Norma isn't sure if she can afford to retire as market turmoil hits Australians' super savings
'Because of the volatility … I'm rethinking that. I might stay at work longer,' she says.
Although the ASX clawed back some losses after sliding more than 9% during the fortnight after Donald Trump's tariff announcements, many retirees – or those approaching it – are still looking aghast at their super balances.
National Seniors Australia (NSA) has called on the government to halve the minimum superannuation draw-down rate, which they say will help slow the depletion of super balances.
On top of this, the organisation says hundreds and thousands of aged pensioners will lose money off their benefits in July, if the new government refuses to continue the freeze on deeming rates.
Lancaster works as a business analyst for a major insurer in Melbourne. Had she retired in December, she could have lived self-funded, even if she made it past 100.
But the 63-year-old is invested in high growth – and has lost about 20% of her fund as she had not started to restructure her investments before the tariff announcements.
'The drop is substantial,' she says. 'I knew the consequences. I can't say I was blind to it. So you go, OK, will I stay at work? You've almost got to gamble on when you think the market will recover.'
Lancaster says she may work another few years to weather the volatility of the global situation.
'This could potentially push out my retirement five years. I don't think it will be a quick recovery.'
Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter
Lancaster financially helps her three sisters, two of whom she says are at risk of homelessness in the next few years. She had planned to sell her unit and buy a bigger house for them to all live in, which may not happen now.
'I can't afford not to be contributing, and I need that to work for me, because if I left my job, I'd take a significant cut,' she says.
'I'm kicking myself. I actually feel it's my own fault, I should have protected myself.'
Roughly 100,000 to 130,000 Australians retire each year. The creator and host of the Retire Right podcast Glen James says while the past few weeks have been scary for people who are thinking about retiring, it is no cause for panic.
'The key thing to remember is, when you retire, you don't just move your whole super balance into conservative assets overnight,' he says. 'That's not how it works.
'Super is designed to keep working for you during retirement. That's why it's so important to zoom out and understand that your super is a long-term asset, even once you've stopped working.'
Even with the current volatility, most portfolios are only showing short-term losses of about 2% to 5% over the past few months, he says.
He says while retirement is a time where one 'misstep could cost you tens of thousands of dollars', the trick is just to have a strategy.
Sign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025
Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
'The biggest issues I see are around uncertainty,' he says. 'People often don't know how much money they'll need to retire, when they can afford to retire, or how to make the best decisions with what they've got.'
It's not just people thinking about retirement. In the past two weeks, Andrew Mckinney has lost $100,000 off his super. He still says he is fortunate. The 71-year-old retiree owns his own house with his wife in northern Tasmania and hopes to ride out the market volatility, like they did in Covid. But he is starting to worry about the future.
'My main concern is not sort of what's happening in the market now, because things do stabilise, and things do come back again,' he says. 'But I am not sure where it will head … especially if we head towards a world recession.
'In the back of mind is what's going to happen. Can the world stabilise itself? There's going to be ongoing pressures, the price of everything being pushed up. Our dollar compared to the States'.'
Chris Grice, the chief executive officer of NSA, says retirees who don't have time to recoup losses will be impacted the most.
'For older Australians already in retirement, they don't have the capability or time to make up these losses,' he says.
'Halving the drawdown rate is one way government can help to ease pressures for retirees who are concerned their balances will run out.'
Grice also wants to see the freeze on deeming rates continue. Deeming rates are used to estimate the amount of income people are earning on any assets they have – when the rate is increased, the valuation of assets is calculated as higher and welfare is reduced.
While it means the budget bottom line is billions of dollars worse off, the rate has been on hold since 2023 to help recipients handle the cost-of-living pressures.
Lifting it would impact the payments of about 900,000 income support recipients, including about 458,000 age pensioners, 143,000 jobseekers and 103,000 parenting payment recipients.
Neither Labor nor the Coalition would answer questions about if they would continue the pause on deeming rates or halve the withdraw rate.
'Halving the drawdown rate and continuing the freeze on deeming are two practical measures the government can take to show retirees it understands the impact of current market volatility,' Grice says.
'In the lead-up to the federal election, and at a time when Australians are already facing so much uncertainty, we hope all sides of politics heed our call and commit to giving older Australians some certainty over their superannuation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Finextra
11 hours ago
- Finextra
Australians embrace digital banking as digital wallet use surges
Australian consumers are adopting digital banking services in increasing numbers with 99.3% of transactions taking place over digital channels, including A$160bn in payments made via mobile wallets. 0 This content has been selected, created and edited by the Finextra editorial team based upon its relevance and interest to our community. The increased use of digital wallets is the standout statistic from the latest report published by the Australian Bankers' Association (ABA) on consumer trends. According to the ABA, more than four billion payments were made via mobile wallets in the last year, which is 11 times more than the 353 million ATM cash withdrawals which were valued at A$106bn. Digital banking interactions have increased by 70% since 2019 while the value of mobile payments has increased 23-fold in the same time period including a 28% increase in the last year alone. Meanwhile ATM cash withdrawals and branch banking have continued to decrease with mobile wallet transactions overtaking ATM withdrawals in 2023. According to ABA chief Anna Bligh, the statistics show Australian consumers' "overwhelming appetite for speed and convenience". 'We are undergoing a massive transformation in how people bank in this country,' said Bligh. 'Making payments with your phone is also now the norm for millions of customers. "Mobile wallet usage continues to surge and is closing in on the use of physical cards or cash." Yet despite the clear preference for digital banking channels, Bligh and the ABA insist that there remains a place for the use of cash. "Digital is now the norm, yet banks continue to invest in face-to-face banking options for Australians who want to use them," said Bligh. "Australia's banks maintain a denser commercial branch network than comparably urbanised OECD peers." The report comes six months after the ABA called for the Australian government to introduce regulation for the country's rapidly growing mobile wallet market. 'With mobile wallets becoming a dominant force in Australia's payments architecture - it's only fair that global tech companies are subject to the same oversight and consumer protection laws as the rest of the payments system," said Bligh back in February.
The Guardian
a day ago
- The Guardian
Raise jobseeker to 90% of age pension and pay for it by curbing super tax concessions, Vinnies says
A welfare reform package that includes raising jobseeker to 90% of the age pension would lift 590,000 Australians out of poverty, with the $11bn price tag paid for by curbing super tax concessions in a way that still leaves the vast majority of savers better off. A new Australian National University paper for the St Vincent de Paul Society, titled A Fairer Tax and Welfare System for Australia, examines a range of options that 'are targeted to benefit persons who have the greatest financial need and would be paid for by those most able to accommodate a modest additional contribution'. In addition to the rise in the main unemployment benefit, the 'major' reform package also includes increases to commonwealth rent assistance and payments to families and single parents. The analysis lands less than a month out from Jim Chalmers' economic reform roundtable, which will bring together representatives from government, business and unions in an attempt to achieve a consensus around concrete measures to lift the country's abysmal productivity performance. But with an estimated one in 10 Australians, or nearly 3 million people, living in households experiencing poverty, the charitable organisation's report highlights the urgent need to make the country more equitable as well as more efficient. Mark Gaetani, Vinnies' national president, said he was hopeful the reforms put forward in the report would be seriously considered at Labor's summit. 'Yes, the government does need to address productivity. But there are two sides to the coin, and the options we put forward will make a really significant difference to those who are doing it really tough and who we see coming through our doors every day,' Gaetani said. 'What we are putting forward is budget neutral. We are simply asking those well off in the community to forgo in the vicinity of $3,000-3,500 a year to offset the cost of assisting those 3 million Australians who live under the poverty line'. Sign up: AU Breaking News email Ben Phillips, an associate professor at the ANU who co-wrote the report with Richard Webster, said increasing the jobseeker benefit for singles and couples was a 'no-brainer'. 'People don't talk about the age pension as a king's ransom, and lifting jobseeker to 90% of that just takes it back to 1990s levels,' Phillips said, noting that it was in line with the recommendation by the government's Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee. The ANU sets the poverty line at $486 a week, or half the median household disposable income of after housing costs. In comparison, the full jobseeker rate for an individual is $390 a week, or about 75% of the $525 rate for a single age pensioner. Lifting it to 90% would involve a weekly rise of about $80. More than half of people on jobseeker or youth allowance are in households experiencing poverty, and the report noted that the balance between avoiding disincentives to work and providing an adequate safety net had become skewed too far in one direction. 'The pendulum needs to swing back towards adequacy,' it said. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The ANU's poverty rates are adjusted to exclude those with low income but with high wealth, such as some retirees. Single parents are much more likely to experience severe financial disadvantage, with poverty rates among this group reaching an estimated one in three. The proposed reform would lift youth allowance and the partnered parenting payment by the same proportional amount as jobseeker, and increase the single parenting payment to equal the age pension. The report said the jobseeker rate and related payments should also be increased each year in line with wages, rather than inflation. The family tax benefit part A should be raised to the same as for older eligible children, and the link between wage growth and family payments should also be re-established, it said. With one in five renters estimated to be in poverty, or twice the national average, suggested changes to the welfare system included a 15% increase in commonwealth rent assistance, as well as an additional $100 supplementary payment to those receiving the disability support pension in recognition that an estimated 37% of people on working age pensions are below the poverty line. The measures in the reform proposal would be paid for by replacing the flat 15% tax on super contributions and earnings with a rate set at the saver's marginal tax rate minus 20 percentage points. The reform to superannuation concessions that Phillips modelled would leave 90% of savers no worse off, and in some cases better off, he said. 'The people who it [the super tax change] would impact negatively are those whose income is above the $190,000 level, where the marginal rate is 45 cents in the dollar.'
The Guardian
a day ago
- The Guardian
Australians lost $1bn through collapsed investment funds. What happened and how can workers keep their super safe?
Thousands of Australians recently lost more than $1bn in retirement savings after the collapse of funds linked to their superannuation platforms, sparking warnings from the corporate regulator about risky investment schemes. While only a small share of the population has been affected, some investors have seen their entire super balances wiped. Here is how the collapses happened, and what Australian workers can do to avoid a similar situation. Over the past year or so, more than 12,000 Australians have been exposed to three major collapsed or frozen investment schemes: First Guardian, Shield Master Fund and Australian Fiduciaries. The failures have so far led to collective losses of up to $1.2bn. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (Asic) blocked investment in Shield in February 2024 and froze the assets of First Guardian in February 2025 after its managers blocked most investors from accessing their funds in May the previous year. The corporate regulator is also investigating concerns about Australian Fiduciaries including alleged inadequate management of conflicts of interest. First Guardian, which held $505m for about 6,000 investors, described its investments as focused on shares, property, private equity and fixed income, according to federal court-appointed liquidators. The liquidators found the company had put nearly $70m into businesses connected to its directors while more than $240m was invested offshore. One director also allegedly bought a Lamborghini with nearly $550,000 of company money. Investors have been warned they will probably only get a portion of an outstanding $446m back, and not until 2027 at the earliest, after liquidators said they expected to conclude directors breached their duties, the value of investments may have been overstated and funds may not have been properly recorded. The fund's May 2024 balance sheet indicated it had grown that to $525m but more than half of that was in question and investors were not likely to recover their entire investment, receivers for Shield reported in November 2024. They found managers had overstated the value of investments in a real estate fund and nearly $7m had been spent on a former director's personal expenses. Some investments would not be recovered for more than two years, the receivers said in December. In these cases, investors switched to superannuation products that would let them invest in First Guardian or in Shield with financial advisers' help, after being cold-called by salespeople, Asic says. The corporate regulator has put the spotlight on salespeople pressuring customers to invest in specific products. Red flags for consumers include cold calling and high-pressure sales tactics, or offers of prizes, free superannuation health checks, or free consolidation of lost super, according to Asic's deputy chair, Sarah Court. 'These calls don't have the hallmarks of a typical scam. The caller will seemingly have your best interests at heart, and they say they want to help you find a better super product or locate lost super for free,' she says. 'If you are unsure or are feeling pressured, just hang up.' Customers and financial advisers reached the products through superannuation platforms, including one operated by an arm of Macquarie Group, that temporarily chose to offer one or both products, Asic says. Super funds are highly regulated and they are discouraged from investing in schemes that are risky or opaque, according to Xavier O'Halloran, the chief executive of advocacy group Super Consumers Australia. Nearly 15 million among the 18 million accounts in Australia are in MySuper products, default super funds that employers offer workers, which did not invest in the collapsed schemes, he says. While all investment carries risk, MySuper products are diversified, and so not reliant on a single investment or asset class. Some Australians invest in less scrutinised schemes, especially through self-managed super funds. Asic recently warned it had growing concerns that peoplewere being encouraged by salespeople and cold-callers to switch from safe investments into complex and risky schemes. Phil Anderson, the general manager of policy, advocacy and standards at the Financial Advice Association Australia, encourages people to research their investments and check details with their financial advisers if they're worried they might be in an inappropriate investment. 'It is quite evident that there's failings in the system,' Anderson says. 'Don't be rushed into doing something. Challenge the adviser: Why is this the right thing for me? … What track record do these investment options have?' Investors can also spread their superannuation between different investment options within or across funds to limit the chance of a single collapse knocking out their entire savings, Anderson says. Customers can check what assets their super is invested in and how it is performing when superannuation funds release their annual statements for 2024-25 in coming months. People who have been told to swap from a MySuper product can also ask their adviser if their prospective fund has been checked by the regulator, the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority. Asic has encouraged those who have lost money in a collapse to make a complaint about their adviser to the sector's independent ombudsman, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. If a customer has lost money but their advice firm has gone into liquidation or insolvency, they may be able to appeal to the sector's compensation scheme of last resort. However, not all of the losses may be recompensed. Last resort compensation payouts are capped at $150,000 per individual and would only cover any clients who accessed the products under the guidance of an adviser, meaning any customer who made the decision without advice would not be eligible. The compensator is expecting claims against advisers linked to the funds but has received no claims for Shield and only one for First Guardian, according to the scheme's chief executive, David Berry. That has made it impossible to determine how many investors will be eligible, how much they might be paid or when they might be compensated, he said. This shortfall has led to calls for increased regulation of the products responsible for the losses, known as managed investment schemes, but also for reform of the compensation scheme of last resort so it covers those who invested without advice. Guardian Australia attempted to reach representatives of the funds Shield, First Guardian and Australian Fiduciaries, including through the firms' liquidators or administrators where applicable. Financial advice firm Interprac and superannuation platform trustees Macquarie, Equity Trustees, Diversa and Netwealth each declined to comment.
