Don't forget about superannuation co-contributions in the lead up to the end of the financial year - low income earners can get up to $1000 co-contributed by the government into superannuation. See http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.aspx?doc=/content/42616.htm For members of a SMSF investing in bullion, that's like getting 29oz of silver from the government Not a bad way to top up particularly if you have a spouse or member who qualifies.
This year it is dollar for dollar depending on the income earned by the contributor. I think it used to be 2 for 1 and in future years it is being further reduced and phased out (all from memory as I'm not at the office).
Super funds for Gov workers in Tassie is unfunded. The super on paper is waiting for new people to enter the scheme. How do you spell PONZI scheme? I did take the offer a few years ago of co- contributions & the funds are locked into 5% income. I would rather buy PM's & hold them myself. I do not need my super fund to post out glossy colour statements saying how great they are. Nor do I need my Super fund to produce flashy coffee mugs or mouse mats or picture frames using my money. my motto is IF YOU DONT HOLD IT DONT OWN IT.
I have a self managed super fund and both me and my wife are members of this fund. As she is at home with our young son she doesn't work and her taxable income from our investment trust is such that she is eligible for the co-contribution. If I make a $1000 contribution to our own fund (which I control) then the government will match that contribution and put $1000 into our superfund bank account. I don't see how any of that can be considered a PONZI scheme - I plan to buy nearly 30 oz's of silver dragons with the governments money.
Remember that yes you get money to invest, but... you wont see that money until you retire. The way the government is going they will be cracking down harder on self managed super and putting more regulations and restrictions on SMSF's. Im 22 so for me IMO it is ridiculous in my mind to put $1000 away to most likely never see it again becuase by the time i retire the retirement age will iether be ridiculously high, the government would have stolen my super money anyway or the state of the world will be so fu**ed up that having retirement money wont help anyway. If you a few years from retirement then it would be a good idea but for me im against putting any of my money in super, id rather invest it myself today and get the money back whenever I like. Im in the process of setting up my own SMSF with esuper and hopefully (but highyl unlikely) one day it will pay off (having super at all that is).
You could get hit by a bus tomorrow and the money you invested outside of the super system wouldn't do you any good anyway. My point is, the future is unknown and the only thing you can really do is make decisions based on the current law and your circumstances - and I suppose your belief about what is going to happen in the future. I am an accountant and know the law and for me (and most people) a co-contribution is a pretty good deal (tax effective and a good return - 100% in the short term depending on your circumstances). Australian super law is very complicated and the government may (in all probability they will) increase the retirement age in the future but who's to say this will effect the transition to retirement legislation (you can essentially get access to your super from the age of 55). Regardless of all of that our advise is always to have money inside and outside the super system anyway. I can't really foresee a situation where the australian people would vote for a government that will enact legislation that allows them to 'steal your super money'. If so this political party will be turfed at the following election. In terms of the world being fucked up; the money invested inside or outside super won't make much of a difference. The only thing I know for sure is that I don't won't to get to 55 years old and only have the house I'm living in plus a bit invested and be wanting to retire. I want the choice and don't want to have to work until the retirement age (probably 70 by then). I sure as hell don't want to rely on the old age pension. We tell most of our clients if you want to retire and live comfortably you need about $800,000 to $1m in super - that way you can live comfortable off of the income without ever having to eat into the capital. Most people won't get to that amount at a compulsory 9%.
Today there are so many experts out there trying to advise you how to invest your money...What you need in latter life is not a pile of money but good health. Most of the people who contribute to super funds have many years to go before their dream of having heap loads of money in retirement may become a reality. All the time your investment in super is been eroded by inflation...In 20 years time $500,000 may get you a nice holden etc. SMSF are the way to go and if you loose you can blame no one but yourself. You have to have faith in your own judgment. Just look at what is happening in the USA with their 401k fund...Dream of an easy retirement, doesn't happen, work on to 70, if your health is still good and the workplace wants an old codger like you. Regards Errol43
What about the Greeks? I have read that Greek workers having a sense of entitlement? If I was saving 42% of my wage then I'd be expecting that it paid off and after seeing Bankers paid off with TAXPAYER money some foreign THIEVES try to steal what's mine then YES, I'd be cranky.
Albert Einstein was quoted as saying that compound interest was the eighth wonder of the world. We put both our sons into our SMSF at 18 and insisted they both contributed the $1000 for the co-contribution. The older one got $1500 the first year before the hard labour mob came in and wound it back to $1000 and recently they have stopped the indexing so over time the value will decrease. The older boy is now 21 and after 3 years working part time and his employer contributing plus his co-contributions he has $10,000. Most of that is in gold bullion that he purchased at an average price of around $1100. He no longer argues about putting the money in each year for the co-contribution.
Sounds like my motto actually Co-contributions - double the con right? I live for today in case I am still alive tomorrow. Therefore, I don't have super. I invest the money freely.
Ah ! add Greek workers to the list of Ponzi scheme super/pension rip offs. You don't want to be rioting in the streets at 50+ years of age just to get money to live on. I really think that a lot of stackers on this site who have their own SMSF have their head screwed on the right way. If you can't trust the so called experts to get it right with your money, then manage it yourself. How many so called experts make a living out of the super contributions?. Regards Errol43
Being totally against non SMSF contributions,its pretty hard to mathamatically argue against the co-contribution as an investment when you are doubling your contributed capital and the able to invest in PM's with the proceeds. However on an average day contributing $1000 into ur Super fund above the legal minimum seems insane.Accountants and financial advisors may disagree but their qualifications do not automatically give them a sound understanding of risk assesment and productive investment vehicles. REDBACK
This is an interesting argument. Warren Buffet has been quoted as saying you should never invest in paper equities unless you are financially literate enough to be able to sit down and disect out the cream from the dross in the profit and loss statement and the balance sheet. He likens share trading by the financially iliterate to pure gambling whereby the fiscally literate shake down the punters. People like to demonize financial planners and most are indeed just product salesmen and women. However the latin expression caveat empetor (let the buyer beware) is the golden rule for all investments including bullion. Considering that 90%++ of society are fiscal pygmies and 98% of the population cannot control their emotions when investing is it any wonder why the world is in the pickle we are now in ? nonrecourse
Considering current events such as the carbon tax debacle, do you honestly think that an Australian political party of the calibre that we have, would even ask the electorate if they can pillage their nest egg?
