Finance Minister Nicola Willis has confirmed raising the superannuation age was still on National’s radar after they campaigned on it in the last election.
She also fielded more questions on whether Kiwis would really be better off after halving Government KiwiSaver contributions, saying people, particularly small businesses that are pushing back on the decision, need to think about the long-term savings.
She told Herald NOW‘s Ryan Bridge that it was clear the burden of superannuation is growing extensively.
She said it was on her “radar” as the election edges closer.
“I think there are some benefits with universal superannuation… and if you are to make any change to that area we have to phase it in over a large period of time."
Willis said at this point it was not on their mandates or the coalition agreement, so it would be unlikely to go forward before the 2027 election.
Willis also fielded more questions about the KiwiSaver cuts announced in last week’s Budget would actually be putting more money in Kiwi’s pockets when the contributions are being halved.
Announced as part of Budget 2025, the Government is halving the contribution it makes to KiwiSaver members to a maximum of $261 a year and scrapping the contribution altogether for members who earn more than $180,000 a year.
Willis will instead push people to do more to save for their own retirements, lifting the default KiwiSaver contribution rate for both employees and employers from 3% to 3.5% from April next year, and 4% from April 2028.
The changes will also require employers to make contributions to 16 and 17-year-olds who save into the scheme and extend the government contribution to this cohort.
“If this was the only thing we have done in our budget, then that would be a concern, however, it’s not.”
She was confident it would not affect the wages of Kiwis and they would actually be growing.
“By making a small contribution more… dollar for dollar that contribution being matched by your employer… we will be seeing growth of up to 28%."
Willis said small businesses and independent contractors would be able to work through it “in their own way” and it would depend on the wage negotiations.
She argued people would be better off in the long term.
8 comments
Unfair
Posted on 26-05-2025 21:11 | By rogue
It seems so unfair to me that someone can work their whole life , only to be penalised at the final hurdle. Some jobs are too hard for a 65 year old to continue for another 2.
For example : Retirement for a concrete layer would have to a lot lower than for an accountant.
Also why are we continuing to penalise honest hardworking kiwis and dishing out handouts to some who don't/won't work.. but still whinge about things not being fair.
@ rogue
Posted on 27-05-2025 08:18 | By Yadick
. . . Also why are we continuing to penalise honest hardworking kiwis and dishing out handouts to some who don't/won't work.. but still whinge about things not being fair.
You couldn't have found truer words. We know a solo mum with two young teenage kids and all they do is smoke weed and drink . One of the kids works part time in fast food and the mum works part time yet they are all capable of working full time. They are claiming every handout known to mankind. This seems to be the new norm for young people and WE as a society need to stop 'just' accepting it because in no way is it acceptable.
@ By rouge
Posted on 27-05-2025 10:58 | By k Smith
Totally agree I have just retired and enjoying it. I would have liked to retire a couple of years earlier. A few thoughts, 65 years still young enough to do some international travel. Visiting families overseas, helping take care of grand children, helping other families, been part of council and or local government, ( Life time of experience advise) been part of community projects. There are still a lot of good a retired person can do.
Labour has just announced they will not support this and will change it back if national pushes this bill through.
Have your say at the next election!!
I don't like the extension to 4 years term elected governments, We can vote them out sooner if they don't behave. If they do behave and have done a good job then re election would prevail. Easy!! ( Trump? )
@Rogue
Posted on 27-05-2025 12:24 | By morepork
I thought your post was excellent. Your differentiation between people who pour concrete and accountants, is very fair and usually overlooked. The Superannuation system DOES need to consider different occupations, and balance the ones that require hard physical labour, which cannot be reasonably continued into old age. Maybe the contributions during a working lifetime should be adjusted so that the payout is fair for all.
@ morepork....
Posted on 27-05-2025 19:44 | By groutby
...firstly I do agree with rogue and yourself in regard to people who pour concrete vs 'pen pushers' but with appreciation that both (all) trades and professions have their place in the workforce.
But....gosh!...how would we do this?...it would seem to me to be as hard, or harder to define as recognised in the recent 'pay equity' (not equality) claims which have created such a storm, so how about (as a conversation starter) we raise the super age as the cost is becoming prohibitive, and allow 'certain' trade workers if they wish to, apply a few years prior to say, 65 to a medical professional to 'sign them off' due to body fatigue or related issues and also we do have ACC...
But, we also have many other reasons 'invented'....there could be a government 'levy' I guess introduced for less physically taxing occupations but VERY hard to implement..
@ Yardick
Posted on 28-05-2025 09:32 | By k Smith
You touched on solo parent with two kids who are eligible to work full time. I also do know a number of people even 2/3 generations milking the system whole families living off the benefit having more kids to collect more $$$. I have a measurement for people on benefits who plead illness unable to find work etc. In our working communities there are many down syndrome people who hold a full time job. Unless you are worse off then these people you should be working earning an income and not living off the hard working tax payers, who pay the benefits, this is where the benefits $$$ come from. They should be given a work job in the communities, working on the Mount tracks, helping roading, services, council jobs, tec.
This would help costs to rate payers.
@Groutby
Posted on 28-05-2025 13:53 | By morepork
"But....gosh!...how would we do this?"
You suggested raising the retirement age, but allowing workers in physical occupations to obtain a medical exemption when they are no longer fit. That is certainly a possibility. Another way would be to have "tracks" to retirement which anybody could select, so they can retire at say, 55, 60, 65, and 70, and their tax would be adjusted appropriately, and paid during their working life. There would still need to be medical exemption for people physically unable to work, before they reached the retirement age for their selected "track".
The option would be to pay less tax during your life and retire later, or pay more and retire earlier.
Our GDP is around quarter of a trillion dollars per year (252 Billion) and we have a population of around 5 Million.
Shouldn't we be able to take care of our people?
Retirement Age?
Posted on 04-06-2025 13:42 | By k Smith
This has been a continuous subject for many countries, retirement ages ranging from 63yrs.
We are living longer and numbers are increasing leaving a huge cost to the economy. Im not 100% sure on how we deal with this but our economy is not good at the moment. I have thought about the increase age of working but many retirement age people are working.
The younger generation say we should retire completely to create more jobs for them.
An idea.
Life experiences from retires are just priceless so if some companies can utilise this opportunity for retires to be supervisors to their work force. Part time would be very practical to some of these people. There are some great knowledgeable retired trades people that have many skills, business people. Wasted talent.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.