is a fascinating look at Australia's population growth due to the recovery of migration, which is why CBA makes this 'per capital' distinction.

The current cash rate is 3.35% and the market is saying about 0.85% higher by September 2023, or three to four more rate hikes. It looks too high with signs of a slowing economy and inflation. If it happens, it is merciless with such a blunt instrument, hitting those who can least afford it. Ironically for a policy which is supposed to reduce demand, wealthy people holding cash and term deposits and no loans are seeing a big income boost and they will spend more. We have progressed nowhere in decades of using monetary policy, leaving rates at zero for too long and now going too high. It's disturbing to recall that the Reserve Bank waited until May 2022, only nine months ago, to make the first cash rate increase from 0.1%.

For anyone who thinks they can do a better job, a couple of the Board positions are now open. And probably a Governor role by September. But beware. Based on recent years, unanimity is expected and troublemakers need not apply.

***

Elsewhere in markets, money is again flowing into bonds after outflows throughout 2022, as the data below for the US shows. Many investors were burnt by the capital losses from rising rates but are now attracted by the higher absolute returns and expectations in the US that inflation has peaked.

But for long-term returns, for those who can tough out the stockmarket falls, equity markets deliver the most rewards. We have featured the work of Elroy Dimson and his colleagues previously, where they update global investment returns each year since 1900. The latest edition of the Credit Suisse Global Investment Returns Yearbook was recently released, and the annualised returns on equities versus bonds are shown below, with Australia close to the top on equities. These are real returns, after inflation.

Graham Hand

Also in this week's edition ...

So much going on, make time for our bumper selection of new articles.

Tribeca's Jun Bei Liu says the February 2023 reporting season showed the resiliency of corporate earnings. Looking forward, she says earnings are likely to disappoint market expectations in the first half, but once Earnings Per Share consensus estimates come down, the market could be ready for take-off. She's positive on the likes of Ramsay Healthcare, Lottery Corporation and A2 Milk.

VanEck's Cameron McCormack is also bullish as he thinks economic growth will remain relatively strong thanks to demand from China. He is overweight the resource and consumer staples sectors but neutral on banks given headwinds of competition and higher bad debts. 

We're entering a new era of fiscal stimulus and a boom in intangible asset investment, says Jacob Mitchell of Antipodes Partners. We've seen this movie before in the 1970s and the result is increased volatility in nominal GDP and a decline in equity market multiples.

James Gruber muses that stockmarket prices are like email: they’re distraction machines. With email, it often distracts people from getting work done efficiently. With stock prices, they distract investors from what really matters: the businesses underlying them.

Retirees with large super balances may be required to draw more than they wish to qualify for tax concessions, says Michael Hutton of HLB Mann Judd. It's a good problem to have but what do you do with the excess money? Michael offers some suggestions.

When the numbers for net migration in 2022 are released, they're likely to be +400,000, much stronger than Government forecasts. Ryan Wells says the numbers won't ease off much this year either. This will have many implications including increasing total consumer spending and expanding the labour force.  

It's surprising little has been written about the outperformance of gold against almost every other asset class in Australian dollar terms in 2022. Sawan Tanna investigates whether gold can continue to shine this year.

In the weekend update by Morningstar, Josh Peach hunts for the ASX's best dividend stocks while Margaret Guidici recommends five undervalued US semiconductor shares

Lastly, this week's White Paper by Heffron Consulting looks into the ins and outs of SMSF pensions.

***

Weekend market update

On Friday in the US, the bulls are back in control, as stocks ripped higher by 1.6% on the S&P 500 to leave the index higher by 6.1% in 2023, while Treasurys enjoyed a bull-flattening rally with the long bond sinking 13 basis points to 3.90%.  Gold maintained recent momentum with a 1% rise to $1,861 per ounce, WTI crude tested $80 a barrel and the VIX tumbled to 18.5 after settling near 21 on Monday. 

From AAP Netdesk:

On Friday, the local share market managed to claw back some of its losses but still finished in the red for the fourth straight week. The S&P/ASX200 on Friday finished up 28.2 points, or 0.39%, to 7,283.6, leaving the benchmark index down 0.3 points since last Friday's close and down 3.6% from its February 3 finish. The broader All Ordinaries on Friday gained 24 points, or 0.32%, to 7,484.

Every sector finished higher on Friday except for the interest-rate-sensitive real estate industry, which fell 0.3%. Telecommunications was the biggest gainer, rising 0.9%.

In the energy sector, Woodside rose another 0.5%, to a two-month high of $37.79, after positive results earlier in the week, while Santos added 1.3% to $7.20.

In mining, BHP rose 0.6% to $48.32, Rio Tinto gained 1.6% to $126.43 but Fortescue Metals fell 1.3% to $22.76. Also, Mineral Resources dropped 0.7% to $89.42 as the mining services company declared its $497 million takeover offer for Norwest Energy would be its final and best bid, while Liontown Resources soared 13.4% to $1.63 after Bell Potter slapped a speculative buy rating and $2.81 price target on the lithium developer.

The big banks all bounced back from Thursday's sharp sell-off prompted by a warning that Australian mortgage arrears, while still low, were increasing. NAB rose 1.1% to $29.15, CBA added 0.7% to $97.75, Westpac climbed 0.4% to $21.73 and ANZ gained 0.6% to $23.85.

From Shane Oliver, AMP:

  • Global share markets rose over the last week with hopes that interest rates won’t rise any more than already priced in. For the week US shares rose 1.9% with a solid rebound from technical support levels, Eurozone shares rose 2.4% and Japanese and Chinese shares both rose 1.7%. Despite the positive global lead, the Australian share market fell 0.3% with gains in resources stocks more than offset by losses in other sectors, particularly financials and property stocks. Bond yields rose further with the US 10-year bond yield briefly rising above 4%. Oil, metal and iron ore prices all rose as did the $A with the $US down for the week.
  • Global inflation and the risk of more rate hikes triggering a recession remains the main concern for investment markets. The good news is that our US Pipeline Inflation Indicator, despite rising slightly in the last week, continues to point to a further fall in inflation reflecting improved supply, lower freight costs & the downtrend in business surveys regarding costs & prices.
  • Maybe Australia is different, justifying relatively lower interest rates after all. RBA commentary over the last month has been very hawkish, and particularly so were its comments in its last board meeting minutes implying that the lower cash rate in Australia (now 3.35%) compared to comparable countries (with a range of 4% to 4.75% in the UK, Canada, the US and NZ) may not be justified with little evidence to suggest monetary policy is more potent in Australia. Our view has been that monetary policy is more potent in Australia – due to high debt ratios and a high reliance on short term mortgage rates. The run of recent data since the last RBA meeting supports this with: weak jobs data; a plunge in consumer confidence back to recessionary lows; slower than expected wages growth; stagnant nominal retail sales since September (and falling retail sales in real terms); weaker than expected underlying December quarter GDP growth (absent net exports it would have gone backwards); and weaker than expected inflation in January. This is all against the backdrop of an ongoing plunge in building approvals and housing finance.
  • Economic data can run hot and cold and seasonal adjustment issues may be playing a role but taken together the run of recent data suggests that demand is cooling and inflation has peaked. As such we remain concerned that the RBA over-reacted to the December quarter CPI release in adopting a very hawkish stance over the last month. Our view is that the RBA has likely already done enough to cool growth and inflation and so should pause to allow more time for lags to work particularly given the run of soft recent data. 

Curated by James Gruber and Leisa Bell

 

Latest updates

PDF version of Firstlinks Newsletter

Australian ETF Review from Bell Potter

ASX Listed Bond and Hybrid rate sheet from NAB/nabtrade

Listed Investment Company (LIC) Indicative NTA Report from Bell Potter

LIC Monthly Report from Morningstar

Plus updates and announcements on the Sponsor Noticeboard on our website

 

29 Comments
Steve
March 08, 2023

What does "not retrospective" really mean?
I consider it should include those who have previously committed to the rules of the time and made their retirement based on their SMSF capacity. There's no going back to restarting your business at 73 or even getting a reasonably paid job at that age, so, the new rules effecting that person are retrospective!
Taxing unrealised capital gains is absolutely socialist agenda practiced in France. French friends emigrated to Australia for that very reason and are now horrified that our democracy is to enforce similar taxes!

SMSF Trustee
March 09, 2023

No Steve,

Retrospective would be if the tax was calculated on earnings in years before the change is made.

The idea that whatever rules are in place on day 1 have to remain in place is just silly. Policies always need to be flexible and adapt to the community's needs. And right now we need extra revenue to improve the budget. It's not unreasonable to tax people with over $3mn in super a bit more to contribute to that. Anyone who has that much is earning around $130k per annum and is being taxed concessionally. This increases the tax they'll pay by only 15% of earnings on the bit of their portfolio that's over the $3mn. EG they get 10% on a year so that's $30k growth in their Total Balance. 25% of that is $4,500. If they have $4mn and get 10% growth then they'll pay $6,000.
I dont like the new earnings calc including unrealised gains - it stinks. I personally dont like paying more tax. But arguing that these are changes that will derail the retirement strategy of anyone who has accumulated that amount is just nonsense. It doesn't derail mine. I might tweak my strategy, but I cannot and will not argue that I've been done an injustice.

Jan H
March 07, 2023

If your super has a balance and is in pension mode and you want to avoid complications, just withdraw enough money to keep it under $3m and pay tax on that amount at your individual tax rate, which depending on your taxable income could be anywhere from zero to 45 cents in the dollar.
Having said that, in respect of the unrealised gains, those with property in super will have problems. That is a dilemma for Labor.

Mark
March 09, 2023

All good and well if you are at or above preservation age, you have opportunities to reduce how this affects you. Under preservation age, you can't, TSB of $3M is saying $3m is sufficient, if so you should be allowed to take any amounts over out of Superannuation if you wish.

Allan
March 06, 2023

"[...] ...your retirement savings are going to be safer under Labor. ... [...]"

Quite apart from one's retirement savings never having been safe from anything or anyone, the word 'safer' is a nonsense. Something is either 'safe' or it isn't, and if it is veritably 'safe' then it is 'safe' to say that it cannot be improved upon. Any use of the weasel-word 'safer' merely weakens the import of the word 'safe' and the minds of those who subserviently swallow 'its' subterfuge.

"[...] ...means that the economy means that the economy must expand... [...]"

Would you care to expand on "this" a little further by (m)any means, Graham?

Bryan
March 05, 2023

Doesn't this change existing tax principles!
For example, if you have an earnings loss, then that must mean that your Capital losses exceeded income from dividends etc You carry forward this loss. The next tax year you have no capital loss or gain, just dividend income. However you have carried over an earnings loss (derived from a capital loss) and use this to offset an earnings gain (derived from income.)
Never before have capital losses been allowed to be used this way. Hasn't a can of worms been opened up?

A question. I have significant capital losses accrued in my SMSF. I presume they can still be used to offset capital gains when calculating tax on the first 15%...

Comments?

MKAdelaide
March 05, 2023

The tax on unrealised gains opens a new tax front.
At present the 15% tax on accumulation accounts’ earnings does not apply to unrealised gains. Company Tax does not apply to unrealised gains. Personal income tax does not apply to unrealised gains.
Are they planning the new tax regime to apply to unrealised gains on the part of an accumulation fund which is below the $3 million? If not, how will the calculations actually work to avoid that?

The change is particularly heinous. A typical fund wholly invested in ASX shares dropped X% in FY 20 and bounced back by that amount and more in FY 21.
Had the fund exceeded the $3m cap before FY 20, and dropped to a level just over it at 30 June, in FY 21, it would be paying tax on the whole increase, including the recovery of the losses in the prior year.
How is that fair?
If the gains are to be taxed, why are losses not refunded or at least kept to offset later year gains, as is the case elsewhere in the taxing regime?
For me, having reached 65, I am getting out of the system for any funds in excess of the pension account. The amount of tax at 30% is just 15% more than in my personal possession. The fees on the super fund - accountant and auditor - are a large offset to that additional expense and I can deal with my assets without the paperwork and the lascivious lusting of Labor.
Labor might be proud of creating superannuation, but they have killed it.

Peter
March 05, 2023

I have a good friend who started a business in his 20s ,Worked extremely hard and was very successful. He built a beautiful house then married. When he Divorced he kept his business as well as his factory (which is in Super with a Large Mortgage ). The business suffered but he managed to get enough for a deposit on a small house . He married again and divorced again and lost the house .The business suffered and couldn't afford the Factory repayments. He moved in with his Father and ran the business from there .He rented the Factory ,but the Rent didn't cover the repayments. He had a Breakdown ,ended up in an institution and lost his Business. He now Lives in a caravan but he has his factory( in Super ) worth over $3m and the Rent just covers the Repayments. He is now in his early 50s. I told him last year that by the time he is 60 the Factory will be paid off and the Rent will be enough to live on . With the new Unrealised Capitol Gains Rule I fear for his wellbeing . Does anyone understand what would need to happen in this circumstance.

Mic Smith
March 05, 2023

Really Graham, why do you have to make your publication so partisan by an overtly politically biased tone and such statements as "the Murdoch media". You really do diminish what should be an informative and helpful journal for old guys like me on retirement matters.

SMSF Trustee
March 05, 2023

Mic Smith, I disagree with your criticism.
Graham has provided a quite dispassionate account of a political announcement. He's not being political, he's just commentating and stating what he likes and doesn't like about the policy.
And everyone refers to "the Murdoch press".

Bruce Gregor
March 05, 2023

Siperannuation Assets at $3.5 trillion are now the largest pool of financial assets (big 4 banks assets $3.3 trillion, stock market equity market cap $2.5 trillion). While ever there is no compulsion to provide lifetime pensions, politicians of all persuasions will see super assets as easy pickings. The current little skirmish from a left leaning Treasurer is just a flesh wound payback on the rich for their Liberal mates being mean to industry funds. If people were to see more significant political access to the super till reflected in reduced projected pension on their annual statement, this action would bring ballot box retribution like people feel when mortgage payments are going up from the unaccountable RBA weilding their blunt instrument.

Bill
March 03, 2023

The explanatory statement at the beginning of the article says:
"To be clear, it's not individuals with super over $3 million that will have all earnings taxed at 30%. The earnings on the first $3 million will remain taxed at the current 15% (or 0% in pension mode) and only the earnings on the amount over $3 million will be taxed at 30%."
Regarding the 0% tax in pension mode, doesn't that only apply to the first $1.7 million? In effect there will be three categories for people in pension mode: zero tax, 15% tax and 30% tax?

Simon
March 03, 2023

The 0% tax in pension mode applies to the amount in your pension account. You can put a max of $1.7m in, but it can grow to a higher figure through capital growth and investment returns. e.g. it could well be $2.5M over time and you would pay 0% tax on the earnings. The new additional 15% tax applies when the the TSB (including the pension mode) is over $3M. So if you had funds in the pension mode and accumulation mode, you would pay 0% on the pension mode earnings, 15% on the accumulation mode earnings, then the new tax if the pension mode + accumulation mode is more than $3M at the end of the financial year (and this new tax is not really an earnings tax..!).

Ashley Voigt
March 03, 2023

As per the cartoon in The Age today by Golding –
Reporter questioning Anthony Albanese:
You promised not to touch this flawed and inequitable policy before the election.
How can you justify changing it now?

Tom Taylor
March 09, 2023

Don't know what your problem is. its George Orwell's animal farm. The pigs are in charge whether its labor or or the coalition. They get a super scheme that you and I could only dream for. We allow them when they retire from parliament to be parachuted into another government position AND they get to collect their super while working, unlike us the unwashed voters. If you have an SMSF you are the draft horse that gets sent to the knackery. What can be more fair than that? Apparently according to the Australian newspaper poll 62% of the sheeple think its a good thing. We most cetainly get the governments we deserve... suck it up people

Martin
March 03, 2023

I can't stand the term "start a conversation". It is nothing of the sort. A thought bubble is floated by the bad cop (Chalmers), watered down by the good cop (Albanese), then gradually brought into being by a series of trade-offs which were probably factored in from the start. Bit like putting a frog into a pan of water and bringing it to the boil slowly. By the time the poor frog realises what is going on, it's too late

Rez
March 02, 2023

Until the next election, Dutton will argue the changes are unacceptable, supported by the Murdoch media. It's not the only thing that's 'unnaceptable'.

Hmmmm, maybe another way of putting this is;

Until the next election, Albanese and Chambers will argue the changes are acceptable, supported by the ABC and the Fairfax media’

Rose B
March 03, 2023

You get to vote on it before so ball is in your court……

Mic Smith
March 05, 2023

Hi Rez,
Clearly I am not the only one who has picked up on the rigorously balanced and unbiased journalism of First Links.

Vincent
March 02, 2023

Once again I am surprised that you did not criticise Costello for changing the superannuation system without "a conversation" and creating "uncertainty" when he abolished the tax on pension phase withdrawals. It seems that changes favourable to the taxpayer do not create uncertainty and do not need a conversation. Never a word about whether it is good policy or not, and with the current fiscal cliff looming for our grandchildren, I know which is better policy.

TonyD
March 03, 2023

Glad someone said this.

Peter Goerman
March 02, 2023

The sting in the tail is the tax on unrealised capital gains, calculated by subtracting the start-of-year Total Superannuation Balance (TSB) from the end-of-year Total Superannuation Balance (TSB), which is ON TOP of the tax on all other earnings. Is this the first time in Australian tax history that unrealised capital gains are taxed? It was never mentioned by the Treasurer!!! What an underhanded approach to milking the taxpayer!

June
March 03, 2023

So, if they are going to tax "unrealised Capital Gains" in your super account, as they also going to subtract from that figure "unrealised Capital Losses" sitting in the fund and on the accounts as at financial year end? Methinks not! People who have shares in their super fund occasionally have losses, sometimes even outside their control for takeovers etc. The proposal at the moment does not affect us personally, but it is so ill-thought out, I can't help wondering what's the next sting in the tail?

D Ives
March 02, 2023

There is little sign of savings in pensions. Pollies just keep increasing the pension rates from time to time, and widening eligibility and/or perks. The argument about saving on pensions is undermined at every turn.

brendan ainsworth
March 02, 2023

the changes to super are a disgrace
what about the judges and politicians earningt 400k and more in retirement with no mention of them being hit with this tax or any tax
we now will have 3 levels of taxation in super
this goverment is a joke
why cant it make some tough decisions on spending cuts
no way could they do that !!!

Chris Hoch
March 03, 2023

There are a host of public servants as well as politicians on defined benefit funds which pay indexed pensions that would require capital balance well in excess of $3M. Not word about them. That is absolutely outrageous.

Greg Hutchison
March 06, 2023

Interesting. I am also in that situation. Back in 2017 my Transfer Balance Credit from my $39K CSS pension was $626,594.46. On top of this I have a SMSF worth in the order of $900K giving me a TBC Amount of around $1.5M in 2017. I have no understanding if I would use the old TBC from 2017 to work out my future Total Super Balance in the future. I have always understood that my CSS Balance amount wont change even though the CSS pension is indexed. If they are not going to use the old TBC to work out ones total super balance then its going to get very messy.

Roland Geitenbeek
March 02, 2023

If every working person was asked to vote on if they wanted the "Compulsory Super" contibution from their employer added to their pay packet and then given the option to either pay up to 15% of their gross pay into super as a fully tac deducatable payment, I am certain there would be an overwhelming vote in favour. If anything is worthy of a referendum this is and it should be binding and never ever able to be changed other than by a referendum.

C
March 02, 2023

The point of the Super system is to have people saving for retirement whether they like it or not and therefore less people on the full aged pension. People who take the employer contribution money in their pay packet instead and then spend it all before retirement then need taxpayers to fund their aged pension retirement.

 

Leave a Comment:

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Vale Graham Hand

It’s with heavy hearts that we announce Firstlinks’ co-founder and former Managing Editor, Graham Hand, has died aged 66. Graham was a legendary figure in the finance industry and here are three tributes to him.

Australian stocks will crush housing over the next decade, one year on

Last year, I wrote an article suggesting returns from ASX stocks would trample those from housing over the next decade. One year later, this is an update on how that forecast is going and what's changed since.

Avoiding wealth transfer pitfalls

Australia is in the early throes of an intergenerational wealth transfer worth an estimated $3.5 trillion. Here's a case study highlighting some of the challenges with transferring wealth between generations.

Taxpayers betrayed by Future Fund debacle

The Future Fund's original purpose was to meet the unfunded liabilities of Commonwealth defined benefit schemes. These liabilities have ballooned to an estimated $290 billion and taxpayers continue to be treated like fools.

Australia’s shameful super gap

ASFA provides a key guide for how much you will need to live on in retirement. Unfortunately it has many deficiencies, and the averages don't tell the full story of the growing gender superannuation gap.

Looking beyond banks for dividend income

The Big Four banks have had an extraordinary run and it’s left income investors with a conundrum: to stick with them even though they now offer relatively low dividend yields and limited growth prospects or to look elsewhere.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

9 lessons from 2024

Key lessons include expensive stocks can always get more expensive, Bitcoin is our tulip mania, follow the smart money, the young are coming with pitchforks on housing, and the importance of staying invested.

Investment strategies

Time to announce the X-factor for 2024

What is the X-factor - the largely unexpected influence that wasn’t thought about when the year began but came from left field to have powerful effects on investment returns - for 2024? It's time to select the winner.

Shares

Australian shares struggle as 2020s reach halfway point

It’s halfway through the 2020s decade and time to get a scorecheck on the Australian stock market. The picture isn't pretty as Aussie shares are having a below-average decade so far, though history shows that all is not lost.

Shares

Is FOMO overruling investment basics?

Four years ago, we introduced our 'bubbles' chart to show how the market had become concentrated in one type of stock and one view of the future. This looks at what, if anything, has changed, and what it means for investors.

Shares

Is Medibank Private a bargain?

Regulatory tensions have weighed on Medibank's share price though it's unlikely that the government will step in and prop up private hospitals. This creates an opportunity to invest in Australia’s largest health insurer.

Shares

Negative correlations, positive allocations

A nascent theme today is that the inverse correlation between bonds and stocks has returned as inflation and economic growth moderate. This broadens the potential for risk-adjusted returns in multi-asset portfolios.

Retirement

The secret to a good retirement

An Australian anthropologist studying Japanese seniors has come to a counter-intuitive conclusion to what makes for a great retirement: she suggests the seeds may be found in how we approach our working years.

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.