Fury at detail in Aussie superannuation graph

A graph has revealed the extraordinary super savings of some of Australia’s wealthiest people - but one balance in particular has sent social media into overdrive.

Data has revealed that there are 27 Australians with more than $100 million in super — but a small detail has prompted frenzied speculation as to which rich-lister has a racked up an eye-watering balance of more than $544 million.

A graph that circulated on social media on Sunday, compiled by the Sydney Morning Herald using ATO data, revealed the alarming detail.

It showed there were about 300,000 Aussies with more than $1 million in superannuation in 2019, and about 100 with more than $50 million.

But, according to the graph, one superannuation fund had accumulated a staggering balance of more than $544 million.

I’d love to know

Who is the ONE AUSTRALIAN with over $544 MILLION in super? pic.twitter.com/DwHyQQqT0p

— The Spence (@adambspencer) February 24, 2023

Social media users speculated wildly as to which mega-wealthy Australian owned the huge account.

The names of mining magnates Gina Rinehart, the richest person in Australia, and Clive Palmer, the seventh richest, were tossed about — as was that of Kerry Stokes, previously the richest executive on the ASX 300.

Other users said the stats pointed to a failing in the taxation system. Superannuation savings are taxed at just 15 per cent, while balances under $1.7 million aren’t taxed at all — so massive super funds are often referred to as tax breaks for the rich.

In fact, the tax concessions received by those with super balances of more than $5 million cost the government more in 2019 than all of the support it provided to low-income households combined.

“27 people have over $100 million in super. 1 person has $544 million. Last week I had to buy groceries with my credit card. What happened to the lucky country?” one Twitter user wrote in response to the data.

“There are 10,000 Australians with super balances above $5mil who pay little or no tax on it. It is a rort for the very rich,” said another.

“These ppl (people) are now squealing that the Govt intends to stop it so we have more money for things like Medicare. They really need to get over themselves.”

300,000 Aussies with more than $1 million in superannuation in 2019, and about 100 with more than $50 million. Picture: iStock.

Others users argued that, with rising cost of living, $1 million or more in super wasn’t such a staggering amount.

“I really don’t see the issue with over $1M in super, we don’t know their age, in fact even $5M in super is easily acceptable now. That’s $250k a year, very comfortable life for a couple to ensure you don’t have to budget or worry in retirement,” one user said.

The Albanese government last week flagged it was considering reforms to how much super could be concessionally taxed. Financial Services Minister Stephen Jones suggested a cap of $5 million, but $3 million has also been floated.

The huge accounts, naturally, far exceed the retirement savings accessed by the average Australian. The median super balance for those aged 60 to 64 was much lower, at just $178,800 for men and $137,050 for women.

Economists have pointed out that some of the mega-balances are more than a person could hope to spend in their lifetime — and so, if the cash isn’t being used to fund retirement, it shouldn’t be taxed as retirement savings.

The government has flagged reforms to the system.

The Coalition, however, has accused Anthony Albanese of breaking an election promise if he reforms the super system.

Mr Albanese said in May last year Labor had “no intention of making any super changes” when he was asked if he would rule out increases to super taxes and changes to caps.

“Make no mistake, if the parliament lets Anthony Albanese get away with this broken promise on superannuation, the Labor Party will be coming after stage three tax cuts next,” Deputy Liberal Leader Sussan Ley said on Thursday.

The political fight over super was sparked after Treasurer Jim Chalmers unveiled Labor’s proposed wording for a definition of superannuation earlier this week.

The definition would enshrine in law the idea that super ought to be preserved for retirement, making it more difficult for governments to introduce policies that allow Australians to withdraw their super early.

Dr Chalmers outlined the proposal in a speech to the financial services industry on Monday, in which he also revealed he was eyeing a shake-up of super tax concessions before the May budget.

He stared down criticism from the Coalition and said he wasn’t going to break any election promises.

But the Coalition has suggested this amounts to an election promise. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Andrew Henshaw

“Superannuation is there to provide for a quality of life in people’s retirement, it’s not there for other purposes,” Dr Chalmers said.

“The Coalition have undermined superannuation at every single opportunity; they went to election after election saying they wouldn’t interfere with the superannuation guarantee and then breached it every single time.”

Labor frontbencher Jason Clare told Sky News on Thursday it was time for Australians to have a conversation about reforming superannuation, but also insisted the government wasn’t going to break an election promise.

“There’s been no decision made; I know the Liberal Party are hyperventilating about this,” Mr Clare said.

“When they were in power they increased the taxes on super by $5 billion … they are dripping with hypocrisy here.

“There’s always going to be a fight on superannuation in this building because we created it and they hate it. They hate the idea of it.”

Originally published as Fury at detail in Aussie superannuation graph