Has the Rudd Government fumbled by largely rejecting the Henry Review?

financial-services-industry/taxation/industry-superannuation-funds/australian-financial-services/self-managed-super-funds/superannuation-guarantee/

17 May 2010
| By Mike Taylor |
image
image
expand image

By holding the Henry Review into Taxation and then rejecting most of its findings, the Government has broken the golden rule of politics, writes Mike Taylor.

There is a golden rule in politics: never ask a question to which you don’t already know the answer.

The Rudd Government, no doubt congratulating itself on its political perspicacity, has been guilty of breaking that golden rule on multiple occasions.

Those who break golden rules deserve to be punished. In the case of the Rudd Government that punishment came in the form of the broad-ranging and sometimes unpalatable findings of the Henry Review into Taxation — something which explains the Government’s less than convincing attempt to provide its own answers.

It would have been churlish for the Australian financial services industry not to have welcomed the superannuation and ancillary measures announced in the Government’s response to the Henry Review but, in truth, those efforts could best be described as ‘limp wristed’ — amounting to a nine-year phasing-in of a lifting in the superannuation guarantee and the partial undoing of the contribution cap changes contained in last year’s Budget.

And there can be little doubt that many of the spokesmen who welcomed the super changes were, at the same time, calculating the potential damage to retirement income streams likely to flow from the Government’s introduction of a mining super profits tax — not least on those self-managed super funds holding high exposures to stocks such as BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto.

But the Government’s response to the Henry Review represented just an entrée to the main meal, which was this week’s Budget — the document that will form the basis of the Rudd administration’s bid for re-election.

And it is already quite clear that, except for the undue influence of industry superannuation funds, financial services will not represent a front-rank issue as the major political parties jockey to win electoral hearts.

The problem for the financial services industry, and financial planners in particular, is that the Government has posed more questions in the past four weeks than it has answered in the past two and a half years.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

2 months 1 week ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

2 months 1 week ago

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

4 months 2 weeks ago

The corporate regulator has issued infringement notices to three AFSLs whose financial advisers provided personal advice to a retail client while unregistered....

3 days 10 hours ago

ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025, with 241 candidates attempting the test....

1 week 1 day ago

Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, has provided further information about the second tranche of the Delivering Better Financial Outcomes (DBFO) reforms....

3 weeks 1 day ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND