Search

Funding for refugees has long been politicized − punitive action against UNRWA and Palestinians fits that pattern

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicholas-r-micinski-207353">Nicholas R. Micinski</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-maine-2120">University of Maine</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kelsey-norman-862895">Kelsey Norman</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rice-university-931">Rice University</a> At least a dozen countries, including the U.S., have <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/01/1145987">suspended funding to the UNRWA</a>, the United Nations agency responsible for delivering aid to Palestinian refugees. This follows allegations made by Israel that <a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/at-least-12-u-n-agency-employees-involved-in-oct-7-attacks-intelligence-reports-say-a7de8f36">12 UNRWA employees participated</a> in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack. The UNRWA responded by <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-palestinian-refugee-agency-investigates-staff-suspected-role-israel-attacks-2024-01-26/">dismissing all accused employees</a> and opening an investigation. While the seriousness of the accusations is clear to all, and the U.S. has been keen to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/30/us/politics/aid-gaza-israel.html">downplay the significance</a> of its pause in funding, the action is not in keeping with precedent. Western donors did not, for example, defund other U.N. agencies or peacekeeping operations amid accusations of <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/01/11/un-peacekeeping-has-sexual-abuse-problem">sexual assault</a>, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-un-general-assembly-president-and-five-others-charged-13-million-bribery-scheme">corruption</a> or <a href="https://www.hrw.org/legacy/summaries/s.bosnia9510.html">complicity in war crimes</a>. In real terms, the funding cuts to the UNRWA will affect <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/where-we-work/gaza-strip">1.7 million Palestinian refugees in Gaza</a> along with an additional 400,000 Palestinians without refugee status, many of whom benefit from the UNRWA’s infrastructure. Some critics have gone further and said depriving the agency of funds <a href="https://jacobin.com/2024/01/unrwa-defunding-gaza-israel">amounts to collective punishment</a> against Palestinians. Refugee aid, and humanitarian aid more generally, is theoretically meant to be neutral and impartial. But as experts in <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/reluctant-reception/558E2A93FF99B8F295347A8FA2053698">migration</a> <a href="https://www.routledge.com/UN-Global-Compacts-Governing-Migrants-and-Refugees/Micinski/p/book/9780367218836">and</a> <a href="https://press.umich.edu/Books/D/Delegating-Responsibility">international relations</a>, we know funding is often used as a foreign policy tool, whereby allies are rewarded and enemies punished. In this context, we believe the cuts in funding for the UNRWA fit a wider pattern of the politicization of aid to refugees, particularly Palestinian refugees. <h2>What is the UNRWA?</h2> The UNRWA, short for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, was established two years after about <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-nakba-at-75-palestinians-struggle-to-get-recognition-for-their-catastrophe-204782">750,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from their homes</a> during the months leading up to the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the subsequent Arab-Israeli war. Prior to the UNRWA’s creation, international and local organizations, many of them religious, provided services to displaced Palestinians. But after <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">surveying the extreme poverty</a> and dire situation pervasive across refugee camps, the U.N. General Assembly, including all Arab states and Israel, voted to create the UNRWA in 1949. Since that time, <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/what-we-do">the UNRWA has been the primary aid organization</a> providing food, medical care, schooling and, in some cases, housing for the 6 million Palestinians living across its five fields: Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, as well as the areas that make up the occupied Palestinian territories: the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The mass displacement of Palestinians – known as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-nakba-at-75-palestinians-struggle-to-get-recognition-for-their-catastrophe-204782">Nakba, or “catastrophe</a>” – occurred prior to the <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/about-unhcr/who-we-are/1951-refugee-convention">1951 Refugee Convention</a>, which defined refugees as anyone with a well-founded fear of persecution owing to “events occurring in Europe before 1 January 1951.” Despite a <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/legacy-pdf/4ec262df9.pdf">1967 protocol extending the definition</a> worldwide, Palestinians are still excluded from the primary international system protecting refugees. While the UNRWA is responsible for providing services to Palestinian refugees, the United Nations also created the U.N. Conciliation Commission for Palestine in 1948 to seek a <a href="https://www.refworld.org/docid/4fe2e5672.html">long-term political solution</a> and “to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation.” As a result, the UNRWA does not have a mandate to push for the traditional durable solutions available in other refugee situations. As it happened, the conciliation commission was active only for a few years and has since been sidelined in favor of the U.S.-brokered peace processes. <h2>Is the UNRWA political?</h2> The UNRWA has been <a href="https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/palestinian-refugees-dispossession">subject</a> to political headwinds since its inception and especially during periods of heightened tension between Palestinians and Israelis. While it is a U.N. organization and thus ostensibly apolitical, it has <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">frequently been criticized</a> by Palestinians, Israelis as well as donor countries, including the United States, for acting politically. The UNRWA performs statelike functions across its five fields – including education, health and infrastructure – but it is restricted in its mandate from performing political or security activities. Initial Palestinian objections to the UNRWA stemmed from the organization’s early focus on economic integration of refugees into host states. Although the UNRWA officially adhered to the U.N. General Assembly’s <a href="https://www.unrwa.org/content/resolution-194">Resolution 194</a> that called for the return of Palestine refugees to their homes, U.N., U.K. and U.S. <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">officials searched</a> for means by which to resettle and integrate Palestinians into host states, viewing this as the favorable political solution to the Palestinian refugee situation and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In this sense, Palestinians perceived the UNRWA to be both highly political and actively working against their interests. In later decades, the UNRWA <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">switched its primary focus</a> from jobs to education at the urging of Palestinian refugees. But the UNRWA’s education materials were <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">viewed</a> by Israel as further feeding Palestinian militancy, and the Israeli government insisted on checking and approving all materials in Gaza and the West Bank, which it has occupied since 1967. While Israel has <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">long been suspicious</a> of the UNRWA’s role in refugee camps and in providing education, the organization’s operation, which is internationally funded, <a href="https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/east-mediterranean-mena/israelpalestine/242-unrwas-reckoning-preserving-un-agency-serving-palestinian-refugees">also saves</a> Israel millions of dollars each year in services it would be obliged to deliver as the occupying power. Since the 1960s, the U.S. – UNRWA’s primary donor – and other Western countries have <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">repeatedly expressed their desire</a> to use aid to prevent radicalization among refugees. In response to the increased presence of armed opposition groups, the <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/refuge-and-resistance/9780231202855">U.S. attached a provision</a> to its UNRWA aid in 1970, requiring that the “UNRWA take all possible measures to assure that no part of the United States contribution shall be used to furnish assistance to any refugee who is receiving military training as a member of the so-called Palestine Liberation Army (PLA) or any other guerrilla-type organization.” The UNRWA adheres to this requirement, even publishing an annual list of its employees so that host governments can vet them, but it also <a href="https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/east-mediterranean-mena/israelpalestine/242-unrwas-reckoning-preserving-un-agency-serving-palestinian-refugees">employs 30,000 individuals</a>, the vast majority of whom are Palestinian. Questions over the links of the UNRWA to any militancy has led to the rise of Israeli and international <a href="https://cufi.org/issue/unrwa-teachers-continue-to-support-antisemitism-terrorism-on-social-media-un-watch/">watch groups</a> that document the social media activity of the organization’s large Palestinian staff. <h2>Repeated cuts in funding</h2> The United States has used its money and power within the U.N. to block criticism of Israel, vetoing at least <a href="https://www.un.org/depts/dhl/resguide/scact_veto_table_en.htm">45 U.N. resolutions</a> critical of Israel. And the latest freeze is not the first time the U.S. has cut funding to the UNRWA or other U.N. agencies in response to issues pertaining to the status of Palestinians. In 2011, the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE79U5ED/#:%7E:text=WASHINGTON%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20The%20United,grant%20the%20Palestinians%20full%20membership.">U.S. cut all funding to UNESCO</a>, the U.N. agency that provides educational and cultural programs around the world, after the agency voted to admit the state of Palestine as a full member. The Obama administration defended the move, claiming it was required by a 1990s law to defund any U.N. body that admitted Palestine as a full member. But the impact of the action was nonetheless severe. Within just four years, UNESCO was <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1758-5899.12459">forced to cut its staff in half</a> and roll back its operations. President Donald Trump later <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/u-s-and-israel-officially-withdraw-from-unesco">withdrew the U.S. completely from UNESCO</a>. In 2018, the Trump administration paused its <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/31/us/politics/trump-unrwa-palestinians.html">US$60 million contribution to the UNRWA</a>. Trump claimed the pause would create political pressure for Palestinians to negotiate. President Joe Biden restarted U.S. contributions to the UNRWA in 2021. <h2>Politicization of refugee aid</h2> Palestinian are not the only group to suffer from the politicization of refugee funding. After World War II, states established different international organizations to help refugees but strategically excluded some groups from the refugee definition. For example, the U.S. funded the <a href="https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/last-million-eastern-european-displaced-persons-postwar-germany">U.N. Relief and Rehabilitation Administration to help resettle displaced persons after World War II</a> but resisted Soviet pressure to forcibly repatriate Soviet citizens. The U.S. also created a separate organization, <a href="https://academic.oup.com/ijrl/article-abstract/1/4/501/1598187">the precursor to the International Organization for Migration</a>, to circumvent Soviet influence. In many ways, the UNRWA’s existence and the exclusion of Palestinian refugees from the wider refugee regime parallels this dynamic. Funding for refugees has also been politicized through the earmarking of voluntary contributions to U.N. agencies. Some agencies receive funding from U.N. dues; but the UNRWA, alongside the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Organization for Migration, receive the majority of their funding from voluntary contributions from member states. These contributions can be earmarked for specific activities or locations, leading to donors such as the <a href="https://www.peio.me/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/PEIO12_paper_107.pdf">U.S. or European Union dictating which refugees get aid and which do not</a>. Earmarked contributions amounted to nearly <a href="https://unsceb.org/fs-revenue-agency">96% of the UNHCR’s budget, 96% of the IOM’s budget and 74% of UNRWA funding in 2022</a>. As a result, any cuts to UNRWA funding will affect its ability to service Palestinian refugees in Gaza – especially at a time when so many are <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/30/middleeast/famine-looms-in-gaza-israel-war-intl/index.html">facing hunger, disease and displacement</a> as a result of war.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222263/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicholas-r-micinski-207353">Nicholas R. Micinski</a>, Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-maine-2120">University of Maine</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kelsey-norman-862895">Kelsey Norman</a>, Fellow for the Middle East, Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rice-university-931">Rice University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/funding-for-refugees-has-long-been-politicized-punitive-action-against-unrwa-and-palestinians-fits-that-pattern-222263">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

“What a legend”: Brave Aussie pensioner saves puppy from a snake

An Aussie pensioner has gone the extra mile to save her terrified puppy from a carpet snake. Anne Murphy, a woman from NSW’s Lennox Head, captured the moment her 80-year-old mother went toe-to-toe with the slippery intruder who was terrorising her dog and shared the interaction on a Facebook page called Australian Country Memes. According to Anne, her mother bolted out the door one Monday evening when she heard her dog “screaming”, when she was confronted with the carpet snake. The non-venomous snake had wrapped around the small dog and bitten it on the chin, when the 80-year-old intervened. The woman was “bitten three times” by the snake, before she “caught the snake so it could be taken out to the bush and hopefully not make its way back to her place”. She then took her puppy to the vet, and got home three hours after the incident first happened. The post has since received over 2,000 likes and hundreds comments, hailing the 80-year-old as a “legend“, “gutsy” and a “wonderful woman.” “She is a true blue here. My hat is off to you, amazing lady,” one person wrote. Another added, “Way to go! That’s just what country people do. God love her, they don’t make them like that anymore.” Image credits: Getty Images / Facebook

Family & Pets

"Stuff youse": Pensioner who's never owned a phone fights mobile detection camera fine

A pensioner from New South Wales has disputed a fine he was issued for using his phone while driving, despite never owning a phone. Frank Singh, 77, was captured on a mobile phone detection camera while driving on the Pacific Motorway last September, and was issued a fine for $362. Mr Singh has refused to pay the fine, claiming that he was holding his wallet when the image was captured. He also claims to have never owned a mobile phone or a computer in his life, wondering how the camera made such a mistake. The senior man decided to appeal and take Revenue NSW to court, despite the risk of paying thousands in legal fees if he lost the case. "Looks like I'm guilty on it, but I'm not," he told A Current Affair. "I thought, what the bloody hell is this all about, I don't own a mobile phone. I've never used a mobile phone. What a load of s***." When questioned what the item could be, he said, "I think it could be my wallet." While Mr Singh admitted he can't specifically remember what he was doing at the time, he believes he was possibly placing his wallet on the passenger seat after paying for fuel. Unfortunately, the review of the fine was rejected and Frank was ordered to pay the $362, but he has not given up. "Then I thought stuff youse, I'm not guilty, I don't own a bloody phone," he said. While preparing to appeal the fine once more, Revenue NSW revoked the fine after issuing a letter to Mr Singh saying he would not be required in court following an investigation by the government body. "We have decided to cancel the fine," the letter read. "You little bloody beauty, how good's that," Mr Singh said on hearing the news, before planning to celebrate the win with a beer at his local pub. Image credits: A Current Affair

Legal

Couple who found love in chemotherapy raise funds for final trip

Ainslie Plumb, 22, and Joe Fan, 29, found love in an unexpected place, at the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital. The couple met in 2022 while they were both undergoing leukaemia treatment. “We met at an event for young people with cancer and became friends following that,” Plumb told 7News. “(We) would hang out during our hospital stays, I asked him out in October 2022 and (we) have been together ever since.” While Plumb successfully entered remission, last October, Fan was told that he was now terminal, as doctors had run out of options to treat his Philadelphia chromosome positive acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. With only months left to live, Fan, who has actively given back to the hospital and cancer community by playing his violin for patients and staff and worked with the Queensland Youth Cancer Service, has one final wish - to travel. The couple have set a <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-joe-live-his-dreams" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GoFundMe</a>, to help raise funds which cover flights, accommodation and specialised travel insurance, for Fan's final trip. “I go through my cancer treatments and observe the toll that takes on my physical and mental wellbeing,” Fan said. “The end of a trip can hopefully mark the start of another — and I have held onto hope, looked forward and dreamed for one more trip, more time, one more experience with that someone I love.” Their first destination will be Taiwan and Hong Kong, where Fan's parents are from and where he spent a majority of his childhood. They also intend to travel to New Zealand and Western Australia to swim with whale sharks at Ningaloo in the state’s north. “We’re aiming at going at the end of February to give us time to co-ordinate with his doctors around his appointments and infusions, which are all booked in advance,” Plumb said. “We recently reached 75 per cent on the fundraiser and are hoping to hit 100 per cent perhaps by the end of January.” As of today, the couple have successfully raised over $21,000 from their $20,000 goal, and have thanked everyone in their community and strangers for their support. “Truly, words do not suffice,” the couple said. Images: 7News

Relationships

Carer allowance and disability pension set to increase

Over 936,000 Aussies are set to see a cash boost in the new year, as indexation to government payments takes effect from January. Australians receiving youth, student or carer support will receive a 6 per cent boost to their payments, as additional support to help them navigate the rising cost of living. “Australia’s social security system is a safety net that is continually strengthened and improved to support all vulnerable Australians,” Minister for Social Services Amanda Rishworth said. “Through regular indexation, our payments are adjusted in line with changes in the cost of living to retain their purchasing power.” For over 600,000 carers, the Carer Allowance is set to increase to $153.50 a fortnight, while the Disability Support Pension for Australians under 21 will increase by $31.10 to $44.90 a fortnight. Youth Allowance payments are also set to increase between $22.40 and $45.60 a fortnight, while Austudy payments will increase by between $36.20 and $45.60. The new year increases are being set into motion after a $40 a fortnight increase to youth and student payment rates, which was effective from September 20. A complete list of the new payment increases can be found on the <a href="https://www.dss.gov.au/about-the-department/benefits-payments/previous-indexation-rates" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Department of Social Services website</a>. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Pensioner's epic 600-mile journey from England to Scotland on a pony

Jane Dotchin has completed an epic 600-mile (1000 km) journey from England to the Scottish Highlands with her pack pony Diamond, and disabled Jack Russell terrier Dinky. The 82-year-old has been making this seven-week trek every year since 1972, with nothing but her trusted pony, pet dog and a few belongings including a tent, food and water which she carries in a saddlebag. The pensioner travels between 15 and 20 miles a day from Hexham, Northumberland to Inverness in the Scottish Highlands. "I love camping and I love the countryside," she said, according to the <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-12735287/Pensioner-82-completes-600-mile-ride-England-Scotland-horse-Diamond-7-week-trip-shes-year-1972.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daily Mail</a>. Her dog Dinky, who deformed front legs, is just as happy to go on the adventure, sitting comfortably in the saddlebag as the world passes by her. She lives on porridge, oatcakes and cheese, and carries an old mobile phone in case of emergencies. Dotchin does not let her eye-patch stop her either, as she is determined to continue the tradition for as long as possible. "I know the route so well, I don’t need to read maps. I can manage if I keep to the routes I know," she told the publication. Dotchin first started long-distance trekking 40 years ago when she rode to Somerset, which was around 300 miles from where she lived, to visit a friend. She has made the journey up north every autumn since, and is an inspiration to many, with those who have spotted her sharing photos and videos of the avid horse rider. "A personal hero passed by just now!" wrote one person, who spotted Dotchin riding her pony back in 2021. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> A personal hero passed by just now! <a href="https://t.co/vcwcdjxMOI">https://t.co/vcwcdjxMOI</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/JaneDotchin?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#JaneDotchin</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/BBCScotland?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BBCScotland</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/TheScotsman?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TheScotsman</a> <a href="https://t.co/8qegaOLA3P">pic.twitter.com/8qegaOLA3P</a> — Robyn Woolston (@robynwoolston) <a href="https://twitter.com/robynwoolston/status/1441359649387671557?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2021</a></blockquote> "Went to watch a bike race and instead discovered an amazing, adventurous and inspirational woman," wrote another person, who spotted Dotchin in 2022. <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/CiLfMCVMOOy/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CiLfMCVMOOy/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Eiger X (@eiger.x)</a> </div> </blockquote> "What an absolute inspiration on a beautiful morning," wrote another, who spotted her a week later. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> When you’re struggling on a morning run and meet the incredible <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/janedotchin?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#janedotchin</a> on the path. This 82-year-old rides 600 miles across Scotland every autumn with her horse Diamond and disabled Jack Russell Dinky in her saddle bag. What an absolute inspiration on a beautiful morning. <a href="https://t.co/SuAvQug6dc">pic.twitter.com/SuAvQug6dc</a> — 📚🕷Suzy A #CrowMoon 🖤❤️📚 (@writer_suzy) <a href="https://twitter.com/writer_suzy/status/1569965657629794306?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 14, 2022</a></blockquote> Images: Twitter/ Instagram

International Travel

If you’re 65 or over and want to work, you’re far better off in New Zealand than Australia

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Want to keep working after you’ve reached pension age? The Australian government has just made it a <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/getting-more-australians-back-work">little bit</a> easier, increasing the amount you can earn per year from work before losing some of your pension by A$4,000 on an ongoing basis. Late last year, it temporarily upped the so-called <a href="https://www.dss.gov.au/seniors/programmes-services/work-bonus">work bonus</a> from $7,800 per year to $11,800 to “<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555212/original/file-20231023-17-xduxan.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip">incentivise pensioners into the workforce</a>”. It was part of the government’s response to its September jobs and skills summit. It meant pensioners could earn an underwhelming $227 per week from work without harming their pension, up from the previous $150. The rules for older workers are very different in New Zealand. In fact, if Australia adopted New Zealand’s approach, we could have an extra 500,000 willing workers – a fair chunk of them paying tax. <h2>What’s NZ doing differently for older workers?</h2> Last month, as part of his <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/employment-whitepaper/final-report">employment white paper</a>, Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers made the increase to $227 per week permanent. Chalmers headlined the announcement: <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/getting-more-australians-back-work">Getting more Australians back into work</a>. But it’s doing an underwhelming job. In Australia, <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/employment-and-unemployment/labour-force-australia-detailed/aug-2023">15.1%</a> of the population aged 65 and older are in some kind of paid work, up from 14.7% a year earlier. In contrast, in New Zealand the proportion has just hit <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/labour-market-statistics-june-2023-quarter/">26%</a>. That’s right: more than one-quarter of New Zealanders aged 65 and older are employed. It’s a similar story if we look at how Australia and New Zealand compared to others internationally on labour force participation (which covers those in paid work plus people actively looking for it). <hr /> <iframe id="qjojO" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/qjojO/5/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> New Zealand wants to see that number rise further. It has been talking about <a href="https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/what-we-can-do/seniorcitizens/older-workers-employment-action-plan/the-ageing-workforce-briefing-paper-future-of-work-governance-group-meeting-4-may-.pdf">33.1%</a> of its population aged 65 or more in paid work, which is what Iceland has. What is New Zealand doing for over-65s that Australia is not? You won’t find it mentioned in either treasury’s employment <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/employment-whitepaper/final-report">white paper</a> (released in September) or <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/publication/2023-intergenerational-report">intergenerational report</a> (released in August) – even though National Seniors Australia <a href="https://nationalseniors.com.au/uploads/NSA-Employment-White-Paper-Submission-Final-Web.pdf">pointed it out</a> in submissions. One crucial thing New Zealand is not doing is annoying pensioners who work. Australian pensioners in paid work get called in for discussions with Centrelink, if it looks as if they are at risk of doing too many hours and going over the $227 per week limit. <h2>The more you work, the more your pension is cut</h2> Pensioners who do go over the $227 per week limit lose half of every extra dollar they earn in a cut to their pension. Plus tax, this means they lose a total of <a href="https://ipa.org.au/publications-ipa/media-releases/employment-white-paper-cop-out">69%</a> of what they earn over the limit where their tax rate is 19%, and 82.5% on the portion of earnings taxed at 32.5%. And this is after the boost designed to “<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555212/original/file-20231023-17-xduxan.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip">incentivise pensioners into the workforce</a>”. Last year’s jobs summit also set up a <a href="https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/resource/download/womens-economic-equality-taskforce-final-report.pdf">Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce</a>. It reported this week, drawing attention to the “disincentive rates” facing second earners (usually women) who return to work after caring for children. It said that taking the loss of benefits, tax and childcare costs together, the penalty for returning to work was more than half of what was earned on the first three days of the week, and up to 110% of what was earned on the fourth and fifth days. My point here is that the losses facing age pensioners who attempt to work are of a similar order – in Australia but not in New Zealand. Australia’s rules aren’t just stopping pensioners from taking on extra hours. They seem to stop them taking up paid work at all. There were 2.6 million Australians on the age pension in June this year. Only <a href="https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/dss-payment-demographic-data/resource/7a6457a8-44a3-406c-b552-62eb0fef9d66">83,925</a> reported income from working. That’s just 3.2%. <h2>NZ pensioners keep their pensions</h2> What’s different about New Zealand is that New Zealand’s pensioners don’t face a penalty if they work. They simply face income tax. In New Zealand, the age pension (which is called <a href="https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/eligibility/seniors/superannuation/who-can-get-it.html">superannuation</a>, making it confusing for Australians) is paid to everyone of pension age. There’s no income test or assets test. You get it because you are a citizen or permanent resident. Australia wouldn’t need to go as far as New Zealand to get the same benefit. We would simply need to ditch the pension income test in cases where that income came from paid work, leaving the assets test in place. Then there would be no concern about working. <h2>Half a million reasons for change</h2> If we made that change – and if the same proportion of older Australians chose to work as New Zealanders – we would soon have an extra half a million older Australians able to step into fields such as teaching, where there are <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/jobs/job-vacancies-australia/latest-release">15,500 vacancies</a>, and health care and social assistance, where there are 68,100 vacancies. It would cost the federal government money because it’d put more Australians of pension age on the pension. But it’d cost less if we abolished the special tax concession for seniors and pensioners, known as the <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/income-deductions-offsets-and-records/tax-offsets/seniors-and-pensioners-tax-offset/">seniors and pensioners tax offset</a>. In New Zealand, senior citizens face the same tax rates as everyone else. And it would cost less as more pensioners earned wages and paid income tax. Calculations prepared for <a href="https://nationalseniors.com.au/uploads/NSA-Employment-White-Paper-Submission-Final-Web.pdf">National Seniors Australia</a> by Deloitte suggest that beyond a certain point, the change would become revenue-positive – actually boosting federal coffers – as the extra income tax revenue outweighed the cost of the extra pensions. National Seniors is calling its campaign <a href="https://nationalseniors.com.au/advocacy/fairer-retirement-income-system/let-pensioners-work">“let pensioners work”</a>. <h2>Tapping into the cash economy</h2> Importantly – and here’s where we get to a fact National Seniors might not like me mentioning – that would happen not only because more senior Australians were employed, but also because more senior Australians were employed legitimately. It’s hard to get a handle on how many senior Australians are working and being paid in cash, which they store rather than bank to avoid tripping the income test. But we do know this. At the end of March, there were <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/statistics/tables/xls/a06hist.xls?v=2021-04-05-19-23-58">18</a> Australian $100 notes in circulation for each Australian resident, an astonishingly high proportion given the use of cash for transactions is <a href="https://theconversation.com/cash-could-be-almost-gone-in-australia-in-a-decade-but-like-cheques-wholl-miss-it-208020">collapsing</a>. In New Zealand at the end of March, there were just <a href="https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/series/reserve-bank/bank-notes-in-the-hands-of-the-public">five</a> New Zealand $100 notes in circulation for each New Zealand resident. That may be just a coincidence. But New Zealand is certainly making it easier for retirees to work legitimately, rather than stay at home or accept cash in hand.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/216260/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, Visiting Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/if-youre-65-or-over-and-want-to-work-youre-far-better-off-in-new-zealand-than-australia-216260">original article</a>.

International Travel

Millions of Aussies set for a pension boost

Millions of Australians are set to receive a generous cash increase when an imminent welfare payment indexation comes into effect. Those on age pension payments from Centrelink will see a boost to their payment from Tuesday. According to figures from the Department of Social Services, single pensioners will receive an increase of $32.70, taking their payments to $1096.70 a fortnight. Couples on the adult pension will have their fortnightly payments increase by $24.70 to $826.70. Those on Jobseeker will also receive a boost to their payments, as payments will increase by $56.10 a fortnight to $749.20 for single people aged 22 or more with no children, and by $57.30 a fortnight for those with children to $802.50. Single people aged 55 or over will also have payments increased to $802.50 after nine months. Partnered people on Jobseeker will get a $54.80 increase to $686 a fortnight. Centrelink recipients on rent assistance, youth allowance and Austudy payments will also receive a boost to their fortnightly payments. Despite the increases across many welfare recipient groups, the Australian Council of Social Services says the increases are not enough. ACOSS said people almost three quarters of people they had surveyed on income support were eating less or skipping meals as the ongoing cost of living criss worsens. Half of the respondents said the incoming increase would not help at all, prompting the ACOSS to call for income support to at least match the pension rate. Image credits: Getty Images

Money & Banking

Medical Research Future Fund has $20 billion to spend. Here’s how we prioritise who gets what

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/adrian-barnett-853">Adrian Barnett</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/philip-clarke-1149967">Philip Clarke</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-oxford-1260">University of Oxford</a> The <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/medical-research-future-fund">Medical Research Future Fund</a> (MRFF) is a A$20 billion fund to support Australian health and medical research. It was set up in 2015 to deliver practical benefits from medical research and innovation to as many Australians as possible. Unlike the other research funding agencies, such the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), most of the MRFF funding is priority-driven. It seeks to fund research in particular areas or topics rather than using open calls when researchers propose their own ideas for funding. As the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/not-how-you-run-a-1b-scheme-science-fund-backers-lead-chorus-for-reform-20230619-p5dhni.html">Nine newspapers</a> outlined this week, researchers have criticised the previous Coalition government’s allocation of MRFF funds. There is widespread consensus the former health minister had <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/a-centre-never-built-and-a-hospital-that-missed-out-the-coalition-s-unusual-20b-research-fund-20230619-p5dhng.html">too much influence</a> in the allocation of funds, and there was limited and sometimes no competition when funding was directly allocated to one research group. The current Health Minister, Mark Butler, has instituted a <a href="https://www.innovationaus.com/billion-dollar-medical-research-grants-process-under-review/">review</a>. So how should the big decisions about how to spend the MRFF be made in the future to maximise its value and achieve its aims? <h2>Assess gaps in evidence</h2> Research priorities for the MRFF are set by the <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/committees-and-groups/australian-medical-research-advisory-board-amrab?language=und">Australian Medical Research Advisory Board</a>, which widely consults with the research sector. However, most researchers and institutions will simply argue more funding is needed for their own research. If the board seeks to satisfy such lobbying, it will produce fragmented funding that aligns poorly with the health needs of Australians. A better approach would be to systematically assemble evidence about what is known and the key evidence gaps. Here, the board would benefit from what is known as a “<a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15484602/">value of information</a>” framework for decision-making. This framework systematically attempts to quantify the most valuable information that will reduce the uncertainty for health and medical decision-making. In other words, it would pinpoint which information we need to allow us to better make health and medical decisions. There have been <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30288400/">attempts</a> to use this method in Australia to help inform how we prioritise hospital-based research. However, we now need to apply such an approach more broadly. <h2>Seek public input</h2> A structured framework for engaging with the public is also missing in Australia. The public’s perspective on research prioritisation has often been overlooked, but as the ultimate consumers of research, they need to be heard. Research is a highly complex and specialised endeavour, so we can’t expect the public to create sensible priorities alone. One approach used overseas has been developed by the <a href="https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/">James Lind Alliance</a>, a group in the United Kingdom that combines the public’s views with researchers to create agreed-on priorities for research. This is done using an intensive process of question setting and discussion. Priorities are checked for feasibility and novelty, so there is no funding for research that’s impossible or already done. The priorities from the James Lind Alliance process can be surprising. The top priority in the area of <a href="https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/priority-setting-partnerships/irritable-bowel-syndrome/top-10-priorities.htm">irritable bowel syndrome</a>, for example, is to discover if it’s one condition or many, while the second priority is to work on bowel urgency (a sudden urgent need to go to the toilet). While such everyday questions can struggle to get funding in traditional systems that often focus on novelty, funding research in these two priority areas could lead to the most benefits for people with irritable bowel syndrome. <h2>Consider our comparative advantages</h2> Australia is a relatively small player globally. To date, the MRFF has allocated around <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/medical-research-future-fund-mrff-grant-recipients?language=und">$2.6 billion</a>, just over 5% of what the United States allocates through the National Institute of Health funding in a <a href="https://www.who.int/observatories/global-observatory-on-health-research-and-development/monitoring/investments-on-grants-for-biomedical-research-by-funder-type-of-grant-health-category-and-recipient">single year</a>. A single research grant, even if it involves a few million dollars of funding, is unlikely to lead to a medical breakthrough. Instead, the MRFF should prioritise areas where Australia has a comparative advantage. This could involve building on past success (such as the research that led to the HPV, or human papillomavirus, vaccine to prevent cervical cancer), or where Australian researchers can play a critical role globally. However, there is an area where Australian researchers have an absolute advantage: using research to improve our own health system. A prime example would be finding ways to improve dental care access in Australia. For example, a randomised trial of different ways of providing insurance and dental services, similar to the <a href="https://www.rand.org/health-care/projects/hie.html">RAND Health Insurance Experiment</a> conducted in the United States in the 1970s. This could provide the evidence needed to design a sustainable dental scheme to complement Medicare. Now that is something the MRFF should consider as a funding priority.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209977/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/adrian-barnett-853">Adrian Barnett</a>, Professor of Statistics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/philip-clarke-1149967">Philip Clarke</a>, Professor of Health Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-oxford-1260">University of Oxford</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/medical-research-future-fund-has-20-billion-to-spend-heres-how-we-prioritise-who-gets-what-209977">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

"Entitled" widow sparks outrage over age pension question

An elderly widow has been slammed for writing in to a financial column asking for advice, despite being very well-off. The 88-year-old (NOT pictured here) wrote in to Nine newspapers’ columnist Noel Whittaker asking for advice on how to access a pension after the death of her husband. “My husband and I received a part pension but he passed away and I now have all the assets but no pension,” she wrote to Whittaker’s <a title="www.smh.com.au" href="https://www.smh.com.au/money/super-and-retirement/i-lost-my-pension-when-my-husband-died-can-i-get-it-back-20230718-p5dp2g.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ask Noel </a>column. “I am 88 and own my own home. I have $680,000 in savings and $180,000 in shares. My income is $25,000 p.a. is there anything I can do to get a part pension?” While the question seemed innocent enough, many Aussies were infuriated by the woman's query, sparking outrage on social media. One person pointed out how well off the woman was, mockingly saying, "We have $1m in assets. Can we get the age pension?” Another person wrote, “Lady you’re 88, where are you getting 25k per year if not investments? You’ll be fine, Karen.” The pile-on continued, with plenty more slamming the woman for being “entitled”, greedy, and mocking her for wanting even more money than she already had to spend over her remaining years. One person added, “How much longer does this person think they’re going to live that they need more than $1 million …” Another person offered their own advice if the last needed more money, encouraging her to use her $680,000 savings, saying "That's what it's there for." Another person summed it up by writing, “The problem with old people these days is they’re too entitled. Back in my day, old people reused their tea bags and were grateful.” Many even commented that the question was the exact kind of “fake” submission dreamt up for columnists to “enrage readers”, and someone posed their own mock question to Whittaker to point out how ludicrous the woman's question was. “I own my own home, have 6 million ingots in assets, and my income is several gold bullion per month. I am 300 years old. I am a fire-breathing dragon. Can I claim the part pension?” they wrote. Image credits: Getty Images

Retirement Income

“A little bit unfair”: Hard-working tradies blast age pension increase

A group of tired tradies have rallied against the “unfair” decision to increase the age of eligibility for the age pension. The tradesmen, all in their 60s, simply said their bodies “can’t handle” working in manual labour until they’re 70, which may be in their future if the eligibility age continues to rise. The age to qualify for the pension was raised from 66 years and six months to 67 on July 1st with the move impacting any Australian born after December 31st, 1956. Experts predict the age could rise even further to 70 by the year 2050 with the news sparking backlash among hardworking Aussies. One man, a concreter in his mid-60s named Steve, said working the manual labour job was already taking a toll on his body and that the new retirement age was “unfair” on those working physically demanding jobs. “Now I'm starting to feel it more in my knees, I've got arthritis in my hands, I've had two back surgeries,” he told <a href="https://9now.nine.com.au/a-current-affair/australian-tradies-outraged-over-decision-to-raise-pension-age-to-67/5b5c6dda-c995-44ad-bb29-98c625e9d276" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A Current Affair</a>. “It does seem a little bit unfair that you have to work all your life.” Peter, who cuts down trees in the Gold Coast for a living, compared the raising of the pension age to the harsh realities of his job. “It's just like climbing a tree,” he said. “The injuries are just climbing all the time, it's getting harder, worse, sorer all the time.” He described what was happening as “very scary”. “Unfortunately I thought 65 would be a nice time to retire and get on a pension but now we are talking 67,” he said. “Is it going to go up to 68, 69, 70?” Macquarie University Professor Hanlin Shang believes the pension age will need to rise to 70 or government spending will spiral out of control. He and other researchers estimate that the retirement age will rise to 68 by 2030, 69 in 2036 and 70 by 2050. “As Australians live longer than before, it presents a challenge to the government to fund retirees through a pension scheme,” Professor Shang said. Despite these challenges, Peter said politicians don't understand the burden that working physical jobs has on older bodies. “It would be nice to be a politician sitting on a nice comfortable chair all day in an air conditioned room or office,” he said. “They need to come out and see what it's like to do some physical work. That would make them change their mind in trying to stretch this pension out to 67, 68, 69, 70.” Image credits: A Current Affair

Retirement Income

Australia’s ‘retirement age’ just became 67. So why are the French so upset about working until 64?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-whiteford-2016">Peter Whiteford</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Since Saturday, Australians have been required to wait until the age of 67 until they can get the age pension. The original so-called “retirement age” of 65 for men dated back to <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/p2020-100554-ud01_outline.pdf">1909</a>. Women had their pension age lifted from 60 to 65 between 1995 and <a href="https://insidestory.org.au/work-till-you-drop/">2013</a>. And all Australians have had it lifted in stages from July 2017, in a process that ended on <a href="https://www.dss.gov.au/seniors/benefits-payments/age-pension">July 1 2023</a>. It has happened with little protest – a stark contrast to the demonstrations and riots that rocked France earlier this year, when President Macron proposed and passed laws to lift the French pension age from 62 to 64. <h2>What’s so special about French pensions?</h2> French strikes and demonstrations over the retirement age aren’t new. There were nationwide protests when France increased its retirement age from 60 to 62 in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/10/french-retirement-age-reform-62">2010</a>, before that in <a href="https://www.etui.org/covid-social-impact/france/pension-reform-in-france-background-summary-an-overview-of-pension-reforms-since-the-1990s-updated-july-2019">2003</a>, and in <a href="https://theconversation.com/pension-reform-in-france-macron-and-demonstrators-resume-epic-tussle-begun-over-30-years-ago-198354">1995</a>, when France tried to increase the pension age for public sector workers. Just about anything you could want to know about public pension schemes in high-income countries can be found in the <a href="https://www.oecd.org/about/">OECD</a> report <a href="https://www.oecd.org/publications/oecd-pensions-at-a-glance-19991363.htm">Pensions at a Glance</a>, published every two years, most recently in 2021. Public pension spending in <a href="https://www.oecd.org/els/public-pensions/PAG2021-country-profile-France.pdf">France</a> is 13.6% of GDP, compared to 4% in <a href="https://www.oecd.org/els/public-pensions/PAG2021-country-profile-Australia.pdf">Australia</a>. In part, this is because France has an older population than Australia, but it is also because French pension payments are more generous than both Australia’s age pension and superannuation supports taken together. <hr /> <iframe id="E0wpD" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/E0wpD/7/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> The OECD finding that Australia provides a replacement rate of about 40% and France of about 74% is “forward looking”, in that it is based on what a worker on average earnings is estimated to be entitled to under the system applying in 2020, if she or he works from age 22 until that country’s normal retirement age. For low-paid workers, Australia’s means-tested age pension makes the payments about as generous as those in France. <hr /> <iframe id="rJpy5" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/rJpy5/4/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> A separate 2018 OECD calculation showed that the average after-tax income of a French household headed by someone 65 years or older was <a href="https://www.oecd.org/publications/oecd-pensions-at-a-glance-19991363.htm">99.8%</a> of the average income of all French households. In contrast, the average after-tax income of an Australian household headed by someone of that age was 75% of that of all households. Given that French households receive about the same disposable income while retired as working, it is easy to see why they are keen to retire. And the heavy tax contributions required to fund their retirement incomes give them little opportunity to save privately while working. The level of median private wealth in Australia (converted at prevailing exchange rates) is nearly <a href="https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/assets/corporate/docs/about-us/research/publications/global-wealth-databook-2022.pdf">twice</a> that in France. Yet French public pension wealth is substantial. Calculating the value of the future pension income streams using life expectancies, the net pension wealth of French retirees amounts to 14 years of average earnings, compared to just over seven in Australia. Because the value of these income streams is strongly influenced by how long the pensions are received, raising the French pension age by two years would cut the value of French pension wealth by around 8%. <h2>Why was postponing pensions easier in Australia?</h2> The phase-in of the Australian change after 2017 meant it didn’t affect the retirement incomes of Australian workers until many years after the change was first announced, and didn’t affect the incomes of those already retired at all. And the Australian change legislated in 2009 was part of a <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/2738/2009_budget_pension_changes.pdf">broader program</a> of reforms that included the biggest single <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_Affairs/Newstartrelatedpayments/Report/section?id=committees%2Freportsen%2F024323%2F72678">increase in age and disability pensions and carer payments</a> in Australian history. Yet it will have losers. Those losing the most will be those with the shortest life expectancies. Indigenous men have life expectancies nearly <a href="https://www.niaa.gov.au/resource-centre/indigenous-affairs/commonwealth-closing-gap-annual-report-2022">nine</a> years lower than non-Indigenous men and Indigenous women nearly eight years lower. <h2>Which Australians will pay the highest price?</h2> And the change has pushed a substantial number of Australians aged 65 and over who would have once received the pension on to the <a href="https://theconversation.com/top-economists-want-jobseeker-boosted-100-per-week-tied-to-wages-150364">much-lower</a> Jobseeker unemployment payment. The number of people aged 65 years and over receiving JobSeeker climbed from zero in 2017 to <a href="https://www.data.gov.au/data/dataset/dss-income-support-recipients-monthly-time-series/resource/05f06c42-e027-43aa-b83e-28292f683ede">40,300</a> by May this year – and will climb further because of this month’s change. <figure class="align-right zoomable"><figcaption></figcaption></figure> These people are severely disadvantaged by this change, as the level of payment for an older unemployed person is more than $300 a fortnight less than the age pension, a gap that will only be slightly reduced by the increases announced in the most recent Commonwealth budget. Relatively little attention has been paid to these people, who because of the low level of payment are among the poorest in the Australian population – with very limited prospects of being able to improve their circumstances. In contrast, the idea of boosting tax on the earnings of superannuation balances over <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/28/albanese-government-lifts-tax-rate-on-superannuation-balances-over-3m">A$3 million</a> attracted <a href="https://www.firstlinks.com.au/mechanics-3m-dollar-super-tax-must-fixed">widespread criticism</a>. The very different institutional environments of Australia and France have created different lobby groups, with different interests to protect.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208648/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-whiteford-2016">Peter Whiteford</a>, Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-retirement-age-just-became-67-so-why-are-the-french-so-upset-about-working-until-64-208648">original article</a>.

Retirement Life

"I've done enough": Hero tradie slams raising of retirement age

Thousands of Australians are rallying behind one hard-working tradie, who is standing up in opposition to the proposed rising of the retirement age. On July 1st, the Aussie pension eligibility age will rise from 65 to 67, with research suggesting that it will rise again to the age of 70 by 2050. The tradie shared a photo holding a sign that reads, "Only a bloke who's worked in an office his whole life would think you can work until you're 70." Many have echoed his statement, particularly blue-collar workers who say it is asking too much of people approaching 70 to keep up physically demanding labour. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> The LNP has been working for years to oppress & dumb down the Australian population so that it has more power & control over us. But insisting that the retirement age should be 70 is just wrong. This isn’t about ‘left’ or ‘right’ any more. It’s about the elite vs the rest of us <a href="https://t.co/yxIuAL75rm">pic.twitter.com/yxIuAL75rm</a> — Bethany Williams 💙🇺🇦💛 (@BethanyinCBR) <a href="https://twitter.com/BethanyinCBR/status/1332236229077659651?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 27, 2020</a></blockquote> "My body is just tired, as is my husband's, who is 66. We both need to just rest now. We had planned on retirement at 65. Then they changed the goal posts," one person shared in replying to the image. "I've worked 43 years as a butcher. I'm almost 65 yrs old, I think I've done enough, and my body agrees," a second added. "I spent many years in a quarry as well as a coal mine, my body is physically worn out, so I 110 per cent agree with his poster," a third agreed. Others shared that they thought it was simply unfair to ask older Aussies to keep working in manual labour in order to provide for their families, during a time when they should be resting and starting to plan their retirement years without stressing about finances. Many angered Aussies spoke out about the politicians who are responsible for raising the age pension number, saying they have no idea how physically taxing manual labour jobs can be. "The politicians all need to get out of their chairs and do a tradies' job for a week or two then they will know what a bad back is and realise that the body won't let you work until you are 70," one person wrote. A second added added, "I would like to see all politicians work a week as a bricklayer, a boilermaker, a plumber, or a builder - doing what we did to 65, they couldn't for a week." Currently, Australians are able to access a pension wage at 65 years and 6 months as long as they were born between July 1st 1952 and December 31st 1953. Those born after that date will be able to access their pension from the age of 66. However, from July 1st anyone born after January 1st 1957 will have to work even longer with the pension age increasing to 67-years-old. Image credits: Facebook

Retirement Life

“If I can work until 70 it'll be a miracle”: Outrage over rising Aussie retirement age

People all across Australia have had a strong reaction to the news that they might have to keep working until they’re 70, if new modelling by Macquarie University’s Business School is anything to go by. According to the model - which takes the nation’s ageing population and declining birth rate into consideration - more people are set to reach pension age, but with fewer people still of working age available to support pensions paid by the state. As Professor Shang explained, “less people in the working group and more in retirement will make the old age dependency ratio (OADR) higher. “What this means is there are less working people to support elderly people. And with more elderly people in the population, this will create a burden for the government pension system.” Results from the group’s study found that in order to maintain the OADR [of 23 per cent], Australia’s pension age should rise to 68 years by 2030, 69 years by 2036, and 70 years by 2050. The news went down like a lead balloon on social media, with one researcher sharing an article to his Twitter, alongside a scathing - and wholly sarcastic - caption of his own. “Hey Millennials. Why are you increasingly getting peeved off at the system? Don’t you know how good you have it?” he asked. “You get to spend your life in debt, experiencing life long housing insecurity, and get to retire when you get wheeled into an age care home.” <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Hey Millennials. Why are you increasingly getting peeved off at the system? Don’t you know how good you have it? You get to spend your life in debt, experiencing life long housing insecurity, and get to retire when you get wheeled into an age care home. (Sarcasm font needed). <a href="https://t.co/jHJUxyjHMH">pic.twitter.com/jHJUxyjHMH</a> — Kos Samaras (@KosSamaras) <a href="https://twitter.com/KosSamaras/status/1663484016866246659?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 30, 2023</a></blockquote> One user was quick to remark that those behind the big decision should “try and be a Tradie at 70”, with the original tweeter agreeing that “after 50 is a stretch”. “Successive Federal Governments (as well as the current one) don't seem to be doing much about this problem!” another wrote. “And we get told we need to re-train to change jobs every 5 years, from a generation who had a ‘Job 4 Life’, Free University and owns all the properties,” one lamented. “We’re also paying their pensions, but we’ll never get a pension, because Superannuation is taken out of our wage also.” Meanwhile, one pretended to look on ‘the bright side’, with the fed up take that “on the plus side, if we are going to be expected to work until 75 or 80, maybe we can get 45-year mortgages to own a home. And our time outside of work will feel much longer when our commutes are 2 hours each way.” “I'm turning 40 this year. If I can work until 70 it'll be a miracle,” someone admitted. “I work In a laborious job and have [had] many injuries and one major injury in the last two years. “My body is already telling me it wants me to stop and find an easier job”. Images: Getty

Retirement Life

Tragic end for pensioner struck by royal motorcade

Helen Holland, the 81-year-old woman who was struck by a police motorcade escorting the Duchess of Edinburgh, has died. <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/news/news/elderly-woman-hospitalised-by-royal-motorcycle-escort">Helen was hit on May 10 at the junction of West Cromwell Road and Warwick Road in west London’s Earl’s Court</a>, and was taken to hospital after receiving treatment from paramedics at the scene. Her family confirmed the news of her passing, telling the BBC that while she had fought "for her life for nearly two weeks”, tragically “irreversible damage to her brain finally ended the battle”. Helen had suffered “multiple broken bones and massive internal injuries” in the crash, despite using the “safe route of [a] pedestrian crossing”, according to her son, Martin Holland. In the wake of the devastating incident, her family had announced that Helen was in a coma, with the police later revealing that she remained in a critical condition. In a statement reportedly shared with Sky News, the family had described Helen as a "beautiful, loving, kind, and caring lady who would always put anyone before herself. "The family are deeply saddened and shocked at the news Helen was involved in such a tragic accident.” They went on to share that while she had been 81 years old, she was “sprightly for her age and nothing stopped her living life to the full, spending precious time with her family, muddy walks with the dogs and lunches with friends is what she enjoyed most”, before asking that everyone keep her in their thoughts and prayers. Meanwhile, Buckingham Palace had announced that Sophie - the Duchess of Edinburgh - had offered her “heartfelt thoughts and prayers” to “the injured lady and her family”, and that she was “grateful for the swift response of emergency services and will keep abreast of developments". An investigation was launched by The Independent Office for Police Conduct soon after the event, and it remains ongoing, with the police watchdog assuring Helen’s family that they would keep them “regularly updated as the investigation progresses". That investigation involved examining footage from neary CCTV as well as footage from police body cameras. Additionally, officers who were present at the scene were to be interviewed, while the organisation sought other witnesses to come forward with any more information they might have. While the family waits for answers, they are also coming to terms with their difficult loss, with Helen’s grandson - Joe Strutter Holland - sharing on Facebook, “rest in peace Nanny (Helen) Holland. One of the kindest and most joyful souls you'll ever of had the pleasure of meeting. Taken before her time.” He went on to note that he was glad his grandmother and his son had gotten the chance to meet, writing 'I'll ensure he knows who you are, till we meet again”. Images: Facebook, Getty

Caring

"Get a grip": Retirees roasted over tone-deaf pension question

A pair of retirees - and their significant others - have found themselves at the centre of a new online debate, all because of their submission to one financial advice column, and its circulation on social media. Both retirees - each with millions of dollars to their names - submitted their concerns to the Sun Herald’s George Cochrane, hoping for financial advice and a solid strategy moving forward with their respective retirements. The first request saw a 78-year-old man and his 79-year-old wife ask if they should look into selling some of their shares in order to stay below a threshold. The couple were receiving an account-based pension from their self-managed super fund, with a combined total of nearly $2.3 million - he had $1,5999,956 and she had $675,590 as of July 2017. Their combined funds were invested in Australian shares, they noted, and gave them a “healthy return which includes imputation credits”. They went on to share that since 2017, some of their shareholdings had “more than doubled in value”, and that the husband’s contribution to their fund had exceeded “the $3 million limit which the government intends to bring in.” “What will be the tax implications if my SMSF reaches $4 million and my wife’s $1.8 million?” they asked. “Should we sell some of our shares to stay below the $3 million threshold?” The second request came from a 60-year-old woman on behalf of herself and her 50-year-old husband, in which she revealed they had property valued at $4 million, and that they’d accessed her super to pay their $300,000 mortgage. His super, meanwhile, still contained half a million. Additionally, the two had plans to relocate to Europe to a “less expensive property” in order for them to spend more time - and have more funds to put towards - travelling. “We prefer not to work,” she shared, “have no children and intend to spend all our money. What would be a good strategy?” Advice was given, but the column’s wave of response came when The Guardian’s deputy news editor Josephine Tovey shared it to her Twitter, sharing her thoughts on the “generational inequality” it represented, and closing her take with the line “what problems to have”. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Honestly if you want to get your blood up about generational inequality in Australia may I recommended the letters on the Money page of the Sun Herald? What problems to have. <a href="https://t.co/uka3EpbOOj">pic.twitter.com/uka3EpbOOj</a> — Josephine Tovey (@Jo_Tovey) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jo_Tovey/status/1660073911944638464?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 21, 2023</a></blockquote> Many - mostly those from younger generations, primarily millennials - were quick to side with Tovey, unable to wrap their heads around the idea that the couples’ problems were valid ones. “Oh no. I have TOO MUCH MONEY. What to do, what to do,” one user wrote. “‘I have more money than I know what to do with. Please help’,” another contributed. “I'd ‘prefer not to work’ too but here I am,” one quipped. And as someone else put it, “more than $4 million in assets but too cheap to pay for professional advice. Nothing could be more boomer than this.” “I think that there is huge inequity and variance among Boomers - often depending on the presence or absence of intergenerational wealth,” another user noted. “Ditto with millennials cos of [the] same reason”. However, for every person who was condemning them, another was prepped and ready to come to their defence. “Dear oh dear. Tall poppy syndrome strikes again - Australians are so good at trying to tear down the successful,” one said. “Seriously, get a grip everyone. Good luck to them and I hope they enjoy their respective retirements.” “My partner and I don’t have kids, we live in a modest house and save as much as we can so that we can retire early and travel, we are not landlords, we didn’t inherit any money but we should have about $2 million to retire on, we are working class,” one shared, “doesn’t seem wrong to me.” “They obviously worked hard and earnt it!! Haters going to hate - but good on them - I hope in 20 years when I retire, I have problems like this too,” another wrote. “So they have worked hard all their lives, they don’t have children and they want to travel - why is this an issue?” someone wanted to know, before adding that “they deserve to spend their twilight years in comfort.” Images: Twitter

Money & Banking

Are bigger super funds better? Actually no, despite what the industry is doing

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/geoff-warren-3657">Geoff Warren</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> Australia’s superannuation funds are getting bigger – and fewer. There were <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/aug/29/australian-superannuation-mergers-cut-number-of-funds-by-half-in-a-decade">close to 400</a> funds in 2010. With mergers, it’s now <a href="https://www.investordaily.com.au/superannuation/53144-are-mega-funds-poised-to-dominate-the-super-industry">closer to 120</a>. By 2025, according to industry executives surveyed last year, there will be <a href="https://www.investordaily.com.au/superannuation/50971-rise-of-mega-funds-set-to-intensify-erasing-100-funds-by-2025">fewer than 50</a>. The portfolios of the two biggest super funds, AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust, are bigger than even the federal government’s Future Fund Management Agency, which oversees the A$194 billion <a href="https://yearinreviewfy22.futurefund.gov.au/performance-results.html">Future Fund</a> and several other funds worth a total $242 billion. <hr /> <iframe id="0wOBb" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0wOBb/5/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Underpinning this consolidation is the idea that larger scale is beneficial for superannuation fund members. But that’s not necessarily true. A bigger fund is no guarantee of better returns. I’ve examined the issue of fund scale with Scott Lawrence, an investment manager with 35 year’s industry experience. Together we’ve written <a href="https://theconexusinstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Does-Size-Benefit-Super-Fund-Members-24-March-2023.pdf">a report</a> for the Conexus Institute, an independent research centre focused on superannuation issues. Our conclusion: funds, large and small alike, succeed or fail depending on how well they formulate and execute their strategies. <h2>Managing assets in-house</h2> The first potential benefit of bigger size is that funds can manage assets using their own dedicated investment professionals, rather than outsourcing everything to external investment managers to invest on their behalf. For example, UniSuper (the higher education industry fund) manages <a href="https://www.unisuper.com.au/investments/how-we-invest/investment-managers">70% of assets in-house</a>. AustralianSuper, with more than double UniSuper’s assets, manages <a href="https://www.australiansuper.com/-/media/australian-super/files/about-us/annual-reports/2022-annual-report.pdf">53% of assets</a> in-house. This can be cheaper than paying fees as a percentage of assets to these external providers. It offers more control as the super fund can decide the assets in which they invest, rather than leaving the decision to someone else. But fund members will only benefit if the internal team makes investment decisions that are as good as the service they are replacing. For this reason, there is no reliable correlation between performance and degree of in-house management. <h2>Investing in big-ticket items</h2> The second potential benefit is it becomes more possible to become successful direct investors in “big ticket” assets such as infrastructure and property, instead of just focusing on shares and other assets traded on stock exchanges. For example, AustralianSuper owns <a href="https://www.australiansuper.com/-/media/australian-super/files/about-us/media-releases/australiansuper-increases-investment-in-westconnex.pdf">20.5% of WestConnex</a>, Australia’s biggest infracture project, having contributed $4.2 billion to the consortium that is building the mostly underground toll-road system linking western Sydney motorways. Opportunities like this are easier to access by large funds, and can help to diversify their portfolios. But such direct investment is costlier than buying shares and bonds. This limits the potential for fee reductions. For members to benefit, these investments must deliver attractive returns. This requires a fund developing capability in what are specialised markets. Size alone won’t deliver on its own. <h2>Economies of scale and scope</h2> The third potential benefit is that size brings economies of scale and scope. Scale can reduce fees, by spreading the fund’s fixed costs over a larger member base. Our review of the research literature confirms there are solid reasons to expect administration costs to reduce with size, as well as in-house management reducing investment costs. <hr /> <iframe id="26cxr" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/26cxr/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Economies of scope involve an organisation being able to improve or increase services, say by investing in better systems and more staff. But investing in better systems also brings potential pitfalls. Big visionary projects tend to run over time and over budget, and sometimes fail. An example is the disastrous attempts of five industry funds (AustralianSuper, Cbus Super, HESTA, Hostplus and MTAA Super) to develop a shared administration platform, called Superpartners. It was meant to cost $70 million, but development costs blew out to $250 million before <a href="https://www.investmentmagazine.com.au/2016/12/link-group-completes-superpartners-integration/">they gave up</a>. <h2>Size brings its own challenges</h2> Large funds also face some unique challenges. Because they have more money to invest, they have more work to do in finding sufficient attractive assets to buy. The risk is they need to accept some assets offering low returns to do so. They can also outgrow some market segments, such as owning shares in smaller companies. Large organisations are typically more complex, more bureaucratic and less flexible. They can find it difficult to coordinate staff to work towards a common purpose. These elements may create dysfunction if not managed. This may explain why, despite the potential increased scope of their offerings, surveys suggest large funds tend to deliver <a href="https://www.investmentmagazine.com.au/2022/08/members-willing-to-pay-for-better-service-post-retirement/">less personalised service</a>. So the idea “bigger is better” is not necessarily true. Large size is not an automatic win. Whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages and challenges ultimately depends on fund trustees and management doing their jobs well so that members benefit.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/203417/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/geoff-warren-3657">Geoff Warren</a>, Associate Professor, College of Business and Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-bigger-super-funds-better-actually-no-despite-what-the-industry-is-doing-203417">original article</a>.

Retirement Income

Super has become a taxpayer-funded inheritance scheme for the rich. Here’s how to fix it – and save billions

Australia’s A$3.3 trillion superannuation system is supposed to boost people’s retirement incomes. The government says as much in its <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/c2023-361383.pdf">proposed leglislated objective</a> for superannuation. The system is supported by billions of dollars of tax breaks each year, ostensibly to that end. But there’s just one problem – increasingly, much of what is saved is never spent. Our new report, <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/super-savings-practical-policies-for-fairer-superannuation-and-a-stronger-budget">Super savings: Practical policies for fairer superannuation and a stronger budget</a>, points out that without an overhaul, super tax breaks are set to do little more than boost the inheritances of Australians with well-off parents. Super contributions and super earnings are both taxed more lightly than other income. These tax breaks cost the budget about $45 billion (2% of Australia’s gross domestic product, or GDP) each year. Treasury predicts that figure will hit 3% of GDP by 2060, and that the cost of super tax breaks will overtake the cost of the age pension by as soon as 2036. Super tax breaks are also unfair: about two-thirds go to the top 20% of earners. This means the tax breaks provide the biggest boost to the super accounts of high earners, who will almost all have a comfortable retirement regardless, and who tend to save the same regardless of the tax rate imposed. The wealthiest 10% of Australians get a bigger boost to their retirement savings from super tax breaks than poorer Australians get from the age pension. But much of what is saved for retirement never actually gets spent in retirement. Earlier research by <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/news/balancing-act/">Grattan Institute</a> and the <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/p2020-100554-udcomplete-report.pdf">2020 Retirement Income Review</a> found that, for a variety of reasons, spending falls substantially during retirement. Retirees often end up leaving much of their nest egg untouched, bequeathing it to their children. This means billions of dollars in super tax breaks simply end up boosting the inheritances received by the children of well-off parents. It makes super a taxpayer-funded inheritance scheme. This problem is set to get worse. With the rate of compulsory superannuation legislated to rise from 10.5% of wages to 12% by 2025, future generations of retirees are set to retire with even larger nest eggs that they will never spend. Treasury projects that by 2059, one in every three dollars paid out of the super system will be a bequest, up from one in every five today. Big inheritances boost the jackpot from the birth lottery. They help richer children get richer. Among the Australians who received an inheritance over the past decade, the wealthiest fifth received on average <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/news/the-great-australian-nightmare/">three times</a> as much as the poorest fifth. To help reverse this, the government needs to rein in the super tax breaks. <h2>How to make super fairer</h2> The government’s policy, <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/superannuation-tax-breaks">announced in February</a>, of taxing the earnings on balances bigger than $3 million at 30%, instead of 15%, will help. But the threshold ought to be lowered to $2 million. Balances between $2 million and $3 million are very unlikely to be spent in retirement, so winding back tax breaks on earnings on balances bigger than $2 million would further wind back taxpayer-funded bequests. And there’s more. Currently, many wealthier Australians receive a larger tax break per dollar contributed to super than many low income earners. Yet low earners have more to be compensated for. Putting money into their super cuts their age pension in retirement, and they live shorter lives, meaning less time to enjoy their super in retirement. The pre-tax contributions of people earning more than $220,000 a year should be taxed at 35%, instead of the 30% charged to those earning more than $250,000 currently. That would still offer a 10% tax break on super contributions for high earners (given the top marginal rate of 45%) and at least a 15% break on the contributions of low and middle earners. And the annual pre-tax contributions cap should be lowered from $27,500 to $20,000. Contributions above this level tend to be made by people close to retirement with already-high balances. <h2>Tax earnings in retirement the same as while working</h2> On the earnings side, the tax-free earnings enjoyed by retirees on their first $1.7 million ($1.9 million from 1 July this year) of their super should go. Superannuation earnings in retirement should be taxed at 15%, the same as superannuation earnings before retirement. This would save the budget at least $5.3 billion a year, and much more in future, and make taxing super more simple. More than 70% of this revenue would come from the top 20% of retirees. The top 10% would pay an extra $7,000 to $7,500 a year on average, whereas the poorest half would no more than $200 more each. Both sides of politics say they agree that super shouldn’t be a taxpayer-funded inheritance scheme. But there’s a long way to go before that vision is reality. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/super-has-become-a-taxpayer-funded-inheritance-scheme-for-the-rich-heres-how-to-fix-it-and-save-billions-202948" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Retirement Income

What does your health fund know about living costs? Because health cover premiums are on the rise this year too!

Have you noticed more scary headlines about ballooning inflation and climbing interest rates out there lately? While the media love their dramatic headlines, there’s more truth than usual in their scary stats. It’s no secret that a lot of us are feeling squeezed financially at the moment. The cost of living has shot up in recent months - from interest rates, to groceries, and new energy and fuel price hikes, it’s getting harder to make ends meet. Health cover is no exception. In fact, in 2023, health insurance premiums are set to rise by an average of 2.9%... …but did you know that your fund can put your premium up by a lot more than that? It’s true. Don't be fooled by any ‘average’ messaging. An ‘average increase’ is just that - an average. Your premium may be going up by a lot more. OverSixty has partnered with Compare Club, Australia’s most trusted team of health insurance experts,* who spend every day talking to Aussie families – and they’ve recently shared with us two examples: 1. Kevin's policy has gone up by 20% in 2 years - that’s a LOT more than the current rate of inflation it’s being blamed on. 2. Cassie's family combined cover policy is going up by 13.67% or $33.60 a month - that’s over $400 a year on top of her current premium. We know how much households are hurting right now, so Compare Club talked to us about three smart ways to keep your health insurance premiums in check - without compromising your cover: 1. Downsize your policy - only pay for what you need: Are you on a top tier policy you’re not fully using? You might find you can get a Silver Plus or Bronze Plus tier policy with a lower premium, and stay covered for what you need. 2. Split policies - health funds’ best kept secret: If you and your partner have different health needs, splitting your cover across two different policies - or even two different funds - could save your family several hundred dollars in annual premiums. 3. Pay in advance - before your premium rises: You may have noticed that a lot of health funds have delayed their premium increase this year. If yours is one of these, and you can afford to pay your full annual premium before the date of increase, you’ll lock in a full year’s worth of savings for yourself. Know your options: “Health funds are a competitive bunch, so you don’t have to take what your fund dishes out. If you've not reviewed your health cover recently, you could be paying an average of $785^ more than you need.” – Compare Club CEO, Andrew Davis. OverSixty has partnered with Compare Club’s experts who have saved over 136,500 customers an average of $300 on health cover premiums over the last five years^. We’re quite sure you have better things to do with your money than overpaying for health cover. Compare Club have been helping Aussies switch and save on health cover since 2010#, so get in touch and see how much their experts could save you. <h4 style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; line-height: 1.2; color: #212529; font-size: 1.5rem; background-color: #ffffff;">Call 1300 863 204 now, or visit <a style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #258440; text-decoration-line: none; background-color: transparent; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;" href="https://lp.compareclub.com.au/over60/?utm_medium=partner&utm_source=over60&utm_campaign=raterise&utm_content=nativearticle&category=health" target="_blank" rel="noopener">compare.oversixty.com.au</a> to save today!</h4> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;"> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;"> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;"> <p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1rem; color: #212529; font-family: -apple-system, 'system-ui', 'Segoe UI', Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;">*Based on Trustpilot reviews, correct as of 04/01/23 ^Savings based on 136,746 customers between 1 Jan 2018 - 23 December 2022. #Compare Club compares selected products from a panel of trusted insurers. We do not compare all products in the market.

Caring

Streets on fire after controversial raising of retirement age

French Emmanuel Macron has ignited a furious spark in the people of France with controversial new pension reforms - those that would see the country’s pension age raised from 62 to 64. The changes were reportedly pushed through their parliament without a proper voting process - it has been said that Macron employed “special constitutional powers” to see it through. Protesters flocked to the streets in response, with over 250 different protests organised nationwide, in a move that has been praised by union leaders. However, while hundreds of thousands of participants experienced peaceful marches through some of the country’s largest cities, tensions were high in Bordeaux, and the town hall felt the full brunt of it when it was set alight. While it is not known who was responsible for the fire, it was quickly extinguished. In Paris, where the majority took part in peaceful demonstrations, violence did rear its head, with a number of clashes between protestors and police officers breaking out - shop windows were broken, street furniture demolished, and fast food establishments attacked. It has also been reported that while police were the target of various projectiles, they made use of tear gas to push back those responsible for any rioting behaviour. And at Place de l’Opera, the location at which demonstrators concluded their march, the tear gas was back, covering a portion of the area in a haze of fumes. The official demonstration in Paris - which had drawn people from all over the French social spectrum - was not the only one to take a violent turn, with the cities of Nantes, Rennes, Lorient, and Lyon facing similar fates. The protests, coupled with strikes and industrial action across the country, disrupted transport and prompted the cancellation of flights, with airport authorities claiming roll-on effects from the chaos. Protestors also succeeded in blocking off Terminal 1 of France’s largest international airport, the Charles de Gaulle airport. As to why the French had taken this approach to fighting the reforms, one demonstrator in Nantes summed it up by declaring “the street has a legitimacy in France. “If Mr Macron can't remember this historic reality, I don't know what he is doing here.” And as another told Reuters, "I oppose this reform and I really oppose the fact that democracy no longer means anything. We're not being represented, and so we're fed up." "It is by protesting that we will be able to make ourselves heard because all the other ways ... have not allowed us to withdraw this reform," another explained to AFP. The women on the streets were furious, seeing Macron’s move as one that targeted them in particular, especially those that had been forced to step away from their careers to dedicate their time to raising their children. As one social worker told The Guardian, “everyone is angry. Everyone thinks this law is unfair, but it particularly penalises women who are expected to produce future generations of the nation, and then find they are punished for doing so.” “They want to raise it to 64 today. Will it be 66, 67, 68 tomorrow?” a teacher implored. “They tell us life expectancy is longer but are we to work until we collapse and are carted off to the crematorium?” Images: Getty

Retirement Life

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Funding for refugees has long been politicized − punitive action against UNRWA and Palestinians fits that pattern

“What a legend”: Brave Aussie pensioner saves puppy from a snake

"Stuff youse": Pensioner who's never owned a phone fights mobile detection camera fine

Couple who found love in chemotherapy raise funds for final trip

Carer allowance and disability pension set to increase

Pensioner's epic 600-mile journey from England to Scotland on a pony

If you’re 65 or over and want to work, you’re far better off in New Zealand than Australia

Millions of Aussies set for a pension boost

Medical Research Future Fund has $20 billion to spend. Here’s how we prioritise who gets what

"Entitled" widow sparks outrage over age pension question

“A little bit unfair”: Hard-working tradies blast age pension increase

Australia’s ‘retirement age’ just became 67. So why are the French so upset about working until 64?

"I've done enough": Hero tradie slams raising of retirement age

“If I can work until 70 it'll be a miracle”: Outrage over rising Aussie retirement age

Tragic end for pensioner struck by royal motorcade

"Get a grip": Retirees roasted over tone-deaf pension question

Are bigger super funds better? Actually no, despite what the industry is doing

Super has become a taxpayer-funded inheritance scheme for the rich. Here’s how to fix it – and save billions

What does your health fund know about living costs? Because health cover premiums are on the rise this year too!

Streets on fire after controversial raising of retirement age

Our Partners

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Funding for refugees has long been politicized − punitive action against UNRWA and Palestinians fits that pattern

“What a legend”: Brave Aussie pensioner saves puppy from a snake

"Stuff youse": Pensioner who's never owned a phone fights mobile detection camera fine

Couple who found love in chemotherapy raise funds for final trip

Carer allowance and disability pension set to increase

Pensioner's epic 600-mile journey from England to Scotland on a pony

If you’re 65 or over and want to work, you’re far better off in New Zealand than Australia

Millions of Aussies set for a pension boost

Medical Research Future Fund has $20 billion to spend. Here’s how we prioritise who gets what

"Entitled" widow sparks outrage over age pension question

“A little bit unfair”: Hard-working tradies blast age pension increase

Australia’s ‘retirement age’ just became 67. So why are the French so upset about working until 64?

"I've done enough": Hero tradie slams raising of retirement age

“If I can work until 70 it'll be a miracle”: Outrage over rising Aussie retirement age

Tragic end for pensioner struck by royal motorcade

"Get a grip": Retirees roasted over tone-deaf pension question

Are bigger super funds better? Actually no, despite what the industry is doing

Super has become a taxpayer-funded inheritance scheme for the rich. Here’s how to fix it – and save billions

What does your health fund know about living costs? Because health cover premiums are on the rise this year too!

Streets on fire after controversial raising of retirement age

Our Partners

Join Over60