Search

Aussie TV star wins $9.2m on game show – the largest in history

In an electrifying moment that will surely go down in television history, Australian reality TV star David Genat has claimed a jaw-dropping AUD$9.2 million prize on US television, securing the largest single cash payout ever seen on American TV. The 44-year-old, widely recognised by Aussie audiences from Survivor Australia, Celebrity Apprentice, Rush and Getaway, delivered a masterclass in risk-taking and intuition in NBC’s Deal or No Deal Island. Genat, dubbed the “Survivor golden god” after his 2020 Survivor Australia: All Stars victory, knew he had the upper hand early in the final showdown. But the real twist came when the show’s notorious banker was revealed as none other than Chrissy Teigen. Faced with 26 cases – one containing the life-changing sum of AUD$12.2 million – Genat navigated a nail-biting elimination round, fuelled by his father’s memory and a razor-sharp strategy. Rejecting a staggering seven offers, including multiple million-dollar deals, he played with nerves of steel until just two cases remained. Then came the final offer: a mind-blowing $US5.8 million ($AUD9.2 million). With tension at an all-time high, Genat made the call – he took the deal. It was a decision that paid off in monumental fashion. When his chosen case was opened, it contained just $75. Had he gambled one step further, he would have walked away with next to nothing. Instead, he etched his name into television history with the record-breaking win. “It was surreal,” Genat later shared with USA Today. “The offer came in at US$5.8 million and I started thinking about it, and that is just so much money. I was having a spiritual experience, man. I just knew where that money was. I knew which cases to open. I was looking for signs from my father, who passed away a couple of years ago. I felt his presence there, and he was just guiding me on what cases to open.” That deep connection gave him the clarity to seize the moment and walk away with a life-altering fortune. “My frequency is on another level,” he added. “I fully feel like I’m floating.” With his newfound millions, Genat already has a few indulgences in mind, including a new motorcycle, a luxury watch and some sleek new cars for his four kids. But the adventure might not stop here. Rumours are swirling that Genat could be gearing up for another reality TV showdown on the upcoming Survivor: Australia vs. the World, set to air later this year. Images: Instagram

Money & Banking

Federal Budget 2025: The short, sharp and – sort of – sweet version

The federal budget is always a massive, jargon-filled beast, but don’t worry – we’ve got your back. Here’s a quick and easy rundown of the key numbers, economic forecasts and big-ticket promises (without making your head spin). Whether it’s tax cuts, energy bill relief, or debt figures that sound like someone’s phone number, this summary gives you the essentials in plain English. THE BIG PICTURE: WHERE THE MONEY’S GOING (AND COMING FROM) Economic Growth: The economy is expected to grow by 1.5% in 2024-25, which isn’t exactly fireworks but at least it’s moving in the right direction. Unemployment Rate: The jobless rate is set to rise to 4.25%, meaning more people might be dusting off their résumés. Inflation: The cost of living squeeze is easing slightly, with inflation forecast to drop to 2.5%, finally giving our wallets a breather. Wages Growth: Paychecks are expected to grow by 3%, so while you won’t be rolling in cash, you might afford an extra coffee per week. Living Standards: Household disposable income is expected to rise a bit faster than planned, so that’s a small win for the grocery bill. Migration: Net overseas migration is slowing down, dropping from 435,000 in 2023-24 to 225,000 by 2026-27, as the government tweaks immigration settings. The Big One: Budget Deficit: The country will be $27.6 billion in the red this year, which sounds bad, but hey, it’s better than some past years. Commonwealth Debt: The nation’s credit card balance will hit $940 billion in 2024-25 before cracking $1 trillion the year after, making it one of the biggest IOUs in Aussie history. Net Debt: The government’s net debt will rise to $556 billion, proving once again that we’re all experts at spending more than we have. WHAT’S IN IT FOR YOU (IF LABOR STAYS IN POWER)? If Labor wins the next election, they’ve got a shopping list of goodies lined up. From tax cuts and cheaper meds to more affordable childcare and a crackdown on dodgy workplace contracts, here’s what they’re promising in order to make life a little easier (or at least a little less expensive). Tax Cuts: Everyone gets a tiny tax break worth about $10 a week, starting in July 2026 – not enough for a holiday, but maybe an extra beer, depending on where you buy your drinks. Energy Bill Relief: Households and small businesses will get $150 off their power bills, because, let’s face it, electricity prices are still a killer. Cheaper Medicines: Prescription drugs will be capped at $25 per script, meaning fewer nasty surprises at the pharmacy checkout. Healthcare Boost: More bulk-billing, 50 new urgent care clinics, and extra funding for nurses and GPs, costing a whopping $9 billion over four years – great news if you hate long waits at the doctor. Childcare Help: Families earning up to $500,000 (yes, you read that right) will get at least three days of subsidised childcare, costing $427 million over five years. First Home Buyer Support: The Help to Buy scheme will get a boost, making it a bit easier for first-home buyers to get into the market (assuming they can still afford avocado toast). Workplace Shake-Up: Banning non-compete clauses for low- and middle-income workers could boost wages by $2,500 a year – so no more weird contracts stopping you from getting a better job. HECS Debt Slash: A 20% cut to student loan debt, wiping $16 billion from the books – a rare win for anyone still haunted by their HECS balance. Disaster Recovery: $1.2 billion is going towards helping communities in southeast Queensland and northern NSW recover from ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred – because Mother Nature isn’t playing nice. Big Infrastructure Plans: Expect major upgrades like $7.2 billion for Queensland’s Bruce Highway, $2 billion for a new rail hub in Melbourne, and $1 billion for Sydney’s southwest rail corridor – so maybe, just maybe, your commute will be a little less torturous. Defence Spending: A fast-tracked $1 billion investment in guided weapons, submarines and frigates, because apparently, we’re getting serious about military hardware. And that’s the budget in a nutshell! More spending, some relief for households, and a debt number that’ll make your calculator cry. Images: WikiCommons

Money & Banking

The renting trap snaring retirees – and how to avoid it

It has long been known that renting in retirement is associated with a lower quality of life. Understanding the causal factors can help you avoid a similar fate. There are many reasons why renting in retirement can be problematic. For a start, figures on how much income we need to retire comfortably usually assumes that you own your home – the cost of rent isn’t included. So, anyone using this as a guide falls well short, potentially by 20-40 per cent. Additionally: <ul> <li>Rent usually eats up a larger portion of retirement income than home ownership.</li> <li>Over time, rents typically keep rising while mortgage debts reduce.</li> <li>Home ownership provides equity to use for other investments, further boosting retirement income.</li> <li>Downsizing homeowners can make an additional superannuation contribution from the sale proceeds, which renters cannot.</li> <li>Homeowners can make accessibility modifications to meet their needs as they age, like installing ramps or rails.</li> <li>Homeowners have greater stability and aren’t subject to eviction (and moving costs) at short notice.</li> </ul> How big a problem is it? Numerous studies have highlighted the growing scale of the problem faced by renting retirees. <a style="color: #467886;" href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/renting-in-retirement-why-rent-assistance-needs-to-rise/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Grattan Institute</a> recently found that “two in three retirees who rent in the private market live in poverty,” and that “most older working Australians who rent do not have sufficient savings to keep paying rent in retirement.” The rental trap is also not exclusive to low-income earners. <a style="color: #467886;" href="https://everybodyshome.com.au/resources/priced-out-priced-out-an-index-of-affordable-rentals-for-australian-voters/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Everybody’s Home</a> recently found Australians earning $100,000 per year – above the <a style="color: #467886;" href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/labour/earnings-and-working-conditions/employee-earnings/latest-release" target="_blank" rel="noopener">national median of $1,396 per week</a> ($72,592 per year) – are struggling to pay their rent. The end result is that homelessness is a growing problem for over 55s – particularly women. <a style="color: #467886;" href="https://www.mercyfoundation.com.au/our-focus/ending-homelessness/older-women-and-homelessness/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Mercy Foundation</a> notes that homelessness among these women grew 6.6 per cent in the 2021 Census, following a huge 31 per cent increase in the 2016 Census. What is causing it? Not owning your own home in retirement is obvious answer here. But there are various contributing factors that see people forced to rent later in life, including losing their home and being financially unable to replace it. These include: <ul> <li>Divorce/separation – court and legal fees, counselling costs, division of assets (including the family home).</li> <li>Pre-retirement chronic illness – time out of the workforce for both the patient and their partner to care for them, loss of income, less going into super, and higher healthcare costs.</li> <li>Death of a partner – up-front bills like funeral expenses, surviving partner suddenly on a single income.</li> <li>Elder abuse – an estimated <a style="color: #467886;" href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/family-domestic-and-sexual-violence/population-groups/older-people#abuse" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one in six older Australians experience elder abuse</a>, including 2.1 per cent facing financial abuse.</li> <li>Domestic violence – fleeing abusive relationships with little or no money and assets.</li> <li>Climate change – loss of uninsured home/other assets as storms, floods, cyclones, and fires increase in frequency and severity.</li> <li>Scams – <a style="color: #467886;" href="https://www.nasc.gov.au/news/australians-better-protected-as-reported-scam-losses-fell-by-almost-26-per-cent" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Australians lost $2 billion to scams</a> in 2024.</li> <li>Gambling – <a style="color: #467886;" href="https://aifs.gov.au/research/research-snapshots/gambling-participation-and-experience-harm-australia" target="_blank" rel="noopener">46 per cent of gamblers are at risk of harm</a>, including losing their home.</li> <li>Housing unaffordability – soaring prices (and stamp duty) push home ownership out of reach.</li> </ul> Women often face the brunt of these effects, disadvantaged by the gender pay gap, having less in superannuation, often having primary or sole custody of children, and having less secure employment. How can you protect yourself? Thankfully, there are steps we can all take to protect ourselves and our retirement: <ul> <li>Get your foundations right for a strong financial footing – emergency fund, spending and investment plan, insurances, superannuation, estate planning.</li> <li>Make decisions jointly – letting your partner control finances alone means more risk for you and less spending oversight.</li> <li>Have contingency plans – your own bank account, independent financial and retirement plans, insurances, and back-up plans just in case.</li> <li>Get into the market ASAP – even a cheap investment property far from where you live is a financial asset and a roof over your head if needed.</li> <li>Consider co-ownership – if you can’t afford to buy property alone, split the purchase and ongoing costs with an adult child, sibling, or close friend. Alternatively, sub-let a room to offset the costs.</li> <li>Don’t settle for less – avoid accepting an unreasonable separation settlement just to resolve things quickly.</li> <li>Be alert – know the warning signs of scams, elder abuse, gambling addiction and domestic violence to avoid losing everything.</li> <li>Get independent advice – professional legal, accounting, and financial advice can help you build financial independence, create safeguards, and recover faster if disaster does strike.</li> </ul> Overall, the best thing you can do is simply to act. By being proactive instead of burying your head in the sand, your future self stands a much better chance of enjoying a comfortable retirement! Helen Baker is a licensed Australian financial adviser and author of the new book, Money For Life: How to build financial security from firm foundations (Major Street Publishing $32.99). Helen is among the 1% of financial planners who hold a master’s degree in the field. Proceeds from book sales are donated to charities supporting disadvantaged women and children. Find out more at <a style="color: #467886;" title="http://www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au/" href="http://www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au</a> Disclaimer: The information in this article is of a general nature only and does not constitute personal financial or product advice. Any opinions or views expressed are those of the authors and do not represent those of people, institutions or organisations the owner may be associated with in a professional or personal capacity unless explicitly stated. Helen Baker is an authorised representative of BPW Partners Pty Ltd AFSL 548754. Image: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

To tip or not to tip? Kyle weighs in on the great debate

In a country where tipping is about as popular as warm beer, Kyle Sandilands has somehow managed to ignite a national debate with his bold approach after revealing his personal tipping policy: doubling the bill. While everyday Australians are grumbling about feeling "under surveillance" by watchful waitstaff, Sandilands has effectively turned the concept of tipping on its head by making it rain on every meal. “Whatever the bill is, I’ll pay that again,” he declared on air, leaving co-host Jackie O and newsreader Brooklyn Ross stunned. The revelation has sparked a flurry of reactions, ranging from admiration to outright panic. Many hospitality workers have suddenly discovered a newfound appreciation for Sandilands, with one Sydney waiter reportedly seen frantically Googling his favourite restaurants in hopes of securing a booking. Meanwhile, local economists are nervously clutching their calculators. "If this catches on, we could see a rapid rise in inflation, an economic boom in hospitality, or Kyle Sandilands accidentally becoming Australia's next Reserve Bank governor," speculated one financial analyst. Not everyone, however, is on board with the tipping craze. Outraged anti-tipping Australians have taken to social media, decrying the practice as "un-Australian" and a gateway to the country becoming “the 51st state of America”. One particularly passionate commenter warned, "This is how it starts! First, it's tipping, then it's calling football ‘soccer’, and next thing you know, we’re driving on the right side of the road!" Despite the uproar, Sandilands seems unfazed. With his unique approach, he may have found a loophole in Australia’s new EFTPOS tipping culture – if everyone else sticks to the modest 5-25% suggested range, he might actually be saving money. “You’re doubling the cost,” Ross pointed out in disbelief. “I’ll save big time,” Sandilands responded, seemingly unconcerned with mathematical realities. As for whether his fellow Australians will follow suit or hold the line against tipping tyranny, only time will tell. One thing’s for sure: if you see Kyle Sandilands dining out, you might want to consider switching tables – and bringing an extra billfold. Images: KIIS FM

Money & Banking

After a century of Monday to Friday, could the 4-day week finally be coming to Australia?

<div class="theconversation-article-body">The reality of shorter working hours could be one step closer for many Australians, pending the outcome of the federal election. The Greens, who could control crucial cross bench votes in a hung parliament, have announced plans for a <a href="https://greens.org.au/news/media-release/greens-launch-4-day-work-week-election-policy">four-day</a> working week, with no loss of pay. They say the policy would alleviate stress and burn out, and increase women’s participation in the workforce. Earning the same money for fewer hours would appeal to most workers. But is it too good to be true? Could it really be rolled out cost free to all workplaces, especially to “client facing” companies and service providers? Or does research suggest the Greens could be onto something? <h2>The Greens’ plan</h2> The Greens’ policy would involve a new National Institute for the Four Day Work Week and a test case through the Fair Work Commission. A series of national trials would be set up in a number of different industries, whereby workers would work 80% of their normal hours, while maintaining 100% of their pay. According to Greens Senator Barbara Pocock, it’s a win-win for everyone: <blockquote> It can increase productivity, reduce absenteeism, improve recruitment and retention and give employees more time to manage their home life. This change will allow workers to create a working week that works for them. </blockquote> <h2>The 100:80:100 model</h2> The four-day work week being proposed in this instance is commonly regarded as the 100:80:100 model. It delivers 100% of the pay, for 80% of the hours, in <a href="https://www.4dayweek.com/news-posts/100-80-100-rule">return</a> for maintaining 100% of productivity. This is unlike other forms of shorter working weeks, which compress five days’ worth of work into four longer days. This obviously disadvantages some employees. Recent <a href="https://figshare.swinburne.edu.au/articles/report/Emerging_Four_Day_Work_Week_Trends_in_Australia_New_insights_based_on_interviews_with_Australian_firms_who_have_already_adopted_4DWW_arrangements_Preview_report_/26282311?file=47647063">research</a> conducted by Swinburne University of Technology involved interviews with ten Australian firms that have already adopted the 100:80:100 model. They were a mixture of small and medium sized private sector businesses, including management consulting firms, a shipping and logistics company, and recruitment and marketing agencies. The research underlined the potential for a range of positive outcomes for both employers and employees. Workers reported having better work-life balance, more time to complete “life administration” tasks, and more time to invest in hobbies, exercise, wellness and self-care. Bosses cited productivity gains, reduced sick days, and significant improvements in recruitment and retention rates. However, the 100:80:100 model is viewed with scepticism in some quarters. There is still doubt that productivity and output would be maintained, or in some cases improved, when workers are working one day fewer per week. Also, there could be costs associated with the implementation of this work model for front-line roles, such as retail, schools, hospitals and nursing homes. Additional workers may need to be hired, at extra expense, to cover the hours dropped by the existing workforce. <h2>100 years of working 5 days a week</h2> The year 2026 will mark the 100th anniversary of the five-day work week. It was car maker Henry Ford who <a href="https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/henry-fords-five-day-week/">reduced</a> the working week in the United States from six days to five. Other sectors and countries followed suit. This was at a time when the average life expectancy of Australian workers was just 55 and households typically only had one bread-winner. Despite the time saved by the many technological breakthroughs in the past 100 years – from the photocopier, desktop computer and fax machine, to the internet, mobile phones and AI – the average Australian is now <a href="https://futurework.org.au/report/taking-up-the-right-to-disconnect-unsatisfactory-working-hours-and-unpaid-overtime/">working longer hours</a> in paid and unpaid labour than ever before. The Greens point out Australian society is changing. More women and carers are either in the workforce or would be encouraged into the workforce by more flexible arrangements: <blockquote> yet we are constrained by archaic labour laws that see the fruits of our efforts swallowed up in profits for bosses and shareholders. </blockquote> The role of generative AI technologies in the workplace may also deliver benefits to workers. Separate Swinburne <a href="https://figshare.swinburne.edu.au/articles/report/Generative_AI_at_work_Empowering_employee_mental_wellbeing/27252948">research</a> has revealed an increasing expectation among workers that they will receive a share in the time saved by future technologies in the form of improved work-life balance and wellbeing gains. <h2>Time to enter the 21st century</h2> Earlier this year, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/jan/27/two-hundred-uk-companies-sign-up-for-permanent-four-day-working-week">200 UK companies</a> signed up to the 100:80:100 model, as part of a campaign to “reinvent Britain’s working week”. Large scale trials are also underway in <a href="https://4dayweek.io/country/canada">Canada</a> and several <a href="https://www.euronews.com/next/2024/02/02/the-four-day-week-which-countries-have-embraced-it-and-how-s-it-going-so-far">European</a> countries. The global interest in a shorter working week is not surprising, and has likely been fuelled by the COVID pandemic, which has caused workers and employers to re-imagine their working lives. If the Greens are in a position to leverage any balance of power after the coming election, it could be Australia’s turn to recognise the conventional five-day working week is no longer fit for purpose.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/252379/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-l-hopkins-255434">John L. Hopkins</a>, Associate Professor of Management, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/after-a-century-of-monday-to-friday-could-the-4-day-week-finally-be-coming-to-australia-252379">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Farewell, Your Majesty: Major change coming to Aussie fiver

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has announced a new theme for the Aussie fiver, designed to honour the “enduring emotional, spiritual and physical connection of First Nations peoples to Country”. “This inspiring theme will guide the creation of an artwork that will feature on the redesigned banknote,” said Michelle McPhee, RBA’s Assistant Governor of Business Services. The selection of this theme followed an extensive national campaign, receiving over 2,100 theme nominations from the public. For the first time since 1992, the $5 note will not feature the late Queen Elizabeth II, who had appeared on the denomination for more than 30 years. Breaking with tradition, the RBA confirmed that the redesigned note would not bear a portrait of any monarch, meaning King Charles will also be absent from the new design. However, the reverse side of the note will continue to depict the Australian Parliament building. Since the 1960s, the $5 banknote has undergone four major redesigns, with the most recent update in 2016. When Queen Elizabeth II’s portrait was first introduced in 1992, it replaced humanitarian Caroline Chisholm, a decision that was met with criticism at the time. The RBA defended its choice, citing Australia’s status as a constitutional monarchy and the tradition of including the reigning monarch on at least one banknote. The new banknote is expected to take several years to be designed, printed and circulated. The process of selecting an artist for the design is currently underway, with more details to be revealed in the coming months. The development of the note will also involve incorporating advanced security features to prevent counterfeiting. While the new design is in progress, the existing $5 note will continue to be issued. Meanwhile, Australian coins, which are produced by the Royal Australian Mint, will maintain the tradition of featuring the monarch. Images: RBA

Money & Banking

Desperate Aussie dad sparks brutal immigration debate on Q+A

An Australian father, fearing that another rent hike could push his family into homelessness, directly challenged the federal government’s immigration policies on national television. Morgan Cox, a father of a one-year-old, raised his concerns on ABC’s Q+A program on Monday night. The episode, broadcast from the federal election battleground of Wyong on the Central Coast of New South Wales, saw an emotionally charged exchange between Cox and Federal Health Minister Mark Butler. Cox detailed his dire financial situation, explaining that he had recently received notice of a $180-per-week rent increase – an additional $10,000 annually. “I tried to find a cheaper place and there just aren’t any," Cox said. "What little is available, there’s dozens of people lined up. Lots of them are immigrants and they have plenty more money than I can possibly get.” The audience applauded as he pressed the government on whether it planned to curb immigration to align with housing availability. In response, Butler expressed sympathy, acknowledging the widespread struggles with housing affordability. “I’m so sorry you’re going through that and it’s a story we all hear right across the country, particularly in the bigger states around the big cities,” Butler said. He then noted that the government was working to bring immigration levels down to sustainable levels, but said that it is difficult to control departures of temporary residents. “What we’ve found after those efforts is that the arrival numbers have returned to about pre-Covid levels, but we’re not managing the exits – the people returning home after studying or short-term skilled work. We’re working very hard on that,” Butler explained. However, Cox appeared visibly frustrated, questioning why the government could not simply halt immigration until housing supply could meet demand. Former NSW Treasurer Matt Kean, also on the panel, argued that the issue was more complex than immigration alone. “The reality is that we need more housing supply," he said. "More supply into the system means more availability for renters, for homeowners – more choice.” He further criticised excessive bureaucracy in housing development. “There’s way too much red tape and green tape stopping housing developments, whether it’s Sydney, Melbourne, or right across Australia,” he added. As housing affordability continues to be a pressing concern for many Australians, the government clearly faces increasing pressure to strike a balance between population growth and adequate housing solutions. Images: ABC

Money & Banking

Replacing stamp duty with a land tax could save home buyers big money. Here’s how

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> Infrastructure Victoria has released a <a href="https://assets.infrastructurevictoria.com.au/assets/Victorias-draft-30-year-infrastructure-strategy.pdf">draft 30-year plan </a> outlining how the state can grow sustainably. It focuses on key areas like transport, housing, energy, and public services to support a growing population and improve liveability. The plan also suggests ways to make the state’s infrastructure and tax system fairer, more efficient and more sustainable. The plan’s recommendations are expected to cost between A$60 billion and $75 billion, mostly spent before 2035. This is around 10% of <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/national-accounts/australian-national-accounts-state-accounts/2023-24-financial-year#data-downloads">Victoria’s yearly economic output</a> in 2023-24, spread over the next decade. With Victoria already spending record amounts on infrastructure, and <a href="https://pbo.vic.gov.au/document/BudgetUpdateSnapshot2024-25">budget deficits forecast</a> until 2025-26, finding the money to fund social housing, transport and other projects is a key challenge. We estimate the Infrastructure Victoria proposals would add between $4 billion and $5 billion to Victorian government expenditure each year. Yet one of its proposals — replacing stamp duty with an annual land tax — would only cost between $1 million and $5 million to implement, but generate substantial gains for Victorian households. <h2>Why replace stamp duty with land tax?</h2> Stamp duty is one of the biggest barriers to moving house in Victoria and other Australian states. This tax, which people pay when they buy property, adds thousands of dollars to the cost of moving. In 2022-23, Victorians paid about <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/national-accounts/australian-national-accounts-state-accounts/2023-24-financial-year#data-downloads">$12 billion</a> to move house. Of this, $3 billion went to actual moving costs (like real estate services, and removalists) and $9 billion was <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/government/taxation-revenue-australia/latest-release#data-downloads">stamp duty</a>. That’s an effective tax rate of 300% on the true cost of moving, and in 2023 <a href="https://www.e-business.sro.vic.gov.au/calculators/land-transfer-duty">added about</a> $40,000, or 5.3%, to the cost of purchasing the average Victorian home. High stamp duty discourages people from relocating, even when their needs change — whether that’s moving for a new job, finding a bigger home for a growing family or downsizing after retirement. This leads to longer commutes, traffic congestion and a less efficient housing market. Switching from stamp duty to an annual land tax would make moving easier and spread the tax burden more fairly. Instead of a large, one-time tax when buying a home, all landowners would pay a smaller tax each year. This would help fund schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure more sustainably. <h2>What can we learn from Canberra?</h2> Victoria University’s Centre of Policy Studies <a href="https://www.treasury.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/1618407/cops-final-report.pdf">studied a similar reform</a> in the Australian Capital Territory, where stamp duty has been gradually phased out since 2012 and replaced with higher general rates (a type of land tax). Each year, the ACT government sets a target for how much money it needs to raise. Landowners then pay a share of that total, based on the value of their land. One of the biggest benefits of this approach is that it raises money more efficiently. Unlike other taxes, land taxes don’t discourage investment or economic activity. The study found removing stamp duty had a big positive impact on the ACT’s economy. Around 80% of the economic boost came from removing stamp duty, while introducing land tax also had benefits. By studying transaction data from the ACT, we showed each 10% reduction stamp duty rates drove a 6% rise in property transactions. <h2>Would it help housing affordability?</h2> One of the main arguments for replacing stamp duty with land tax is its effect on housing prices. Economists widely agree land taxes reduce land values, which makes housing more affordable. However, the impact of removing stamp duty is less predictable. Our previous research found <a href="https://theconversation.com/swapping-stamp-duty-for-land-tax-would-push-down-house-prices-but-push-up-apartment-prices-new-modelling-finds-184381">the effect on house prices</a> depends on how often properties are bought and sold. Apartments, for example, tend to change hands more frequently than houses. Because of this, removing stamp duty tends to push up apartment prices more than house prices. Even so, the overall effect of the reform is a drop in property prices. The challenge is ensuring this price reduction is evenly spread across different types of housing. <h2>A fairer tax system</h2> To make the system fairer, policymakers could adjust how land tax is applied. One option is to introduce a fixed-rate component, as <a href="https://www.revenue.nsw.gov.au/grants-schemes/previous-schemes/first-home-buyer-choice">proposed </a> in New South Wales. Another idea, suggested 15 years ago in the <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-10/afts_final_report_part_1_consolidated.pdf">Henry Tax Review</a>, is to base the tax on the per-square-metre value of land. Another key factor is housing supply. If planning laws allow more high-density housing in inner suburbs, price changes could be better managed. <h2>We also need short-term solutions</h2> Replacing stamp duty with land tax is a long-term reform that would take years to fully implement. The ACT, for example, planned a 20-year transition. If all state governments implemented this reform, we estimate Australian households would ultimately be <a href="https://www.copsmodels.com/ftp/workpapr/g-337.pdf">better off by about</a> $,1600 per household per year. In the short term, <a href="https://theconversation.com/whats-the-best-way-to-ease-rents-and-improve-housing-affordability-we-modelled-4-of-the-governments-biggest-programs-225446">other policies </a> could help improve housing affordability. These include increasing Commonwealth Rent Assistance and rethinking first-home buyer support. These steps could complement broader tax, infrastructure and housing supply reforms. The Victorian government is <a href="https://engage.vic.gov.au/victorias30yearinfrastructurestrategy">seeking feedback</a> on the draft plan before releasing the final version later this year. This is an opportunity for Victorians to contribute ideas on how to shape the state’s future and ensure its infrastructure and tax system work for everyone.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/251472/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jason-nassios-318488">Jason Nassios</a>, Associate Professor, Centre of Policy Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/victoria-university-1175">Victoria University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/james-giesecke-9853">James Giesecke</a>, Professor, Centre of Policy Studies and the Impact Project, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/victoria-university-1175">Victoria University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/replacing-stamp-duty-with-a-land-tax-could-save-home-buyers-big-money-heres-how-251472">original article</a>. Image: 7news.com.au </div>

Money & Banking

Millions of Centrelink customers to get cash boost

More than five million Australians on welfare, including pensioners, renters, and job seekers, will have their payments boosted as the indexation changes are due to kick in. The payment increases will be made from March 20, with single pensioners able to take home an extra extra $3913 each year, while couples are set to receive an additional combined $5902. People on JobSeeker payments will get an extra $3374 to $5038, with single parents, mainly women, set to be more than $7500 better off annually. The maximum single rate of pension for those on the Age Pension, Disability Support Pension and Carer Payment will increase by $4.60 to $1149.00 a fortnight. “We’ve spent the past three years strengthening our social security system, so that it helps Australians at whatever age or stage they’re at in life,” Social Services Minister Amanda Rishworth said. “Indexation is a critical part of our social security safety net. For pensioners and other payment recipients receiving this financial boost, this will help ease some pressure.” Image: TK Kurikawa / Shutterstock.com

Money & Banking

Over 350k Aussies to be forced back into the office

Opposition leader Peter Dutton has vowed to end working from home arrangements for public servants, forcing them back into an office five days a week. The leader of the Coalition will end flexible work arrangements for federal government employees, which currently allows them to work from home for two days a week. According to a report in the <a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/coalition-to-force-public-servants-to-return-to-the-office-20250303-p5lge3" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-link-type="article-inline">Australian Financial Review,</a> the Coalition will also make massive job cuts, slashing about 36,000 jobs, which will save about $6 billion per year, if elected in the upcoming federal election. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese warned that the drastic move would impact frontline workers, meaning slower delivery times for Aussies on benefits, including veterans. Opposition spokeswoman Jane Hume said the government has offered a “blank cheque to work from home” to employees, saying it was “unsustainable” and “not an arrangement that works for everyone”. On Tuesday, 7News reporter Nick McCallum and Founding Director of Western Sydney Women, Amanda Rose, spoke with Nat Barr about the policy on Sunrise. “Nick, would there be a revolt if public servants are ordered back to the office?” Barr asked. “I have no doubt there would be. I actually like the policy. I think it is ridiculous that, what is it now, more than 60 per cent of federal public servants have ability to work at home,” McCallum said. “There is a big ‘but’ to all of this: Peter Dutton, it’s a perfect policy for him to sound tough, sound Donald Trump-like, bang his chest and say ‘I am going to demand they come back’ but they’ve recently signed a workplace agreement and under that there is a presumption that they can work at home." “All people in the public service can at least request it. There is a presumption they can do it and there is no limit on the number of days they can actually work from home." “So, he can’t really change that until 2027 anyway. So, call me cynical but it’s a perfect policy for him but at the moment he can’t do a lot about it.” Image credits: STEVEN MARKHAM/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock Editorial

Money & Banking

Cricket great takes aim at Albo's beer tax freeze

Cricket great David Warner has slammed Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's move to combat soaring beer prices. On Monday, Albanese promised to pause the government's tax hike on beers poured at pubs for the next two years. Albanese announced the policy while enjoying his "first beer of the year" at the Bob Hawke Beer and Leisure Centre in Marrickville. "This will make a difference. It is a positive announcement. As I said, good for beer drinkers, good for pubs and clubs, good for cost of living pressures," he said. Australia's inflation-indexed alcohol tax - which increases twice annually - has long been an issue for breweries, pub owners and customers. This month, there was a 3.5 per cent rise on the price of beer, an additional cost that usually gets passed onto the customer. The Prime Minister said if he is re-elected, the Labor government would freeze the indexation on draught beer excise for 24 months from the next indexation date this coming August. However, Warner believes this move is a "few years too late," slamming the Prime Minister's pledge on social media. Warner, who is an investor and director of Victoria's St Andrews Beach Brewery, has been affected by the rising prices. Shortly after Albanese's announcement, Coalition treasury spokesman Angus Taylor said Peter Dutton, if elected, would also freeze tax. "The government has chosen the eve of an election to promise voters a freeze on a tax that has skyrocketed due to its failure to address inflation at its core," Taylor said. Image: LUKAS COCH/EPA-EFE/ Shutterstock Editorial/ Instagram

Money & Banking

Steve Price slams woman's savvy Airtasker job

Steve Price has launched into a tirade on The Project over a story about a woman's savvy use of Airtasker. The Sydney woman posted a job on the site to pay a stranger $100 if they delivered her a pair of sneakers to the Ivy nightclub, after her high heels began hurting her feet at 1am. Her ingenuity quickly went viral, with The Project panellist Georgie Tunny explaining the situation. "Someone came through (and delivered the shoes), and her followers applauded her, calling it genius hack," Tunny said. <div class="embed" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; outline: currentcolor !important;"><iframe class="embedly-embed" style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; border-style: none; vertical-align: baseline; width: 591px; outline: currentcolor !important;" title="tiktok embed" src="https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2Fembed%2Fv2%2F7476683192787946770&display_name=tiktok&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2F%40aimee.clairee%2Fvideo%2F7476683192787946770%3Fembed_source%3D121374463%252C121468991%252C121439635%252C121433650%252C121404359%252C121497414%252C73319236%252C121477481%252C121351166%252C121487028%252C73347567%252C121331973%252C120811592%252C120810756%252C121503376%253Bnull%253Bembed_masking%26refer%3Dembed%26referer_url%3Dwww.dailymail.co.uk%252Ftvshowbiz%252Farticle-14454879%252FThe-Project-Steve-Price-sneakers-nightclub-heels.html%26referer_video_id%3D7476683192787946770&image=https%3A%2F%2Fp16-sign-sg.tiktokcdn.com%2Fobj%2Ftos-alisg-p-0037%2Fo4gbklEViYI8Bu8LPiDDiBnRVC8KAIVEAZBDy%3Flk3s%3Db59d6b55%26x-expires%3D1741222800%26x-signature%3Dr1zBofQ2NEGTc0Et0FGfYs3KRQY%253D%26shp%3Db59d6b55%26shcp%3D-&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=tiktok" width="340" height="700" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div> Steve Price, however, wasn't impressed by the woman's determination to be comfortable, blasting her "ridiculous" request. Price crinkled his face in disgust at the harmless story and let loose, mincing no words as he shared his opinion. "Don't be stupid. That's the most ridiculous, over-privileged w**ky thing I've heard of" he said. "That woman has too much money. She got secondhand smelly sneakers," Steve added. Georgie defended the woman, saying that in her clubbing days, she would absolutely have paid someone a decent sum in order to be in comfortable shoes and spare her feet. Image credits: The Project

Money & Banking

Woman slammed for using GoFundMe for house deposit

A woman has been relentlessly mocked online after launching a GoFundMe page to ask strangers to contribute money to her house deposit. Emmalee Potter, a mother-of-three from Victoria, wrote on the page that she had been "suffering a rough few years" and relying on friends and family for help with accommodation. Now however, Potter is finally in the position where she is tantalising close to being able to purchase her new home after "working hard towards saving", but still finds herself $3,000 short of her goal. As she wrote on the fundraising page, "I'm almost at the final stage but I'm short on the deposit so I'm calling on my village. Please help me get over this last hurdle, every little bit truly helps, a house is more than just a place to live." "It's a foundation for the next chapter of life, a space where memories are made, and where I can really begin to feel settled. Your donation, no matter the size, will go directly toward helping me achieve this dream." While Ms Potter thanked those who could contribute, many were not impressed at her using the platform in order to fund her house. "No hate but you expect people to donate to you so you can buy a house?" one person asked, while another added, "I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. If we are all going to start GoFundMe accounts, I may as well start one so I can go on a holiday to Greece." Another person wrote, "It's a tough time for everyone trying to buy a house, especially with the cost of living, so I'm kind of confused why you're asking for donations. The first paragraph of your listing says 'I'm now in a position to purchase a home' but you're asking strangers to send you money for the deposit?" Ms Potter defended the fundraising page as she responded to one outraged commenter, writing, "It's not about 'funding me a house' it's the small amount still needed to buy something." "Me and my kids are living in a room at my friends. Buying is actually cheaper than renting. We've applied for over 100 rentals and been knocked back. I can get the home loan and pay the repayments [I'm] just needing the last bit of the deposit." Others were quick to defend the woman, as one person wrote, "There's nothing wrong with asking for help." Image credits: GoFundMe / Facebook

Money & Banking

Albo quizzed over luxury home purchase

Anthony Albanese has been grilled by Karl Stefanovic over the recent purchase of a multi-million dollar home, that was widely slammed by the public as being "out of touch". As part of his pre-election campaign, the Prime Minister and his fiancé Jodie Haydon sat down with 60 Minutes where they discussed the controversial real estate move. Karl Stefanovic described as the $4.1 million purchase of the Copacabana holiday home as “harebrained", as Albo defended his decision to buy the home. “Whose harebrained idea was Copacabana?” Stefanovic asked as the program began. Mr Albanese, who is notoriously sensitive about the purchase amid claims it was tone-deaf during a cost-of-living crisis, laughed at the question as he responded, “Look, Jodie and I are getting married.” “What you don’t do is move into the family home where Carmel and I raised Nathan together as a family. And guess what, Karl? At some stage … I won’t be Prime Minister into my 80s and therefore we have bought a place close to where Jodie grew up … where her family are all based.” In the program, Stefanovic observed that, “I’ve spent some time with her these last couple of days and I get the feeling the girl from the Central Coast would sooner rather than later have her feet up at Copacabana, whether you are there or not!” “No — well, she’s a Coastie and a proud one,” Mr Albanese replied. “And it was very much a personal decision, not a political one. And I think Australians get that.” Karl then asked about the controversy around the home, asking the PM, “Did it sting you at all the criticism around that, the perception being during a cost-of-living crisis, the PM shouldn’t be seen as being, you know, so lavish?” Albanese responded, “I’m pretty resilient, Karl, and if you’re worried about every bit of criticism that was out there, then life would be much more difficult than it is." Image credits: 60 Minutes <p style="box-sizing: inherit; border: 0px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', HelveticaNeue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size-adjust: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-variant-alternates: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-position: inherit; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; font-size: 18px; margin: 0px 0px 24px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">

Money & Banking

"Absolutely cooked": Old Sydney home sold for over $4.1 million

A one-storey red brick home in Lane Cove, Sydney has sold for a whopping $4,165,000 at an auction on Saturday. The home, which boasts two bathrooms, a backyard, four bedrooms and a “traditional kitchen” has sold for more than $600,000 over reserve, despite being built between the 1920s-1950s and needing renovation. The home was snapped up by a British family after a fierce bidding war with six other registered buyers. “The people who purchased it were the opening bid. (The bidders) were actively bidding into the high threes, and two of them pushed it above the four mark,” said Sam Lloyd from McGrath Estate Agents. “As far as we know, they will definitely do some work to it to make it their family home.” Lloyd added that there was was “plenty of interest” in the 695 sqm property, with its prime location near the suburb's retail and restaurant precinct. The selling agent said that both himself and the owner were “surprised” by the high price of the property – which had a reserve of $3.5 million. “It was definitely above our expectations” he said. According to Domain, the median house price for a four bedroom home in Lane Cove is $3.505 million. Many expressed their outrage over the "crazy" price online, with freelancer chief executive Matt Barrie saying: “Sydney house prices rapidly approaching $5m. Absolutely cooked." “$4 million for the house, plus another $2-3 million to demolish and rebuild. The reality of living in Australia where even the top one per cent income earners face significant costs for home ownership,” another added. “Our economy is out of control, what a ridiculous price for an average house,” a third wrote. “That’s some crazy pricing! I hear Adelaide is lovely this time of year …” a fourth commented. Image: Domain

Money & Banking

Official interest rates have been cut, but not everyone is a winner

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/isaac-gross-737430">Isaac Gross</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> The Reserve Bank’s decision to cut interest rates for the first time in four years has triggered a round of celebration. Mortgage holders are cheering the fact their monthly repayments are now slightly lower, while the Albanese government hopes the small easing in the cost of living will <a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-will-albanese-opt-for-an-april-election-now-a-rate-cut-has-him-breathing-more-easily-250136">lift voters’ moods</a>. This is despite the Reserve Bank’s warnings that <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-reserve-bank-has-cut-rates-for-the-first-time-in-four-years-but-it-is-cautious-about-future-cuts-249704">further rate cuts may not eventuate</a>, depending on how much further progress is made on taming inflation. But it’s important to remember not everybody benefits from an interest rate cut. Some will be worse off. <h2>Savers lose out</h2> Not all Australian households are net borrowers. Many are net savers, retirees or prospective homebuyers, who actually lose out when rates fall. For starters, <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/fsr/2024/sep/contents.html">only about a third of households</a> are in hock to the banks when it comes to a monthly mortgage repayment. Another third of households have paid off their mortgage entirely, and so don’t benefit from a reduction in mortgage interest rates. And the remaining third are renters, who also don’t pay a mortgage. So while this news is generally a good thing for borrowers, a fall in mortgage rates only directly benefits a minority of households. Here are some of the ways lower interest rates might actually hurt rather than help the typical Australian household. <h2>Higher house prices</h2> One of the most immediate effects of lower interest rates is their impact on the housing market. With cheaper borrowing costs, more buyers can afford larger loans, bidding up house prices. This is great if you already own a home, but terrible if you’re still trying to buy one. For young Australians locked out of home ownership, a rate cut makes things even harder. It drives prices higher, forcing prospective buyers to stretch their finances further just to get a foot in the market. <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2024/sp-ag-2024-05-16.html">Reserve Bank calculations </a> suggest that, in the long run, higher house prices from lower rates can outweigh the benefit of lower mortgage repayments. <h2>Lower returns on savings</h2> If you’re a saver rather than a borrower, interest rate cuts are unequivocally bad news. Whether you’re saving for a home deposit, retirement, or just an emergency fund, lower rates mean you earn less on your bank deposits. The money in your savings account is now growing more slowly, making it harder to build wealth over time. Indeed, more than 20 banks actually cut their term deposit rates in advance of the Reserve Bank’s decision on Tuesday, according to <a href="https://www.canstar.com.au/home-loans/banks-slash-term-deposit-rates-february-2025/">Canstar research</a>. Analysis of HILDA data, <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2020/jun/household-wealth-prior-to-covid-19-evidence-from-the-2018-hilda-survey.html#:%7E:text=The%20HILDA%20Survey%20is%20a,observation%20available%20is%20for%202018.">which surveys household wealth and income</a>, suggests net savers tend to be younger households without property, retirees living off savings, and those who are not in full-time employment. For these groups, lower rates mean less income and fewer financial opportunities. <h2>Retirees will feel the squeeze</h2> Many <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2012/dec/pdf/bu-1212-3.pdf">retirees rely on income</a> from interest-bearing assets such as term deposits or cash savings. When rates fall, their returns shrink. The cost-of-living crisis has made it harder for retirees on a fixed income to fund their lifestyles, and a rate cut only makes things worse. While some retirees have exposure to the stock market via superannuation, many prefer the stability of cash savings. With rates falling, they face the tough choice of either reducing their spending or taking on more investment risk in their old age. <h2>Bad news for the dollar, and overseas travellers</h2> When the Reserve Bank cuts rates, it tends to <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/education/resources/explainers/drivers-of-the-aud-exchange-rate.html">weaken the Australian dollar</a>. A weaker dollar makes overseas travel more expensive for Australians. That pint of beer in London, that piña colada in Puerto Rico, or that shopping trip to New York all become pricier. For Australians planning international holidays, rate cuts are a blow. A strong Australian dollar makes travel cheaper, and lower rates work against that. So while mortgage holders might celebrate, anyone hoping to travel overseas finds themselves worse off. <h2>More expensive imports</h2> Just as a weaker Australian dollar makes travel more expensive, it also increases the cost of imported goods. And Australia imports a lot – especially cars and petrol. Since the closure of domestic car manufacturing, all new vehicles sold in Australia are imported. Petrol, the second-largest import, is also sensitive to currency fluctuations. When the Australian dollar weakens due to lower interest rates, the cost of these essential goods rises. For the millions of Australians who rely on their cars for daily life, this is a significant financial burden. This isn’t to say rate cuts don’t benefit a large portion of Australians. Anyone with a significant mortgage debt will find themselves with lower monthly repayments, and that’s undoubtedly a financial relief. But the public narrative around interest rates tends to treat cuts as a universal good, ignoring the many Australians who are left worse off. Falling interest rates are a sign the high inflation that has caused the cost-of-living crisis has abated. That is <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/media-releases/2025/mr-25-03.html">an economic success</a> that ought to be celebrated. But that now rates are falling again, we should at least acknowledge the costs that come with them.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/250140/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/isaac-gross-737430">Isaac Gross</a>, Lecturer in Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/official-interest-rates-have-been-cut-but-not-everyone-is-a-winner-250140">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Money & Banking

Australia’s largest super fund fined $27 million

Australia's largest superannuation fund has been charged a whopping $27 million for charging duplicate fees to tens of thousands of customers. AustralianSuper was first sued by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) in 2023. During the investigation, it was discovered that more than 48,000 members’ accounts were not merged in their best interests, allowing duplicate fees to eat in to the retirement savings of hard-working Aussies. About 90,000 AustralianSuper members were affected between July 2013 and March 2023, costing them $69 million. Both ASIC and AustralianSuper appeared in the Federal Court at Melbourne on Friday, where Justice Lisa Hespe handed down her decision. AustralianSuper were fined $27 million, and were also ordered to pay ASIC’s legal costs up to $500,000. “By failing to properly remediate that beneficiary, AustralianSuper did not exercise in relation to the interests of that beneficiary the same degree of skill, care and diligence as a prudent superannuation trustee would have exercised,” Justice Lisa Hespe ruled. AustralianSuper apologised to members when the lawsuit began, saying it regretted that its processes to identify and combine multiple accounts did not cover all instances of multiple member accounts. In a statement after the hearing, AustralianSuper chief executive Paul Schroder said they had taken steps to prevent similar mistakes. “We found this mistake, we reported it, we apologised to impacted members, we compensated them, and we’ve improved our processes to prevent this happening again,” he said. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

How women will shoulder the burden of new care reforms

It’s time to put a ‘gender lens’ on the once-in-a-generation reforms to Australia’s aged care system. There are almost <a href="https://www.gen-agedcaredata.gov.au/topics/people-using-aged-care" target="_blank" rel="noopener">double</a> the number of women compared with men in permanent residential care. Women are also more likely to use home care services. And we do the bulk of unpaid caring for ageing parents and grandparents. In fact, almost 70% of women provide primary care, according to the <a href="https://www.carersnsw.org.au/uploads/main/Files/3.Resources/Policy-Research/Carers-NSW_2022_National_Carer_Survey-Report.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">National Carer Survey</a>. Given these shocking statistics, why is the federal government reducing the quality of care, under its new Support at Home model? This affects women on both sides of the system: as unpaid carers and clients. It’s all to do with pricing. A 10% cap on care management fees will apply from July this year. This means home care service providers may not be able to continue to give older people, who are overwhelmingly women, the level of care they need. “The Aged Care Royal Commission told the sector loudly that Australians expect quality care. The Australian Government went so far to describe what that means in the 2024 Aged Care legislation, so the sector is aghast at the caps on care management, which is critical in supporting vulnerable older people to understand, know and access the support they need to age in place,” Your Side CEO, Danielle Ballantine, says. Capping care management results in the very specialist skills of a care manager being outsourced to family. Inevitably it’s women – especially the sandwich generation – who will shoulder this burden, while trying to hold down jobs and secure their financial future. My sister and I would have been lost without this support when we were caring for Dad in the home, while working full-time and raising our children. Many female carers are forced to cut back their hours of paid work – or leave employment altogether – reducing their earning capacity and financial security. This feeds into the gender pay and superannuation gaps: Women retire with around 25% <a href="https://www.hesta.com.au/stories/bridging-the-gap-for-women-and-super" target="_blank" rel="noopener">less</a> super than men, with many older single women living in extreme poverty. This is undoubtedly an unintended consequence. But it must form part of the federal government’s considerations. “The government is currently consulting with older people, consumer advocates and the sector, with more news on pricing yet to be announced,” Ms Ballantine says. We need women – unpaid carers, aged care workers and clients – to be at the centre of these conversations. Under the proposed changes, most of the services assisting people to be healthy, safe and independent in their later stages of life will be out of <a href="https://www.theweeklysource.com.au/home-care/cut-in-care-management-funding-threatens-high-quality-home-care-say-providers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reach</a>. Based on the capacity to pay, some older people might not be able to afford a care worker to support them to have a shower. When unpaid carers step in, they often become burned out, increasing the risk of skin tears and falls. Without adequate care management oversight, some of these issues can become life threatening. Is this the way we should be treating older women, many of whom have spent their lives caring for others? Closer to home, is this the future we want for ourselves? Image credits: Shutterstock / Supplied Tracey Spicer AM is a multiple Walkley Award-winning journalist, author and passionate advocate for social responsibility issues. She is an Ambassador for the non-profit aged care provider Your Side.

Money & Banking

"Easter is cancelled": Coles and Woolies slammed over "insane" chocolate prices

The turn of the new year means supermarkets are never far away from gearing up for the next holiday. And, just like clockwork, novelty Easter chocolate items such as bunny-shaped treats and the humble egg are being placed on the shelves – some at surprisingly high prices. It appears Easter isn’t just a celebration of chocolate anymore; it's now a financial endurance test. Every year, families prepare to stock up on sweet treats for the annual egg hunt, but now it seems more like a game of "Spot the Cheapest Bunny" – a game with few winners. The cost of Easter treats has continued to climb steadily over the last few years, and early indications show no signs of any relief for shoppers this year. Customers at Coles and Woolworths have recently called Easter chocolate prices "a joke", and one Brisbane woman even suggested "Easter is cancelled" in her household now due to the exorbitant costs. Easter is cancelled? Imagine explaining that to the kids. "Sorry, Timmy, the Easter Bunny took out a mortgage on his chocolate factory and had to downsize. He left you this... single M&M. Enjoy." One shopper came across a Cadbury's 350g Easter egg priced at $20, while also being seemingly unimpressed by a bag of Coles brand eggs being priced at $9. Meanwhile, another woman complained online about the price of chocolate bunnies on display in Woolworths. At this rate, it won't be long before people start taking out short-term loans for a bag of Mini Eggs. Interest rates might be lower than the cocoa inflation rate. After sharing the supermarket finds online, Aussies have been calling the situation "insane" and many have simply encouraged others "just not to buy anything" Easter related. A bold strategy – but also an excellent way to avoid that annual sugar crash. Last year, a Lindt chocolate Easter egg was on Big W shelves for a whopping $120, with the retailer explaining the kilogram egg was a "limited edition" for "chocoholics" to indulge in. However, many Aussies believed it was a step too far. At $120 per egg, you’d expect it to come with a personal message from the Lindt chocolatier, a guided factory tour and possibly a small stake in Wonka's chocolate river. There are reasons why Easter-specific chocolates are more expensive than regular chocolate in stores, according to Gary Mortimer, a professor in retail marketing and consumer behaviour at the Queensland University of Technology. "We generally source cocoa out of West Africa and when you're sourcing such a product and constructing an egg or bunny shape for a very discrete time, maybe only two months, obviously the costs inflate," he told Yahoo News last year. So what you’re saying, professor, is that because the chocolate has been artistically molded into the shape of a bunny, it somehow becomes a luxury item? At this rate, next year we’ll see a Fabergé-inspired chocolate egg with a diamond-studded ribbon. Getting an Easter egg or bunny hollow is much more "complex" than the regular block of chocolate that we all know and love, while the mass distribution of the item is also logistically more difficult due to its shape. Protecting packaging and special machinery is also sometimes required for transport. But if this is the case, why not start a new trend? Flat Easter chocolate. No fancy molds, no structural risks, just a classic chocolate slab with "Happy Easter" written on it. Simple. Affordable. Delicious. Professor Mortimer pointed at general inflation playing a role in the growing cost of Easter chocolate, with things like electricity, water and transport costs going up for businesses, while cocoa prices have also been on the rise, hitting a record high this month. "Naturally this gets passed on to consumers," Mortimer said. Translation: "This is your problem now. Good luck." So, what’s the plan for Easter 2025? Do we raid the clearance aisle in May? Take up chocolate sculpting as a side hustle? Or perhaps, in the most radical move yet, we finally accept the age-old truth: it's the hunt that matters, not the chocolate. And if kids start complaining, we can always say, "Look, back in our day, we had to make do with carob." Images: TikTok

Money & Banking

Being carers costs women more than $500,000 over a lifetime, leaving them with less in retirement than men

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/myra-hamilton-8638">Myra Hamilton</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> By the time they retire, women typically have about <a href="https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-97-5461-8">one third</a> less superannuation than men. This can amount to more than <a href="https://www.carersaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Final-Economic-impact-income-and-retirement-Evaluate-Report-March-2022_2024EDIT.pdf">$500,000</a> when wages and super are combined over their lifetime. The gendered super gap has narrowed over the last few decades, as women have joined the workforce <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/changing-female-employment-over-time#:%7E:text=Women's%20participation%20in%20paid%20work,women%20are%20also%20working%20longer.">in increasing numbers</a> and the superannuation system has matured. But progress is too slow. If we keep tracking as we are, we can’t expect parity until <a href="https://www.womeninsuper.com.au/application/files/3816/8782/3898/7._Not_up_for_discussion.pdf">2070</a>. So why is the gap so persistent? <h2>Making super compulsory</h2> For most of the 20th century, Australia’s retirement incomes system produced more equal outcomes because the age pension is not linked to a person’s lifetime earnings. But the introduction of <a href="https://www.australianretirementtrust.com.au/learn/education-hub/superannuation-history-australia">compulsory super</a> in 1992 linked lifetime earnings and retirement income. The gender super gap arises because women and men have different patterns of paid work and earning over their lifetimes. Women have <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/the-gender-pay-gap#:%7E:text=conscious%20and%20unconscious%20discrimination%20and,responsibilities%2C%20especially%20in%20senior%20roles">14% lower</a> average weekly earnings than men. This is due to <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/the-gender-pay-gap#:%7E:text=conscious%20and%20unconscious%20discrimination%20and,responsibilities%2C%20especially%20in%20senior%20roles">three factors</a>: <ul> <li> women are much more likely to have unpaid care responsibilities. As a result, they take career breaks, work fewer hours, or work in jobs incommensurate with their skills </li> <li> discrimination, bias and lack of workplace flexibility mean better pay and career outcomes for men and fewer opportunities for people to combine work and career with care responsibilities </li> <li> occupational segregation means women are concentrated in female-dominated industries, which tend to attract lower wages than male-dominated ones. </li> </ul> Over a lifetime, these factors limit women’s capacity to earn and to accumulate super. On average, a woman in full-time permanent employment accumulates <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/Women%27s%20economic%20security%20in%20retirement.pdf">17.7% less</a> superannuation per year than a man in an equivalent role. That amounts to A$1,540 less per year. This annual shortfall compounds over time resulting in a wide gender super gap by the time women retire. <h2>How does this work in practice?</h2> The interruptions to work caused by providing unpaid care reduces people’s opportunities for accumulating superannuation. For example, having a child leads to substantial reductions in mothers’ workforce participation and earnings. Women’s earnings <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-03/p2023-372004.pdf">fall</a> by an average of 55% in the first five years after entry into parenthood. In contrast, research suggests men’s earnings are <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-03/p2023-372004.pdf">unchanged</a>, or even <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5340267/#:%7E:text=Over%20time%2C%20unmarried%20but%20coresident,support%20for%20egalitarian%20gender%20roles.">increase</a>, after they become parents. So parenthood has a much greater impact on a mothers’ super than a fathers’. One <a href="https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/assets/documents/hilda-bibliography/hilda-conference-papers/2007/Parr,-Nicholas_final-paper.pdf">estimate</a> suggests having a child reduces a woman’s superannuation balance at age 60 by about $50,000 and a man’s by $5,000. It’s not just parenthood. <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/informal-carers">One in 10</a> Australians provide care for an ageing relative or person with a disability or chronic illness. Women do most of this unpaid care. Unpaid carers <a href="https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/view/journals/ijcc/6/3/article-p318.xml">often</a> reduce their working hours, withdraw from work, or put their careers on hold. Among primary carers <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/gender-equality-and-caring#:%7E:text=Primary%20carers%20are%20carers%20who,carers">only 58%</a> are in paid work. According to a <a href="https://www.carersaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Final-Economic-impact-income-and-retirement-Evaluate-Report-March-2022_2024EDIT.pdf">recent study</a>, on average, by age 67, primary carers have lost $392,500 in lifetime earnings and $175,000 in super. Some older workers, especially women, also care for their grandchildren. More than a <a href="https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-07/Grandparents%20and%20child%20care%20in%20Australia_0.pdf">quarter</a> of grandparents of a child aged 13 or under provide care for the child in a typical week, usually while the parents work. In a <a href="https://nationalseniors.com.au/uploads/09151356PAC_GrandparentsChildcareLabourForceParticipation_Report_FINAL_Web_0.pdf">recent</a> study, 70% of grandparents, mostly grandmothers, providing regular childcare reported they adjusted their work to accommodate it. One in three reported it had negative impacts on their financial security as they aged. These factors compound over a lifetime. Many Australians provide care for multiple family members simultaneously, or at different times throughout their lives. Women in employment are more likely to be in lower paid positions, and lower paid industries and occupations. Employees in feminised industries such as community services (including paid care workers) and retail have among the <a href="https://www.superannuation.asn.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/2311_An_update_on_superannuation_account_balances_Paper_V2.pdf">lowest</a> median super balances, less than half of those of managers and professionals. <h2>What is the solution?</h2> The gender super gap reflects deep inequalities in the distribution of work, incomes and care responsibilities between women and men across their lives. How do we fix it? Policy and public debate has focused on boosting women’s workforce participation. More women in work, means higher incomes and more saving, reducing the gender super gap, right? Yes, up to a point and rates of <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/changing-female-employment-over-time">women’s workforce participation</a> are increasing. But we also know in Australia, we have a <a href="https://nationalseniors.com.au/uploads/09151356PAC_GrandparentsChildcareLabourForceParticipation_Report_FINAL_Web_0.pdf">preference</a> for some family care of young children, and for care of adults with disability and older people in the <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/australias-welfare-2017-in-brief/contents/ageing-aged-care">community</a>. This means many parents and carers will continue to have at least some interruptions to paid work, reducing their super contributions. We also know when women are encouraged to enter paid work, care responsibilities are often “redistributed” to other women. When mothers enter or re-enter paid work it’s often <a href="https://theconversation.com/caught-in-an-intergenerational-squeeze-grandparents-juggle-work-and-childcare-47939">grandmothers</a> who step in, frequently reducing their incomes and super. For care of ageing <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ageing-and-society/article/abs/an-integrative-analysis-of-sibling-influences-on-adult-childrens-caregiving-for-parents/038C6F299E62380F9C954A9A586A28CD">parents</a> it is often non-working female siblings that step in. As the savings potential of one group of women increases, the savings potential of another decreases. Where care can’t be redistributed to other women within the family, it is redistributed to paid early childhood education and care, disability support, and aged care services. All of these services are dominated by women. As a highly feminised industry, the caring roles are <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-08-14/why-are-nurses-and-childcare-workers-so-poorly-paid/104218868">poorly remunerated</a>, so those doing the care, while paid, are themselves limited to save enough super. Boosting women’s workforce participation is an important step. But another is to pay super contributions to parents during the time they are off work providing childcare, as <a href="https://ministers.pmc.gov.au/gallagher/2024/super-boost-new-parents#:%7E:text=It%20means%20that%20eligible%20parents,to%20their%20nominated%20superannuation%20fund.">recently</a> agreed by the federal government. But we need an <a href="https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2015/04/carers-deserve-more-credit-in-the-retirement-incomes-debate">equivalent</a> for other kinds of unpaid carers. Even so, as long as care continues to circulate between different groups of women – older women, low paid women – and as long as care isn’t valued for the large social and economic contribution it makes, the gender super gap will persist. To close the persistent gender gap, we need to go further, encouraging greater men’s involvement in care, and providing better recognition and remuneration of unpaid and paid care. <hr /> This article is part of The Conversation’s retirement series, in which experts examine issues including how much money we need to retire, retiring with debt, the psychological impact of retiring and the benefits of getting financial advice. Read the rest of the series <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/retirement-series-2024-168372">here</a>.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/240323/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/myra-hamilton-8638">Myra Hamilton</a>, Associate Professor, gender, ageing and care, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/being-carers-costs-women-more-than-500-000-over-a-lifetime-leaving-them-with-less-in-retirement-than-men-240323">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Aussie TV star wins $9.2m on game show – the largest in history

Federal Budget 2025: The short, sharp and – sort of – sweet version

The renting trap snaring retirees – and how to avoid it

To tip or not to tip? Kyle weighs in on the great debate

After a century of Monday to Friday, could the 4-day week finally be coming to Australia?

Farewell, Your Majesty: Major change coming to Aussie fiver

Desperate Aussie dad sparks brutal immigration debate on Q+A

Replacing stamp duty with a land tax could save home buyers big money. Here’s how

Millions of Centrelink customers to get cash boost

Over 350k Aussies to be forced back into the office

Cricket great takes aim at Albo's beer tax freeze

Steve Price slams woman's savvy Airtasker job

Woman slammed for using GoFundMe for house deposit

Albo quizzed over luxury home purchase

"Absolutely cooked": Old Sydney home sold for over $4.1 million

Official interest rates have been cut, but not everyone is a winner

Australia’s largest super fund fined $27 million

How women will shoulder the burden of new care reforms

"Easter is cancelled": Coles and Woolies slammed over "insane" chocolate prices

Being carers costs women more than $500,000 over a lifetime, leaving them with less in retirement than men

Our Partners