Sent to the Treasury 1st October 2013

Attached is the Response of the consumer group Kaspanz– Kiwi Saver, Annuities and Superannuation Protection Association New Zealand Incorporated– and the request for comment by October 11, 2013 on the Flexible Superannuation proposal

FLEXIBLE SUPERANNUATION: Submission by Kaspanz

Kaspanz is a New Zealand consumer organisation representing people in receipt of New Zealand Superannuation, Kiwi Saver, Annuitants or Pensions.

Kaspanz on the weight of evidence it has been able to assess, does not support the proposal

Principles

Kaspanz strongly supports the current model of New Zealand Superannuation, and also supports evidence based research and trends over time. Kaspanz is wary of the accuracy and weight often given to long term projection costs associated with New Zealand Superannuation.

Kaspanz suggests the New Zealand public do not support changes or interventions with long term saving plans, without significant discussion, and long lead in times for pending changes, so people can adjust to amendments/alterations changes and make appropriate adjustments to their saving habits.

People also fear Government tampering and inconsistency in policy changing applying to retirement income savings. The complexity mosaic (unforeseen consequences) has application to the Flexi Superannuation proposal, and anything which reduces the simplicity of the current NZ Superannuation model probably should be avoided

In this context Kaspanz supports in general terms the Governments cautious approach to any adjustments in the current NZ Superannuation model and residency requirements albeit discussion on obvious flaws and discrepancies should be transparent, and open to wide discussion and comment.

Kaspanz has read a number of academic and policy papers on this Flexible Zealand Superannuation topic, including related research in the United Kingdom and Canada, and also listened to a range of commentators. Kaspanz has come to the conclusion that while the idea has some merits, overall the negatives outweigh the positive factors.

Therefore the proposal is not supported

Alec Waugh Chairman Kaspanz

Kaspanz.wordpress.com