Michael Price

Prominent actuaries and superannuation experts have tackled the decades-old issue of women retiring with less money than men, pinpointing three areas for reform including a government-funded carer’s credit.

Mercer’s David Knox, and Michael Rice and Richard Dunn from Rice Warner, said the gender super gap begins at the very start of a woman’s working life, peaking when she is in her 50s.

“Women are the fastest growing cohort of retirees living in poverty in retirement,” said Mr Rice, the Executive Director at Rice Warner. “It is the final outcome of a flawed system,” he said.

“Australia’s performance has been less than stellar,” said Dr Knox, senior partner, and senior actuary at Mercer. “Average super balances for women are significantly less than those for men, and one in three women are retiring with no super at all,” he said. “Part of the solution needs policymakers and community commitment to change.”

In the paper, Gender Inequality in Retirement Savings^[1], the authors argue for measures that include a ‘carer’s credit’; fundamental changes to annuities; and recognition and drive for change in the way the superannuation industry addresses women’s finances. The paper, which represents the views and work of the three authors, which was presented at the Actuaries Institute’s Virtual Summit on April 29.

The paper states three broad areas, that combined, result in women retiring with less money in superannuation than their male peers. The first is employment differences: women tend to have shorter working lives than men because they take time out to care for children and sometimes aged parents; they are paid less with more part-time work, and women, on average, live longer than men.

The second is differences in superannuation and pension design. “In Australia, a feature of the super system is that workers must earn more than $450 a month before super contributions are paid by the employer,” Dr Knox said. “We know that more women than men have casual or part-time jobs. Hence more women than men miss out on super. The removal of the $450 threshold is a fairness argument.”

The third factor affecting women relates broadly to cultural issues and attitudes, from the lack of affordable and appropriate childcare, to the fact that women, not just in Australia but globally, tend to be conservative investors in retirement, which reduces their investment returns over the long-term. The OECD (2021) also found that lower levels of financial literacy among women affects their financial decisions.

Richard Dunn, Consultant, at Rice Warner, said a carer’s credit, which provides paid superannuation for those out of the workforce looking after small children, would help build super savings for women.

The concept is not new: care-giver credits are paid by governments in France, Sweden and Germany. The payment, which could be set at the current superannuation guarantee levy rate of 9.5%, would be paid by the government, and would also result in lower Age Pension costs over time.

While the paper noted that the rate could be based on a median or minimum wage, it also said the period for which it is provided varies around the world and is open to debate.

“We want to get the discussion started,” Mr Dunn said, adding, the authors also recommend compulsory superannuation contributions be mandatory during paid parental leave. Currently, there is no obligation for employers to pay the levy.

“A carer’s credit is something that requires community agreement,” Dr Knox said.

“It’s a government expenditure. As a society, we must encourage and help people who take time out of paid employment to look after small children. We have an ageing population. Peter Costello [the former Treasurer under John Howard] introduced the Baby Bonus; it’s time to think about a carer’s credit.”

The paper also examines the way annuities are priced and structured. In Australia, annuities provide smaller pensions for women than men because women tend to live longer. The use of gender specific mortality tables leads to smaller annuities or pensions for women due to their lower mortality rates. The authors say lifetime annuities should be based on unisex rates, as required in Europe.

“We know that women live longer than men,” Mr Dunn said. “It’s not that annuities are incorrectly priced; they are priced based on the data. However, we should look at what’s fair based on society’s expectations. Women over 55 who are single, whether they are widowed or have remained single, struggle more through retirement than any other cohort,” he said. “But a woman buying an annuity today gets a smaller pension than a man, for the same age.”

Dr Knox and Mr Rice have a long history working for better outcomes in superannuation. Mr Rice championed women in his own firm, Rice Warner, which took the battle for better retirement outcomes for women to the Human Rights Commission.

In 2013, Rice Warner’s female employees were offered a package of benefits, including flexible work conditions, paid parental leave, and crucially, an additional 2% payment of their salary into their super fund to partially close the gap with men.

Dr Knox said Mercer included in its 2020 Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index a question about carer’s credits. “We believe that carers who sacrifice their current income to care should not also have to sacrifice their future retirement income. We need to recognise their service to the community,” he said.

———

[1] https://www.actuaries.asn.au/Library/Miscellaneous/2021/GenderInequalityinRetirementSavingsActuariesInstitute270421.pdf

The post Government should consider a ‘carer’s credit’ to overcome gender bias in superannuation appeared first on AdviserVoice.

Michael Rice

A research report by the actuarial firm Rice Warner offers clear guidance to existing and potential self-managed super fund (SMSF) members whether this form of superannuation could be cost-effective and the right retirement savings vehicle for them.

SMSF Association CEO John Maroney says the very important decision of choosing the right superannuation vehicle is one that should be guided by evidence and specialist advice, and this Rice Warner report, supported by the SMSF administrator SuperConcepts, certainly provides the data on which to base an informed decision.

“This research updates a report Rice Warner prepared for ASIC in 2013 and used to inform regulatory guidance. Additionally, for the first time, the research is based on actual data culled from about 100,000 SMSFs that provides valuable evidence to guide that advice and should be a key reference point for all interested parties.”

The comprehensive research report has found that SMSFs with balances of $200,000 or more are cost competitive with Industry and Retail superannuation funds and SMSFs with balances of $500,000 or more are generally the cheapest alternative.

Maroney says: “This research should finally lay to rest any arguments that SMSFs are not competitive on cost compared with the APRA-regulated superannuation sector, with the report graphically illustrating that the reductions in fees for SMSFs and Retail funds and the increase in fees for Industry funds since the initial report has changed the relative competitiveness of SMSFs in comparison with APRA-regulated funds.

“It is also clear that fees considerably lower than those on pricing schedules are being charged to some SMSFs which means that they can be cost competitive even at smaller sizes.

“This is welcome news for the SMSF sector as the cost of running SMSFs, especially those funds with balances below $500,000, has been used as a key factor as to whether an SMSF is viable or not. This report should bring that false analysis to an end.”

Maroney says the report also highlighted that SMSFs with less than $100,000 are not competitive compared with APRA-regulated funds, and that funds with less than $50,000 are more expensive than all alternatives.

“The finding is not surprising, and simply reinforces the Association’s mantra that SMSFs are not for everyone. However, it should be added that many SMSF trustees understand they are paying higher fees initially, knowing their cost structures as a percentage of their funds’ assets will fall as they grow to a competitive size. For this reason, the Association remains adamant there should be no minimum balance, especially as the report’s analysis of these small SMSFs shows that the majority do grow steadily to more viable sizes.”

The report found that for balances of $250,000 or more SMSFs become the cheapest alternative provided the trustees undertake some of the administration, or, if seeking full administration, choose one of the cheaper services.

On the issue of investment returns, the report finds that the SMSF sector has delivered equivalent returns to those of the APRA sector since 2005 in both good and bad years. “These results may not support the proposition that SMSFs are better investment managers than APRA regulated funds, but they do indicate that members of SMSFs, in aggregate, are not disadvantaged when compared with APRA funds.”

Rice Warner Executive Director Michael Rice says his team benefited from analysing a database exceeding 100,000 SMSFs that allowed for accurate allocation of expenses. “In the seven years since the previous report, average costs of APRA regulated super funds have risen whereas SMSF costs have fallen.  It is cost-effective to open and maintain an SMSF account at much lower levels than declared by the Productivity Commission and ASIC.  Separation of the results into those funds holding or not holding properties gives a more accurate picture of the cost structures.”

Grant Christensen, CIO of SuperConcepts, says the impact of the lower SMSF operating costs means that there is a lower threshold at which funds become competitive. “While the issues with small value funds will always exist, it has been encouraging that they grow quickly. Other positive signs are the age at which SMSFs are being established is now in the 35 to 44 age bracket and a significant proportion of small business owners deciding to forge their retirement destiny.”

The post Rice Warner research throws fresh light on SMSF costs appeared first on AdviserVoice.

Michael Rice

Michael Rice has been made an Officer of the Order of Australia (General Division) for distinguished service to business and economics, particularly to the actuarial profession, and through advisory roles.

His notable achievements and extensive service include promoting and advocating higher superannuation payments to women and public policy work that has secured a framework for better retirement options for all Australians.

A founder and executive director of actuarial firm Rice Warner, Mr Rice was named Actuary of the Year in 2017 and chaired the Actuaries Institute’s Public Policy Committee for five years from 2014. In his advisory capacity, Mr Rice has been an honorary member of the Australian National University’s Advisory Board of the College of Business and Economics since 2014 and was a board member of State Plus from 2016-2019 and a committee member of QSuper from 2009-2016.

Rice Warner’s ‘Valuing Females’ package, introduced in 2013, offered women extra benefits including flexible work conditions, paid parental leave, and crucially, an additional 2% payment of their salary into their super fund. Mr Rice took the battle for better benefits for women to the Human Rights Commission, arguing for positive discrimination in favour of Rice Warner’s women employees.

He has led submissions to government on major reviews of Australia’s financial services. These include submissions to the Henry Tax Review, Cooper Superannuation Review and Financial System Inquiry, along with submissions to Treasury, Senate Committees and the Productivity Commission.

“Mr Rice has been a powerful and persuasive advocate for essential and equitable reform in the superannuation and retirement sectors,” said Actuaries Institute chief executive Elayne Grace. “His thoughtful and incisive input is actively sought by policymakers in Canberra and by leading industry groups involved in the wealth management and retirement sectors,” Ms Grace said.

Actuaries Institute President Hoa Bui said, “Michael has been an active voice in the superannuation space for many years and through this has driven increased actuarial involvement in public policy, in order to achieve better outcomes for the community.”

Mr Rice has been involved in papers that examine the Age Pension and dependency, superannuation fund fees, projections of both the superannuation and personal investments markets, analysis of member choices, and the evaluation of retirement strategies for superannuation funds.

He has also advocated better outcomes for young savers wooed into higher-fee superannuation accounts by social media savvy marketers and he has urged the superannuation industry to identify underperforming funds with a view to improving benefits for members.

The post Michael Rice receives Order of Australia for service to actuarial profession appeared first on AdviserVoice.

Anthony Asher

Three of Australia’s leading superannuation and retirement experts have urged the Federal Government to give broad scope to its pending review of Australia’s retirement system, to better integrate the Age Pension, superannuation and aged care.

Dr David Knox, Dr Anthony Asher and Michael Rice, authors of the Actuaries Institute’s Green Paper, Options for an Improved and Integrated System of Retirement, state that Australia’s current system has obvious shortcomings: it is complex, intrusive, contains anomalies, produces perverse incentives, and is sometimes unfair.

“And, as an increasing proportion of the population move from the accumulation to the pension phase, problems that beset the system will become more apparent,” the paper states.

“The best system would take an integrated view across all sources of income and expenses for retirees,” said Actuaries Institute Chief Executive Elayne Grace. “This includes the Age Pension, superannuation, the family home, aged care and health costs.”

“The current system, though world-leading in some respects, falls well short of that.”

The Actuaries Institute believes the overarching objective of the retirement system should be to ensure that Australians can confidently live their retirement years in dignity. The system must be fair and efficient.

Right now, there is potential fiscal headroom to accommodate changes, especially when a holistic approach to retirement is taken.

The report states retirees need access to a regular income stream, savings to cover unexpected expenses, and protection against longevity, inflation and market risks, known as the ‘retirement income trilemma’.

But the system must be simple to understand so that retirees who don’t seek financial advice can still make smart choices.

Intergenerational fairness is crucial. The cost to government and taxpayers must be shared equitably. And there must be encouragement for those who can afford to defer consumption to do so to provide for their retirement.

Retirees should also be persuaded to spend to maintain a dignified standard of living, and not transfer wealth through large bequests to the next generation.

There should not be incentives to ‘game the system’ and disincentives in the form of penal means tests or taxes are undesirable.

Now is the time for review. “The Actuaries Institute encourages that debate to start now,” the paper states.

“If it does not, Australians may lose the opportunity presented by the fiscal headroom of the declining Age Pension costs, and the lead time we have to prepare for known longer-term changes, such as those to patterns of home ownership and work, longevity and growing health and aged care costs.”

Age Pension costs as a proportion of gross domestic product should fall, but long-term projections show aged care is the second fastest growing category of expenditure after the NDIS, and likely to rise as longevity rates increase.

The options for reform reviewed in the paper include:

• simplifying the Age Pension, better integrating it with superannuation and aged care;
• addressing anomalies created from exempting the family home from Age Pension means testing;
• embedding automatic adjustments in the superannuation preservation age and the Age Pension eligibility age to reflect changes in longevity (although not necessarily in a one-for-one manner);
• setting targets for government expenditure for support in retirement;
• addressing tax and aged care funding anomalies; and
• co-ordinating policies for support in retirement.

These could be achieved with a simpler Age Pension means test, an option that might allow retirees to ‘buy the Age Pension’, or a simpler, combined assets and income test. There could also be a universal Age Pension and/or a concession card that allows everyone over a set age to access cheaper medical care and Pharmaceuticals Benefits Scheme drugs.

The authors also point to the perceived unfairness of the current system. “There are individual accounts, worth tens of millions of dollars that are taxed at the concessional rates for all superannuation of 15% on investment income and 10% on capital gains.” The amount held in super could be capped, or those with large balances could pay more tax.

The Actuaries Institute encourages the initial discussion of reform be kept at a high level to identify the options that have enough support to be further developed.

In summing up, and urging the government to act, Actuaries Institute President Nicolette Rubinsztein said, “There are a number of known longer-term trends: an ageing population, a maturing superannuation system, changing patterns of home ownership and work, a growing dispersion of wealth and health, and growing private costs for health and aged care.

“All of these will aggravate the inconsistencies that stem from a lack of appropriate integration between the various components and undermine the potential for a dignified life for all retirees.”

Key points:

• Australian retirees will face greater diversity in wealth, health and longevity outcomes.
• More retirees will reach retirement age as renters, or not having paid off their family home.
• The Actuaries Institute believes structural reform will deliver a fairer retirement for all.
• Options for review should be bold and consider universal benefits, the means tests, the treatment of the family home, and an end to tax concessions for large super fund balances.

The post Actuaries Institute Green Paper urges retirement reform appeared first on AdviserVoice.

Michael Rice

The SMSF Association has produced compelling evidence that the Federal Government should increase the concessional contribution cap for people aged 50 and over and extend the carry forward of concessional contributions.

SMSF Association Managing Director/CEO Andrea Slattery says research undertaken for the organisation by the actuarial consultancy firm Rice Warner “conclusively shows” that people only begin making significant voluntary contributions to superannuation from their mid-50s onwards.

“The research confirms what the Association has long been telling policy makers: that there is a sharp difference between compulsory and voluntary contributions to superannuation – the former increase gradually over time while the latter jump dramatically in the years leading to retirement.

The Rice Warner research used a sample of 14,351 SMSF funds provided to the Association by BGL Corporate Solutions from its Simple Fund 360 SMSF administration software.

Slattery says: “This research graphically shows why people aged 50 and over need to have a more generous contribution cap than the $25,000 that will apply from 1 July 2017.

“The Association has argued for the Government to retain the current $35,000 cap for older workers and notes that even a compromise of a $30,000 cap for those over 50 years will still benefit fund members trying to save their superannuation savings to achieve a dignified retirement.”

The research highlights the significant impact that voluntary contributions can have on a fund member’s superannuation balance.

The research also highlights that if the carry forward concessional contribution limit was increased from a balance of $500,000 to $750,000 it would benefit 13% of the members in the sample, of which half would be female. This measure alone would go a long way towards building adequacy for women.

Slattery says: “The Association believes that this change would increase the effectiveness of the Government’s carry forward policy and deliver better results for people who have had volatile incomes throughout their careers and are trying to build adequate retirement savings.

“These important policy changes will allow a greater opportunity for people to achieve a secure and dignified retirement by building their retirement savings.

“It’s also significant that women’s contribution patterns show that when they are in the workforce they are engaged with their superannuation in an SMSF, and this particularly applies when they are in the 60-plus age group.”

Rice Warner CEO Michael Rice said the underlying focus of the research was to measure the impact of recently proposed legislative changes to tax treatment in superannuation on SMSF members and potential refinements.

“The three most significant of those proposed legislative changes were: the introduction of a $1.6 million cap on the amount that can be transferred from accumulation accounts to pension accounts, the reduction of the concessional contribution cap to $25,000 from $35,000 and the introduction of a $100,000 yearly non-concessional contributions cap (restricted to those with balances under $500,000).
“The research shows that the proposed changes will have a material impact on the SMSF population and will restrict members’ ability to save in superannuation.”

The post Research shows ‘strong argument’ to lift concessional cap appeared first on AdviserVoice.

Michael Rice

Several pervasive myths are obscuring a clear picture of sensible reform in superannuation in Australia today. These myths have created a monumental ball of string that should be unbundled.

Once sorted, we should kill off the myths. Otherwise, as Michael Rice observes, Australia will be set up for poor retirement outcomes and superannuation policy driven by misinformation.

Australia’s superannuation system has three key building blocks:

• the Age Pension
• our mandatory employer contributions (now 9.5% of salaries)
• tax concessions to encourage voluntary contributions.

Over decades, many changes to all three have created uncertainty for people saving for their retirement.

Prime Minister Abbott tried to bring stability with his recent Captain’s Call that there will be no further changes under his government.  Unfortunately, this has led to confusion within his Cabinet and the superannuation industry as there are several reforms currently being considered.  These include the recommendations from the National Commission of Audit, the Financial System Inquiry, Treasury’s Retirement Income Review and the forthcoming Tax White Paper Task Force.

It is difficult to see how we can get meaningful reform without change to tax concessions and to the eligibility for the Age Pension.  Of course, change brings some winners and some losers – and those in the latter group all vote!

Myth #1: Tax concessions are equal

There is a perennial debate on the value of tax concessions.  Treasury provides a figure of about $32 billion but this assumes that, in the absence of any tax incentive for superannuation, people would simply draw salaries and pay tax at their marginal rates.  In practice, the removal of tax concessions on superannuation would allow the government to slash personal tax rates anyway.  Further, taxpayers would simply seek other ways of minimising their tax, possibly through negative gearing of property or shares.

One defence of tax concessions has been to show that the majority (about two-thirds) of concessions are made to taxpayers earning between $37,000 and $180,000.  However, this means the small number of taxpayers (2.3%) earning more than $180K receives most of the rest of the concessions!  So, commentators simply use the statistics which back their story…

Myth #2: Franking credits are defunct

Australia has a system of providing imputation credits for franked dividends to avoid double taxation of company profits.  There is an ongoing debate about the merits of franking credits for the economy.   One positive feature is the encouragement of patient long-term investors (including superannuation fund members and retirees) to participate in the growth of the domestic economy.

One submission to the Tax White Paper argues they should be abolished because members approaching retirement need to worry about sequencing risk and a high allocation to equities in retirement!  Of course, this is rubbish – retirees MUST hold significant levels of growth assets to protect themselves against inflation risks (and partially against longevity risks too).

Dividends (including the associated franking credits) provide a solid source of reliable income for retirees with relatively low levels of volatility.  For those retirees who are prepared to live off their income and consume capital by taking profits occasionally, they provide protection against inflation and longevity risks.

All superannuation funds should fight to keep franking credits!

Myth #3: Lump sums don’t prevail

Another commentator in a recent opinion piece in a national newspaper claimed that the payment of lump sums was the greatest problem of the Australian superannuation system.  No doubt this comment is based on the erroneous assumption that everyone takes out their money the day they retire and they are subject to sequencing risk.

Rice Warner conducted research recently for Colonial First State that showed that about 85% of the value of all retirement benefits is reinvested into pensions.  At least one-third of the balance is invested in bank term deposits (which is a different form of saving) and most of the rest was used for debt reduction (which is also a form of saving).

Further, we are often told retirees spend their money quickly to fall back on the Age Pension.  In fact, those who have account-based pensions are generally conservative about spending their money.  The average amount taken as pension payments each year is about 7%.

Myth #4: Mandatory Annuities are the panacea

From time to time, commentators repeat the error made in the Henry tax review of calling for mandatory annuitisation.  The logic is that mortality is pooled and all of the benefit will be used for retirement income since there will be no leakage from bequests.

Unfortunately, lifetime annuities have the greatest sequencing risk of all products since the price paid is subject to prevailing interest rates on the day of retirement.  They are also relatively poor value as a long-term investment.

The best time to buy these products is late in life (say from age 80) when the product and utility value is better.

Myth #5: Bequests

Several commentators have considered that there is ‘leakage’ from the system if benefits are not used for retirement incomes.  The argument is that benefits need to be used for retirement incomes or the concessions made are wasted.

Clearly, lump sums have the potential for leakage, though as shown above this is not the case in practice.

Another form of leakage is when a retiree dies leaving a residual benefit which is passed on as a bequest for family or charities.  As funds develop better ways to pool mortality, the amounts left will reduce over time.  However, the logical way to address large bequests is to claw back concessions by adjusting the tax rate for benefits passed to non-dependents on death in retirement.  A variation could be to allow the benefit to pass tax-free to a superannuation account of a family member.

Public Policy

Rice Warner is of the firm belief that industry must kill off the many myths and recognise that they can lead to poor public policy.  As more than half of people retiring this year are going to live for more than 20 years, they need to share in the equity risk premium provided by growth assets.  Many current solutions solve the wrong problems and this will lead to a reduction in living standards through lower earnings over the retirement years.

The post Superannuation myths unbundled appeared first on AdviserVoice.

Melissa Fuller

Leading consultants to the financial services and superannuation sector Rice Warner has outlined the scale of the retirement incomes bulge facing Australia’s ageing population, its policymakers, superannuation funds and product manufacturers.

The next 15 years will see more Australians leaving or winding down from the workforce than entering it. On Rice Warner analysis, Australia’s ageing nation will comprise two million men and 2.3 million women in retirement drawing a pension from their superannuation savings by 2029.

This represents a shift to around 40 per cent (or $1.3 trillion – in 2014 dollars) of Australia’s retirement savings assets being converted to some form of retirement income stream. Currently that number sits at 30 per cent (or $492 billion of total superannuation assets) in today’s dollars.

At a personal level, many retirees will not have adequate savings for their retirement. Rice Warner’s latest Retirement Savings Gap research, commissioned by the Financial Services Council, measured (at 30 June 2013) a $727 billion savings gap. This is $67,000 per person less than the amount required for an ‘adequate’ retirement, which would pay retirees up to their life expectancy (more than 20 years).

Compounding this issue is longevity risk: half of Australia’s retirees will live well beyond their life expectancy age.

“It’s great we are all living longer, but the fact is too many retirees will simply run out of money and be forced back on the Age Pension,” said Rice Warner CEO Michael Rice, who has led Rice Warner’s many contributions to the Abbott government’s Financial System Inquiry (FSI), chaired by Mr David Murray.

The FSI’s recent interim report specifically mentions the issue of retirement savings policy, calling for solutions to the problem. “The picture of Australia’s retirement demographic ‘bulge’ is not new. But new ways are needed to address the underlying problems of adequacy, funding and product design – even the fundamental need to deliver people more choice, greater dignity and a better standard of living in retirement,” Mr Rice
said.

“The problem represents a looming challenge requiring a comprehensive range of solutions from industry and government. Our own investigations show today there is not one Australian superannuation fund provider that has in place the right default retirement incomes package to meet the wave of retirees preparing to shift their super into pensions,” he said.

The Rice Warner Retirement Incomes Solution

Mr Rice said the current default option of the superannuation industry is to treat retirement income as handing over a lump sum payment to members when they retire.

“Superannuation fund members are currently given no default option for managing this lump sum. We believe there are better ways to approach this, and have devised what we think is the first comprehensive solution,” Mr Rice said.

Melissa Fuller, deputy CEO, Rice Warner and a leading advocate for the unique retirement savings needs of women in Australia, said the great anomaly is that Australia has a world class retirement savings system but “lags when it comes to an effective and comprehensive retirement incomes system.”

Ms Fuller said the Rice Warner Retirement Incomes Solution, which effectively takes into account the needs of members through the various phases of retirement, provides a comprehensive alternative.

“Rice Warner believes the essential solution is to separate the money needed for any lump sum at retirement and to invest the balance long-term to provide inflation and longevity protection,” Ms Fuller said.

“The account-based pension is converted to a distributing trust so members can derive income from stable fund earnings (and any tax refund from franking credits). Meanwhile, the capital would be projected to grow steadily in real terms. The risk of market volatility impacting the underlying assets is also reduced as the member is not spending his or her capital.

“We’ve received keen interest from some leading superannuation funds about implementing the Rice Warner Retirement Incomes Solution,” she said.

“Our thinking is based on many years of data and insight in this sector, and draws upon numerous submissions, research reports and intellectual property invested by our firm on behalf of clients and various government and independent inquiries held during that time,” she said.

‘We look forward to continuing our contribution to the debate in Australia, particularly as these issues become ever more prevalent in the future planning for the national interest.”

The post Australia’s retirement income ‘bulge’ requires urgent, comprehensive fix appeared first on AdviserVoice.