FPA calls for doubling of CSHC income limit
The adjusted taxable income limits for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card (CSHC) should be doubled, according to the Financial Planning Association (FPA).
In a submission to a Parliamentary Committee inquiry into Government legislation on the income limit, the FPA has urged that it be lifted from the current $50,000 for a single and or $80,000 for couples to $100,000 and $150,000.
In doing so the FPA said that increasing the limits would greatly assist older Australians and deliver longer term fiscal support to the Commonwealth by delaying the need for CSHC holders to access the full Age Pension.
The FPA said it believed that financial citizenship required “a level of income, quality of housing and health that are consistent with a dignified life”.
“Our vision is that the retirement income system should ensure a level of adequacy is available for all Australian retirees in a manner that is fair, flexible, accessible, and sustainable and encourages a self-funded retirement,” it said.
“To achieve this vision the retirement income system should:
- enable the fair and efficient provision of funding through a combination of public and private savings;
- flexibly respond to changing demographic needs and capabilities to enable people to retire on an adequate income without the compulsory extension of working life;
- not consider retirement in isolation from lifetime funding needs, and
- provide a comprehensive and holistic framework for adopting a change in behaviour to the accumulation of savings and retirement income needs.
The submission noted that the Commonwealth currently assists some older Australians by subsidising medical and household expenditure with Australians over pension eligible for benefits via Centrelink concession cards, including the CSHC.
“Such concessions and services are a necessity to address longevity risk and improve financial adequacy for older Australians, as they allow retirement income to sustain expenditure for longer, prolonging the need for age pension support.”
Just checking, this is asking that a should be able to have income of $200,000 a year likely tax free, and owning outright a home should get targeted welfare.
Given Labor has a policy that a family with income up to $530,000 should get child care subsidies, the above proposal doesn’t look as crazy as it at first seems.
I thought we had a huge Government debt issue, and we’re struggling to find money to pay nurses and teachers more?
Lets prioritise rich old people, AGAIN, when we have a massive debt and cant afford basic services or housing to vulnerable or young people. Cant everyone pay their fair share? What planet is the FPA on?
This highlights the FPA is not the Financial Planners Association representing Advisers and Australians, but some Financial Planning Industry representative trying to be all things to all bodies. Personally, I would prefer any representative body questioning why I have to provide my clients with 3-5 documents to charge an Advice fee. Or even why I would go to jail if the clients are provided a FDS and resign their fee anniversary documents a couple of days before the actual anniversary date???? …..there is more than enough issues with bad regulation for the FPA to handle rather than go searching for irrelevant legislation. Centrelink’s concept of Adjusted taxable income of $90K is significantly higher than actual taxable income and cashflow received and if you’re getting $90K of ATI you’re pretty comfortable. I suspect some hi net worth planners on the FPA board, are looking for things to justify their outrageous client fees.