lawyers weekly logo
Advertisement
Markets
13 October 2025 by Olivia Grace-Curran

Currency crunch time: Positioning for a weaker buck

US dollar weakness is a lingering scar of Trump’s trade policy shocks – and the worst may be yet to come, according to Principal Asset Management
icon

Federated Hermes backs short-duration bonds amid Fed rate cut pivot

As the US Federal Reserve attempts to balance ongoing inflationary pressures and a weakening domestic jobs market, the ...

icon

LISTO rise to strengthen equity in super system

The federal government has unveiled major superannuation reforms, boosting support for low-income earners and better ...

icon

Institutions stay the course amid crypto chaos

The macro shock that wiped out US$800 billion from the cryptocurrency market in the largest single-day liquidation event ...

icon

Betashares revises Aussie ETF forecast to $500bn by 2028

After exceeding $300 billion in funds under management last month, Betashares now forecasts the Australian ETF industry ...

icon

RBA’s cautious easing cycle tested by housing rebound

Australia’s soft landing hopes face pressure as the RBA halts rate cuts amid a housing revival and persistent ...

VIEW ALL

Towards an adequate retirement

  •  
By
  •  
5 minute read

The two non-consecutive alphabetic letters encountered most often last week caused more controversy than the underlying policy they represented.

It seems to have become a tradition that every time an increase of the superannuation guarantee (SG) is proposed it is met with lively predictions of doom and disaster.

Employers will become burdened to the extent that they will need to fire staff, while small companies will tumble over like dominoes.

And Australian wages will be reduced to leave the average person struggling to pay their electricity bill.

 
 

It is peculiar then that none of these predictions have become a reality during previous increases of the SG.

In fact, there is more evidence the increase in national savings through superannuation is helpful in maintaining a healthy economy.

It is true. I'm biased; hopelessly conflicted. After all, I earn my money thanks to the growing superannuation industry.

But so are many of the critics of the SG increase.

The fact the SG has sparked a $1.4 trillion industry that employs a significant part of the workforce and provides a welcome diversification to an economy heavily reliant on its natural resources seems to have escaped many.

But let's look at what we, as an industry, can agree on.

A proper retirement system is designed to provide employees with a decent income in their pension phase.

I'm going out on a limb here, but it seems everyone - from a union-raised super fund trustee to the commission-dependent financial adviser - agrees that it takes a replacement rate of about 70 per cent of your pre-retirement income to maintain your lifestyle into old age - the best approximation of a consensus description of the term 'decent income'.

So where do we stand?

Shock and horror, we are not there yet.

But according to a report compiled by the Australian Centre for Financial Studies, on behalf of the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees, the increase of the SG from 9 per cent to 12 per cent will have a dramatic effect on the retirement savings of the average Australian family.

For a couple raising children, where one partner has a period of absence from the labour market from the age of 30 to 40, the impact of the increase in SG is an increase in the replacement ratio from 50 per cent to 70 per cent.

In other words, an SG level of 12 per cent will for the first time provide a level of retirement income for Australian families that we all agree is the bare minimum.

The question, therefore, must not be if we should get to 12 per cent, but how quickly can we get there?