News
Pensioners get largest ever increase
Friday 28th of January 2000
Married superannuitants are to receive the largest single dollar increase in the rate of the state pension, with a rise of $21.42 per week from April 1.
The move makes good promises by the Labour and Alliance parties to restore the threshold for New Zealand Superannuation payments to 65 per cent of the average, ordinary time weekly wage and was announced Thursday by Finance Minister Michael Cullen, Social Services Minister Steve Maharey, and Deputy Prime Minister and Alliance leader Jim Anderton. The new rates equate to 67 per cent of the average, ordinary time wage, reflecting changes to Statistics New Zealand's Quarterly Employment Survey, which produced lower average wage figures than the previous index. "The Cabinet felt that to have calculated the new pension rates on this lower figure would have been unfair given the unreasonable expectations created in the electorate," said Cullen. The pension rate would now be allowed to drop back to the 65 per cent threshold, with adjustment only for inflation in the meantime. The threshold was dropped to 60 per cent in 1993 and had fallen to 62.66 per cent on the rebased QES wage index. The new weekly rates for married, single, and single shared person pensions will be $347 ($21.42 increase), $225.55 ($12.86 increase), and $208.20 ($12.36 increase) respectively. Cullen indicated later that abolition of the Superannuation Taskforce is also imminent, although agreement has yet to be reached with the Alliance over the future funding of NZ Super. Labour's dedicated fund concept has not found favour with the Alliance, but neither Cullen nor Anderton would elaborate on the progress of talks. The broad framework for the future of the scheme is expected in the Budget Policy Statement, due by the end of March.
Want to read the full article?
Click the button below to subscribe and will have free unlimited access for a limited time to full article and all other articles on the site.
You will also be able to comment on articles on Good Returns.
Latest News
Latest Comments
FMA outlines its latest expectations for advisers
Paul Flood: The danger is that the 'goalposts' (regarding what is acceptable or unacceptable adviser conduct) may be susceptible to change. Our 'Principles based' legal/regulatory environment lends itself to “prevalence-induced concept change” over time, perhaps not so much in the written laws and Code, as in the interpretation of the prescribed principles.
2 days ago Steve Wright
FMA outlines its latest expectations for advisers
Just a tip, if you use more than six, six letter words in a sentence you lose most Kiwi's. So avoid client/adviser confusion when writing your post or article if you would like it read and understood.
Ironically, my last sentence was not likely read.
2 days ago Backstage
FMA outlines its latest expectations for advisers
All things said are great aspirational goals for a great financial advice industry, it mirrors what both the legislation and the code requires.
However, like most things discussed it talks about what's expected not how it's done. The hardest aspect of financial advice today isn't what it is, it is how it is done.
The how only comes from those that have done it, the how is only provided with examples. Guidance documents that spell out what's required along side how it it done.
We’re still dealing with the same issues we started with in 2021, figuring out the how. And figuring out the how in every advice business is consuming resources that could easily be shortcut by the FMA demonstrating what they are expecting.
It's not about “do it this way” its about this is the sorts of things we’re looking for.
In the absence of standards and expectations, guesswork prevails. That represents significant risk to FAPs and the result is onerous overcooked advice processes for multiple advice operations and undercooked she’ll be right for single operators focused on getting the work done.
Both approaches have potential for harm and as its been said earlier, leaves advisers open to explain they haven't been speeding with the authorities have pulled them over.
The advice industry needs guidance on the how we know the what already.
4 days ago Jon-Paul Hale
Who is responsible for notifying policy changes?
Sticking an oar in, while we have “service” requirements the expectation that an adviser is responsible for discussing said change is relying heavily on assumption.
1. That the client hasn't moved and contact details haven't been updated. It happens more often than many think.
2. It assumes there is a servicing agreement in place to provide service. Remember the requirement is to scope service not provide it. A client deciding to have ad-hoc service on their request is a legally valid position to have.
3. If there is a service agreement that's realistic to what is expected, how long does the adviser push the issue to have the discussion before moving on with everything else they have to do? Again, a point that is not clear in the guidance to date.
The challenge of the present rules is the adviser is responsible for ensuring the client understands the advice provided.
How do you ensure you're covering this if a client doesn't engage despite genuine attempts to manage it?
There's still a lot of “what if’s” in this whole are we’re only going to have clarity on once someone is taken to task about it.
But first we need to have clarity on what ongoing service actually is, because right now demonstrated by the direct providers a letter once per year with a please call if you want to discuss is the current minimum…
4 days ago Jon-Paul Hale
FMA outlines its latest expectations for advisers
To correct errors in my previous post: "policies, templates, and controls" should read "policies, processes, systems and controls", and "is more conductive" should read "is more conducive".
4 days ago Paul Flood