It's bloody disgraceful!

In the meantime, politicians enjoy a VERY generous retirement scheme funded by (increasing) taxes on us????

It should be front page News.  Need an election Turnball is GONE but is the opposition going to do anything better.. not likely 

Media are too busy reporting click-bait than the real local issues

 Whats this about 

Income under 25k is tax free?

 I pay 20% salary sacrifice on top of the 9.5 my employer puts in or what ever it is. I didn't start super proper until about 2002, so I'm playing catch up. Fortunately my super is growing good.

I do agree with the Rant , I always see red when the buggers start changing/ modifying a mans  retirement nest egg, they have worked hard for.

After a financially cripling un marrrying 5 years ago ( thats what hipsters are saying isnt it?) I will be working till im 100 , and have no chance of

salary sacificing anything except loose change so it wont affect me personnelly , but still,  its not on .

When you sign up to a super plan that plan should remain extant, if there are any changes they should only apply to those who sign up after the agreement has changed. You may win you may lose but your original agreement should stand until you expire.

 This is not news. It was announced in last year's budget.

You will find that very few people actually get anywhere near the $25000 cap. I do feel for those who are going to be restricted thoughm

 Hahah im lucky to have 20 bucks a year super 

 if you can salary sacrifice $500 a week you aint doing it tough. Im sick of reading about people with 1 1/2 mil in super complaining that they are losing 20-$30 in pension payments because their super has gone up 2%

 And the access age keeps going up, I probably won't be able to get mine until I'm around 70 if I'm still here. My own fucking money I've personally paid in. 

I am 40... just...
I won't be able to retire until I am at least 75 I would say, yet Johnny Howard is on $250000 a year..

 Yep, system needs an overhaul. As long as there is politicians whose main aim is to protect the rights of bludging picks and other politicians who are shit scared of scrapping middle class welfare as it is the only thing propping up housing prices in the mortgage belts of Australia, the goal posts will continue to be shifted. It makes it bloody hard for some one to reliably plan for retirement. 

I'm of the belief that most social welfare should be scrapped (excluding the age pension and disability for actual disabled people). Reduce the income tax rates by half and redirect the money that would've been paid to the ATO into super. That super could then be drawn on to purchase a residential property and also be your fall back in place of Newstart etc. This would take around 25 years to implement fully, but would add around 50b a year into public spending a year based on today's figures. 

The superannuation funds have very large amounts of money for investment.

I would like to see them invest in Australian assets rather than overseas owned businesses.
Things like lets buy back the farms from overseas ownership and get vegemite back into Australian hands, and as for selling the rights of Darwin harbour to a foreign country that to me is just plain madness.

The super funds have the capital to do these things IMO and I think it would be a good thing for Australia as well.

 Jackfrost nailed it. Super is intended as a retirement planning tool not a wealth creation strategy. Other investments can be used as well but if your sole reason to invest is to reduce tax then you are heading in the wrong direction.

As for thinking that you should not start extra super in your 20's or 30's is short sighted. Have you heard of compound interest? $50 extra per fortnight from 20 to 60 and you'll have an extra $300k at 60.

Wait until you are 50 and you have to find $800 per fortnight.

Sure, the goal post keep getting moved, but they are still in the same general direction.

 To use the allowance to top up (though the 35G was better) your super as the tax savings effectively mean the government pays half.  That is what both my wife and I did in our last four years and the extra really helped.  Paying off the house and indeed all debts first should be a priority.  Mind you despite what I consider not a huge super fund to draw off we only get a pension of $35 a fortnight but the health card is good!

Don't want to be rude, but if you've got a spare $25k to throw into super each year then you're probably doing better than most Australians.

Maybe you should appreciate what you have and not winge about it.

I am about 40, and mortgage is under control and interest super low at 4%.

If I put extra money into my mortgage, I feel good, and save paying the 4% (compounding).

However if I put extra money into my super now and I have to only pay 15% contributions tax, saving me 17.5% if I earn under $87000, or 22% if I earn more (and more still if I earn over $180 000). And that money might average 4% interest - negating the benefit of my mortgage. 

I ripped below off some website, 

 Let’s look at the numbers. A 30 year old on a salary of $60,000 with a balance of $25,000 in super could expect to have around $424,618 at age 65. But someone salary sacrificing an extra $50 per week into super could expect to have $560,559 when they retire. That’s over $136,000 extra.

where as if I but an extra $50 per week into my homeloan say of $300 000, I pay it off 4 years, 5 months quicker, and make a saving of $33,200 interest.

So by all means pay off extra into your homeloan - I have been and feel pretty settle about this, but assuming I will be able to pay my bills, and get my house paid off, I will really want for extra $$ when I am no longer working... and hence super is the way to go now I think over a long period of time is tax sensible.

Spot on Ricey

People seem to forget that Super is not an investment...its purely a way to get your money into investments and only get taxed at 15% on the contribution amount rather than your marginal rate of 32.5%, 37% or if your lucky 47%. Straight up you are saving 17.5%, 22% or 32%....before you even invest the money. And then the interest earned is only taxed at 15% whereas your other investments are taxed at your marginal rates.

The bang for your buck that super gets (even if you invest in the cash plan only getting 3%) is huge because you benefit before a cent of interest is accrued.

Sure you cant get it until 60 for most people, but that just means you dont put in any funds that you cant afford to be without. Hence the theory of making relatively small contributions increasing over time. 

Jackfrost80 - Quote "If you're paying $100k tax that means you're earning in excess of $280k per year and have $180k disposable income to use to invest in your own future without leeching off the Australian public via tax concessions."

The figures you come up with would be nice if true.

Here is the reality.

$280,000 - Total yearly earnings

$101,260 - Income tax on $280,000
$5,600 - 2% medicare levy
$2,000 - 2% budget repair levy (only charged on taxable income >$180,000)
$3,750 - 15% Superannuation tax
$3,750 - 293 tax on superannuation +15% of the $25000 super cap ($17500 of $25000 cap actually going into the retirement account)

$116,360 - Total tax paid on $280,000
$163,640 - Total income post tax
$17,500 - Contributed to superannuation
$146,140 - Available disposable income

Given the figure of $116,360 tax being paid and considering the vast majority of available income (post mortgage and private health benefit fund payments so as not to be a burden on the public health system) would be spent in the community thereby attracting an additional 10% GST do you still stand by your offensive comment that they are LEACHING OFF THE AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC?

Given this discussion began as a mild rant by SteveO on the basis that the current government (the opposition have the same policy though some might argue, myself included, that the current govt stole the oppositions policy) has reduced, for people under 49 their yearly super contributions by $5000 and by $10000 for those 49 and over. Keep in mind these figures have only been in place for 3 years. Prior to 2014/15 tax year the max contribution was only $25000 for everyone except 59 or older.

Ok so with that out of the way how will this affect steveO and the rest of the Australian economy as a whole?
steveO I'm going to assume you are under 49. If correct, you are being denied the opportunity to contribute $5000 to your super at the concessional tax rate of 15% which equates to a $4250/yr contribution to your future retirement fund and $750 to the tax take.
Of course you can continue to contribute the $5000 anyway and increase your retirement fund but you'll pay marginal rates of tax on that $5000 (see figures below) Though you will save on the GST component mentioned later.

If you do not contribute the $5000 to super you'll pay the marginal rate of tax so now that $5000 will be taxed at 47c/$ so you'll now contribute $2350 to the current tax year take and will have an additional $2650 in your disposable income each year but of course your retirement fund will be denied the $4250 thereby making you more less assured of being fully self funded in retirement and more likely reliant on all of our children's taxation in years to come*.
You'll most likely spend the vast majority of the $2650 in the community which will attract an extra 10% GST on those funds so around another $250 odd in tax.

It's understandable why they want you to do that as your spending's will boost the economy now.

However, as said, you are more likely to be reliant on the pension (should one exist then) sooner in your retirement so therefore you will be a LEACH then (at least that's the way the current govt views it) though it's conveniently forgotten (also by some posters above) what a great contributor you are now and will continue to be until you retire on your reduced amount = lower standard of living in retirement.

However those that are not effected by such lowering of the $5000 in super contributions cap mostly always have been and will continue to be LEACHES (again according to the current government) by requiring the full pension amount and all the other benefits they are entitled to which high tax payers are not. Though conveniently governments of all persuasions do not apply that thinking to their own extremely generous, and way out of balance with community expectations, superannuation accounts.

*The one thing we can be assured of is multi national and some, though to a lesser degree, national corporations are not and will continue to not contribute their fair share of tax on profits. The very same corporations our retired politicians will be on the boards of whilst receiving their generous pensions. That's right, receiving, not waiting till they are 65/67/70 like you or I will be so things will only get worse and govt's will continue to come looking to milk the same tax milking cows for more and more.
See super, income tax & GST introduction history for evidence. So tax paying Australians expect your super tax, PAYE tax and the GST to be increased taxed further into the future.

So in summary I'm happy to pay high taxes to maintain the "Australian way of life" "Take care of the most vulnerable in our community" etc... but I'll respond if someone has a crack for high income earners wanting to be able to have a standard of living commensurate to their current SoL in their self funded retirement particularly given it's statistically fair to say the majority of those same people are and will continue to be accepting of their benefits (be they unemployment/pension/medicare/child benefits be they past/current or future etc...) on the back of higher taxed Australians.

I suggest instead of those above having a crack at high tax paying Australians perhaps you should be directing it to where it is truly warranted. See above paragraph about politicians and their corporate mates.

Shane O doh! Did that at work too, oldtimers disease. Oh well you might have to come up and we go to a few of mine.

If you're earning over $180k per year and you've maxed out your super contributions then have a look into starting an investment bond, they are probably the next most tax effective investment after maxing out your super contributions. This money smart page gives a good explanation of how they work. Not sure if you'll be called a leech for investing in one though

https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/investing/complex-investments/investment-and-insurance-bonds

 Yep, all these people that complain about the rich getting richer. Australia pays out over $200 billion to Centrelink. That doesn't include the government initiatives that the Red Cross and other agencies administer on behalf of the government (so the gov can claim for example that asylum seekers don't get more from Centrelink than every one else). I think it's about time the government reward and assist people for rolling the dice. If you can afford to contribute more than $25k, the government should let you. They support low income earners that get their self contributions matched. I'm a bit over these socialist pricks trying to bring people down to the lowest common denominator. The old saying of 'You get out what you put in' is not true any more. Your share gets diluted by the handouts to useless fucks.

 Seems like you fellas need to go fishing...