KiwiSaver Providers Hope Public Support For Contribution Increases Will See Default Rates Move Higher
KiwiSaver providers are hoping public support for increased contribution rates could provide the incentive to push them still higher.
The latest RNZ-Reid Research poll included questions about the changes to the KiwiSaver scheme announced in the Budget.
From 1 April next year, the default contribution rate for employers and employees will rise to 3.5 percent. The following April, it will be 4 percent.
But the government will halve the credit it offers to people who contribute at least $1042 a year to their KiwiSaver, to a maximum $260.72. It will not be available to people earning more than $180,000.
The poll showed a total of 61.2 percent of respondents supported the contribution change, 21.4 percent opposed it and 17.4 percent were not sure.
Among National voters, almost 80 percent supported the change.
But only 23.7 percent of total voters supported the government's move to halve the contribution rate, and fewer than half of National supporters.
Fisher Funds chief investment officer Ashley Gardyne said he was not surprised by the findings.
He said we should not stop at 4 percent plus 4 percent, and should push towards higher contribution rates.
'I think it's really positive we've seen the contribution rates increase, and ultimately if we want people to get to the right amount of savings in retirement those rates do need to move up through time.'
He said the Australian model, where contribution rates slowly lifted over a number of years, could be one to follow.
'They took a really long-term, 10-year approach of increasing contributions by a little bit every year. The reality is it's tough to find extra money in your pay cheque to put into KiwiSaver but it is really important long-term as well to make sure you end up in the right position for retirement.
'Having a long-term vision like that is really important.'
Kirk Hope, chief executive of the Financial Services Council, which represents KiwiSaver providers, agreed the results were expected.
'We've known for some time that in terms of contributions those will be relatively well received. Obviously it's a bit tougher if the government contribution is being halved or in some cases removed that's not going to be particularly popular, the key thing is the government continues to contribute something.'
He said there should be a bipartisan agreement about a long-term strategy for retirement income.
He said it was also worth discussing other steps the government could take, such as adjusting the tax settings.
'Other changes the government might be able to make to the tax system in the future to continue to incentivise particularly savings and even up the playing field between savings and investment and housing. That's some fundamental shifts in the tax system.'
More incentives needed
Ana-Marie Lockyer, chief executive at Pie Funds, said it was good to see that most people supported the contribution increase.
'In terms of the halving of the government contributions we need to acknowledge the government faced some hard choices as a result of the tight fiscal environment. But I believe we should be offering more incentives for Kiwis to save for their retirement, not fewer.
'Reducing the government contribution is more likely to impact the retirement balances of lower income earners – a group who deserve the same opportunities as everyone else.'
She said even a reduced contribution of $261 a year could grow to more than $40,000 over a person's working life.
'I think what's more important than the dollar amount of the government contribution is the number of Kiwis who don't receive it, either because they're not eligible or they're not contributing enough.
'While it's a good thing that the government contributions are now available for 16- and 17-year-olds, I think the government missed a trick by not extending it to the increasing number of over-65s who are still working, whether by choice or necessity.
'What's probably more concerning is the thousands of KiwiSavers missing out on the MTC government contribution each year because they're not contributing enough to qualify, leaving millions of dollars on the table.
'So the poll is actually a timely reminder for people to ensure they've contributed at least $1043 by 30 June in order to receive the full government contribution of $521 – before it reduces to $261 next year.'
A spokesperson for Finance Minister Nicola Willis said the changes to KiwiSaver were designed to help Kiwis to save more and make the scheme more fiscally sustainable.
'For example, an 18-year-old earning the minimum wage of just under $49,000 a year who invests in a balanced fund can expect to have almost $910,000 in KiwiSaver at age 65. Under the old settings it would have been about $732,000.
'The results are similar for most other people. The Retirement Commissioner estimates the changes will increase retirement savings for about 80 percent of KiwiSaver members.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
3 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
PM wants NZ to get behind development, progress
By Giles Dexter of RNZ National leader Christopher Luxon has told the party's annual conference that the country needs to "say yes" more. Addressing about 550 delegates, MPs and supporters at the Air Force Museum of New Zealand in Christchurch, Luxon bemoaned "activists" who opposed housing developments, agriculture, cruise ships and mines. "If we're serious about keeping Kiwis at home, creating jobs and increasing wages for all New Zealanders, we can't afford to keep saying no to every opportunity that comes our way." Opposition parties have heavily criticised the government for its economic policies and laid the blame at its feet for the 30,000 New Zealanders who moved to Australia last year, but Luxon said the opposition would make it worse. "Take a look at Australia," he said. "If they shut down their mining industry or their energy industry tomorrow, as Labour and the Greens want to do here, I guarantee you would see fewer Kiwis moving across the ditch." Luxon's speech came hot on the heels of an announcement from the United States that it would increase tariffs to 15 percent. Still digesting the announcement and what it would mean for New Zealand exporters, Luxon acknowledged "challenging" global conditions. "We can't just batten down the hatches and hope for the best," he said. Luxon's speech made no mention of National's coalition partners, New Zealand First or ACT, or even the word 'coalition' itself, although deputy Nicola Willis acknowledged the "energy" it took to keep Winston Peters and David Seymour under control. Instead, Luxon's speech was heavy on shoutouts to his National ministers and their policies, and also on blaming the previous government for the cost-of-living struggles New Zealanders currently faced. "In the years to come, immediate action on the cost of living isn't enough," he said. "The last government spent billions of dollars in failed handouts, only to watch inflation roar and the economy falter. "We have to keep our eyes on the prize." Echoing his speech at Monday's post-cabinet press conference, Luxon leaned on the economic policies the government had introduced, such as tax changes, FamilyBoost and the removal of the Auckland Fuel Tax. "We're doing what we can," he said. The speech contained an announcement the government would make it easier to get a concession on Department of Conservation land. "That means more certainty for businesses, less bureaucracy and much faster decisions, so the businesses that should be operating can get up and running." There would still be restrictions on some parts of the DOC estate. "Where it does make sense, we need to get to the 'yes' much faster - instead of being bogged down in process and uncertainty," Luxon said. Charges of $20-40 for foreign visitors to high-volume sites like Cathedral Cove, Tongariro Crossing, Milford Sound, and Aoraki Mount Cook were being introduced, but New Zealanders would be exempt from the fees. Party president Sylvia Wood, who was re-elected at the conference, said the party would select candidates for the 2026 election shortly.
Otago Daily Times
3 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
PM wants NZ to stem tide of Kiwis leaving for Oz
By Giles Dexter of RNZ National leader Christopher Luxon has told the party's annual conference that the country needs to "say yes" more. Addressing about 550 delegates, MPs and supporters at the Air Force Museum of New Zealand in Christchurch, Luxon bemoaned "activists" who opposed housing developments, agriculture, cruise ships and mines. "If we're serious about keeping Kiwis at home, creating jobs and increasing wages for all New Zealanders, we can't afford to keep saying no to every opportunity that comes our way." Opposition parties have heavily criticised the government for its economic policies and laid the blame at its feet for the 30,000 New Zealanders who moved to Australia last year, but Luxon said the opposition would make it worse. "Take a look at Australia," he said. "If they shut down their mining industry or their energy industry tomorrow, as Labour and the Greens want to do here, I guarantee you would see fewer Kiwis moving across the ditch." Luxon's speech came hot on the heels of an announcement from the United States that it would increase tariffs to 15 percent. Still digesting the announcement and what it would mean for New Zealand exporters, Luxon acknowledged "challenging" global conditions. "We can't just batten down the hatches and hope for the best," he said. Luxon's speech made no mention of National's coalition partners, New Zealand First or ACT, or even the word 'coalition' itself, although deputy Nicola Willis acknowledged the "energy" it took to keep Winston Peters and David Seymour under control. Instead, Luxon's speech was heavy on shoutouts to his National ministers and their policies, and also on blaming the previous government for the cost-of-living struggles New Zealanders currently faced. "In the years to come, immediate action on the cost of living isn't enough," he said. "The last government spent billions of dollars in failed handouts, only to watch inflation roar and the economy falter. "We have to keep our eyes on the prize." Echoing his speech at Monday's post-cabinet press conference, Luxon leaned on the economic policies the government had introduced, such as tax changes, FamilyBoost and the removal of the Auckland Fuel Tax. "We're doing what we can," he said. The speech contained an announcement the government would make it easier to get a concession on Department of Conservation land. "That means more certainty for businesses, less bureaucracy and much faster decisions, so the businesses that should be operating can get up and running." There would still be restrictions on some parts of the DOC estate. "Where it does make sense, we need to get to the 'yes' much faster - instead of being bogged down in process and uncertainty," Luxon said. Charges of $20-40 for foreign visitors to high-volume sites like Cathedral Cove, Tongariro Crossing, Milford Sound, and Aoraki Mount Cook were being introduced, but New Zealanders would be exempt from the fees. Party president Sylvia Wood, who was re-elected at the conference, said the party would select candidates for the 2026 election shortly.
Scoop
8 hours ago
- Scoop
What Officials Said About Pay Equity Changes
Article – RNZ Treasury documents show the pay equity reset was key to meeting the coalition's cost-cutting goals., Political Reporter The minister who ushered through the pay equity changes said any limitations on workers' rights were justified in order to reduce the risks to employers. A document dump from the Treasury and the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment (MBIE) showed the processes the government went through to change the pay equity framework, and then return contingency funding to the Budget allowances. Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden, who introduced the legislation, acknowledged the changes would likely be contentious, but were necessary to meet the government's policy objectives of keeping a pay equity system, while changing the framework for assessing whether there is sex-based undervaluation. The government worked on the changes in secret, before announcing the amendment bill in May and passing it under urgency. At the Budget, Finance Minister Nicola Willis revealed the changes had saved $12.8 billion over the forecast period. 'This is justified' – Brooke van Velden The short timeframe to get the bill passed before the Budget meant there had been 'limited testing and analysis' of the policy proposals, and the retrospective provisions in the bill were 'inconsistent' with general principles. MBIE acknowledged the transitional provisions would likely be 'contentious' but without them it was unlikely the amendments would 'meet the policy objective of ensuring the regime achieves pay equity, whilst better managing claims, and ensuring costs are related to sex-based differences in remuneration.' The legal risks remained redacted, and the bill had no Regulatory Impact Statement. The process was also kept secret to prevent a surge of claims being lodged and potentially determined under the existing Employment Relations Act. The acting Attorney-General, Paul Goldsmith's consideration of the bill concluded that while it imposed limits on the right to freedom from discrimination, the right to justice, and freedom of expression, it was still consistent with the Bill of Rights Act. The paper van Velden took to Cabinet for approval, included in MBIE's document dump, shows she considered any limitations on the rights to be justified. 'I consider that this is justified to meet the policy intent of allowing employers to better manage their operations, reducing potential risks to an employer's financial viability, which may lead to a reduction in employment or the quality or quantity of services provided,' van Velden wrote. Finding the contingencies In December 2023, shortly after assuming the government benches, the finance minister requested more information on how the pay equity forecasts worked and whether there were any upcoming large claims. In February 2024, the Treasury reported back, saying the approach brought in by the previous government had contributed to higher cost outcomes, as it disincentivised agencies and funded sector employers from taking a lower-cost bargaining approach. 'While the current Pay Equity process does require agencies to seek a bargaining contingency prior to the bargaining phase, this occurs late in the process, and many of the potential parameters for settlement are already largely agreed between the parties,' officials said. 'The absence of financial incentives during the pre-bargaining phase may have contributed to agencies adopting approaches which exceed the minimum requirements of the Equal Pay Act, for example, agreeing to higher paid comparators when lower paid ones would be appropriate.' It also meant the Cabinet had 'poor visibility' of the costs, until parties were at or near settlement. Treasury said pay equity costs were managed outside of Budget allowances, and there was merit in exploring an approach that brought some or all of the costs back within Budget allowances. By April 2024, Cabinet had agreed to a reset, bringing pay equity funding into two centralised tagged contingencies: one for the funded sector, the other for the public sector. This still allowed the government to meet its legal obligations as an employer, but was deemed to support the coalition's fiscal strategy. However, by the end of 2024, the government was looking to disestablish the funded sector contingency, identifying it as a significant spending commitment. It expected service providers to manage their own claims, with any cost pressures they created managed like any other cost pressure: through the Budget process. How the money was found Nicola Willis chose to close the funded sector contingency and return the funding to the Budget 2025 allowance and capital allowance. This saved $9.6b over the forecast period. For the public sector contingency, Treasury recommended it be retained, but at a reduced level. 'On balance, we consider retaining the contingency at [redacted] for residual costs to protect future allowances to be preferable given the legal obligations on the Crown as an employer under the new Act and Treasury's judgment that we can quantify the impacts with more than 50 percent confidence,' Treasury wrote. The government adopted this approach, with the tagged public sector contingency reduced by $3.2b over the forecast period. In total, the changes returned around $12.8b to the Budget 2025 operating and capital allowances. Closing or reducing the contingencies without some certainty from Cabinet on policy change, however, was seen to potentially 'strain the credibility' of future Budget allowances. And so, the future approach to pay equity was developed. Van Velden's legislation discontinued 33 claims and increased the threshold for what qualified as work that was 'predominantly performed by female employees.' All review clauses under settled claims became unenforceable.
