3 ms·
In Aus, the government doesn't manage the money. They set a mandatory percentage of your wage which must be put into superannuation, but you as an individual ca
by JenrHywy 4y ago
In Aus, the government doesn't manage the money. They set a mandatory percentage of your wage which must be put into superannuation, but you as an individual can choose the fund to manage your account, and you can move funds at-will with no penalty. The Tax Office actually facilitates the move to help prevent any nefarious actions from the funds.
There is also the option of running a self-managed fund, where you invest the money yourself.
That said, it has created an incredibly politically powerful industry managing $3.3 trillion, which comes with its own issues.
- SturgeonsLaw 4y ago> They set a mandatory percentage of your wage which must be put into superannuation For further clarification, it's the employer who has to pay the super contribution, not the worker. And if anyone is about to claim "same thing, if the employer didn't have to pay that, they would pay it out as additional wages", my only response is a heartfelt "lol".
- JenrHywy 4y agoI think "lol" needs to be expanded a bit to be convincing. I can't see how it is not the same thing. The employer looks at the total cost of employment and works out if it's worth hiring someone. If that cost is 10% higher because of super, that means there is 10% less to go to (direct) wages. Now granted, that will differ at different points in the labour market. For minimum wage jobs, I agree that employers wouldn't suddenly start paying 10% above award if super was scrapped.
- jay_kyburz 4y agoI haven't changed jobs much in my career, but when talking about pay I still find people need to be explicit if they are talking about including or excluding super. Most jobs advertise the pay excluding super, but some will quote total package.
- JenrHywy 4y agoYeah, that's particularly the case if you're contracting: they'll advertise the hourly pre-super rate more often than not.