Hi Everyone,
Obviously we all do what we do with respect to property because we don't want to rely on the government assisting us in our retirement years, and we know that superannuation won't provide for what we need in the future.
That said, it's all the more baffling that the 9% SGC hasn't changed since 2002.
Financial experts and commentators widely consider 15% to be the benchmark, or starting point for a healthy retirement figure, so why didn't the Henry Tax Review go far enough - is it considered too much of a cost imposte on employers? If that is the only reason, then a gradual reduction in income tax payable will soften the blow on that as well....Increase in super levy = decrease in less wage increases because of the tax cuts.
Looking forward to everyone's thoughts.
SGC paid on time is fully deductible as well.
Obviously we all do what we do with respect to property because we don't want to rely on the government assisting us in our retirement years, and we know that superannuation won't provide for what we need in the future.
That said, it's all the more baffling that the 9% SGC hasn't changed since 2002.
Financial experts and commentators widely consider 15% to be the benchmark, or starting point for a healthy retirement figure, so why didn't the Henry Tax Review go far enough - is it considered too much of a cost imposte on employers? If that is the only reason, then a gradual reduction in income tax payable will soften the blow on that as well....Increase in super levy = decrease in less wage increases because of the tax cuts.
Looking forward to everyone's thoughts.
SGC paid on time is fully deductible as well.