Women and Tax
CONSULTATIONS CONCERNING WOMEN’S ISSUES IN WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION, SUPERANNUATION AND ASSOCIATED TAXATION AND TRANSFER ISSUES
The Commonwealth Office for Women has asked the National Foundation for Australian Women and the Equality Rights Alliance to undertake consultations with women to assist in further policy considerations about these issues.
Community discussions will take place in Adelaide, Albury-Wodonga, Canberra and Region, Parramatta, Brisbane and Toowoomba. As well the views of women’s organisations affiliated with all six of the national women’s Alliances supported by the Commonwealth Office for Women will be sought. In all, this should mean direct or indirect contacts with well over a million women across the nation.
A report on the consultations will be published, and a further technical analysis of gender issues in relation to taxation and transfers will result from the project.
The purpose of this background paper is to assist in community discussion by outlining the current systems, and raising some questions for consideration.
Dates for future consultations are: (Visit http://equalityrightsalliance.org.au/ for details)
August 8 Albury/Wodonga 12 nooon
http://equalityrightsalliance.org.au/event/national-womens-alliances-tax-consultation-albury
August 11 Adelaide 3 p.m. -
http://equalityrightsalliance.org.au/event/national-womens-alliances-tax-consultation-adelaide
September 1 - Ashfiled - 4 p.m. http://www.equalityrightsalliance.org.au/event/national-womens-alliances-tax-consultation-sydney-0
Papers
A National Strategy for Affordable Rental Housing
Payments for families and effective marginal tax rates-era
Draft Key Principles - recommendations for tax reform
The NFAW has made a submission (click here) to the Phase 3 Governance Discussion Paper of the Cooper Review of Australia’s Superannuation System. The Cooper Review is addressing a range of management issues, and does not cover the broader policy issues concerning superannuation which are being investigated by the team headed by Dr Henry, Secretary of the Treasury.
Discussion of possible desirable changes to superannuation management arose during the consultations on the TAI Report and the barriers to women’s employment, and these are reflected in the Cooper submission.
Meanwhile, we await the publication, anticipated in March, of the Government’s Response to the final report of the Henry Review into Australia’s Future Tax System. There is extensive speculation in the media about the content of the Henry Report, as well as about likely Governmental responses. An example from the Fairfax Pess is copied below:
NON-PROFIT SUPER SHOWS BEST RETURNS
CLANCY YEATES
January 21, 2010
SUPER funds run by the banks and the big wealth managers have been dealt a fresh blow by figures showing that the top 10 funds in the past decade were all non-profit.
Between 2000 and last year, funds operated by unions and employers on behalf of members posted the best annual returns, which were as high as 7.07 per cent, SuperRatings said yesterday.
Retail funds - those run for profit by financial institutions - were nowhere to be seen on the league table, which ranked a typical ''balanced'' fund with money spread across different asset classes.
The Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees, which represents the $450 billion non-profit sector, said the strong showing was because its funds did not pay fees or commissions to financial advisers.
SuperRatings also said non-profit funds had outperformed retail funds over the past five years, providing average annual returns of up to 6.8 per cent.
''With super, it's long-term performance that really matters and the not-for-profit funds are clear leaders over the past five and 10-year periods,'' the chief executive of AIST, Fiona Reynolds, said.
The figures add further weight to separate league tables prepared by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority last year. These also favoured non-profit funds, and said retail funds - including those operated by AMP, Commonwealth Bank and Westpac - performed below the industry average of 8 per cent between 2004 and 2008.
For-profit fund managers say these league tables fail to take into account the different levels of risk offered by retail funds.
Typical membership of retail funds is older, as it often includes people who did not have compulsory super for much of their working life and have been advised to join a fund. The for-profit sector also says retail funds often provide extra perks, such as financial advice.
Source: The Age
http://www.smh.com.au/business/nonprofit-super-shows-best-returns-20100120-mltz.html
We will post comment and reportage on the Henry Review and the Governmental response as it comes to hand.
WHERE WE ARE, AND HOW WE GOT HERE
The decision to hold a full scale review of Australia’s future tax system was one of the recommendations from the Prime Minister’s 20/20 summit. Professor Patricia Apps, the internationally recognised expert on tax, was one of those at the summit making the recommendation. See Paper by Patricia Apps, May 2009.
The Prime Minister announced the review in May 2008 (http://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/Content/Content.aspx?doc=html/home.htm ). Shortly before the December 2008 release of the Review Panel’s consultation papers, the Office for Women asked NFAW to lead a project to identify gender equity issues in the tax system, and to encourage women and their organisations to participate. The project was funded through the WomenSpeak Network.
We contracted Professor Apps and Associate Professor Marian Baird, both of the University of Sydney, to be our technical advisers.
A Reference Group of representatives of the four OfW funded secretariats of national women’s organisations was established, as well as a Steering Group from NFAW and WomenSpeak. Women were invited to input to the process through the NFAW webs-site, and later through social networking sites such as Youtube and Facebook.( hyperlinks to material on www.nfaw.org- e.g. material below to be archived). Ms Jane Caro conducted a communications workshop with us.
A submission was made to the Review on Retirement Incomes (click here for more information) and subsequently on the tax system itself (click here for more information).
A range of technical papers were added to the NFAW web-site as reading resources for visitors - (click here for more information).
On 5 June 2009 NFAW met with the Henry Review team and members of the Secretariat. NFAW was represented by Professor Patricia Apps, Ms Marie Coleman, and Ms Ruth Medd.
The next steps envisaged by the Review include further pubic consultation, and an invitation only technical experts conference organised through the Melbourne Institute at the University of Melbourne, at which Professor Apps was a discussant.
The final report to the Treasurer is due in December 2009.
We can anticipate that after the report is made public, there will be continuing debate and discussions about its options- the process of implementing such an extensive set of likely changes will be much contested in the public sphere, and will take some years.
In consequence, NFAW will continue to explore options for continuing input on gender equity concerns in the process of the public contest of ideas over the next few years.