One Nation wants to let renters and mortgage holders take money from their superannuation to boost their pay packets.<\/p>\n
The super industry says it would be \u201ceconomically disastrous\u201d and stoke inflation and both Labor and the Liberal party have said they don\u2019t support the policy. But economists say the superannuation system needs reform.<\/p>\n
How does early access work?<\/p>\n
Employers pay 12% of workers\u2019 earnings into their super accounts, where it is taxed at just 15% instead of their personal income tax rate.<\/p>\n
At the moment, you can only get early access to the money in your super account for a set of specific purposes<\/a>. People who have been paid income support for six consecutive months and cannot pay for urgent living expenses can apply for up to $10,000 every 12 months.<\/p>\n The Morrison government offered broader super releases in 2020 when it let people withdraw up to $20,000 if they were in hardship due to the Covid-19 crisis. Economists found large sums withdrawn were spent on gambling<\/a> and shopping, while the Super Members Council (SMC) estimated about\u00a0725,000 Australians completely emptied their accounts<\/a>.<\/p>\n One Nation is proposing far wider access. All renters and mortgage holders would be given the option to split their 12% payments into 9% for their super account and 3% to go back to their bank account, still at the low 15% tax rate.<\/p>\n About two in every three Australian households are renting or have a mortgage. One Nation estimates about 7 million people would be eligible.<\/p>\n There would be no other conditions and the money could be spent on anything, not just housing costs. Those who opted in would only get the split payments for a maximum of three years.<\/p>\n How would One Nation\u2019s proposal affect you?<\/p>\n One Nation says the early release would mean a full-time worker earning $90,500 a year would get about $2,300 in their pocket that would otherwise have gone to their super account. That\u2019s $44 a week.<\/p>\n But the SMC has estimated a typical 30-year-old worker on that income would end up $25,000 poorer by retirement if they opted in to the One Nation plan.<\/p>\n Barnaby Joyce, the One Nation MP, admitted the party had not modelled what the policy would cost workers in retirement.<\/p>\n \u201cI can come back tomorrow with that,\u201d he told a News24 host on Monday.<\/p>\n Poorer retirees would force the government to spend more on the age pension. The SMC estimated the Covid-era withdrawals, where 3 million Australians took out nearly $38bn, would cost taxpayers up to $85bn by the end of the century.<\/p>\n Asked on Monday about the prospect of higher pension spending, Pauline Hanson said: \u201cI would rather see them get that help and assistance that they need now, not later in life.\u201d<\/p>\n How would it affect the economy?<\/p>\n More cash in workers\u2019 pockets today could help Australians handle the cost of living. Inflation is high at 3.5%, while wage growth is falling behind at 3.2% a year. The proposal would effectively lift wages by 3%, putting income growth ahead of price rises.<\/p>\n But it would also mean more money flowing through the economy when the Reserve Bank is trying to take money out by lifting interest rates. Strong household spending is one of the factors expected to increase inflation.<\/p>\n The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia chief executive, Mary Delahunty, said the proposal would be \u201ceconomically disastrous\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cThis policy would push up inflation and make people poorer in retirement,\u201d Delahunty said.<\/p>\n Hanson has claimed the proposal is \u201cneutral\u201d on inflation.<\/p>\n What do political opponents say?<\/p>\n Jim Chalmers on Monday said the proposal was a \u201cfull-frontal attack on superannuation\u201d and claimed it would end super \u201cas we know it\u201d.<\/p>\n Angus Taylor, the Liberal leader, said he did not want to change the way super was being paid.<\/p>\n The Australian Council of Trade Unions assistant secretary, Joseph Mitchell, said the proposal was the next step in Hanson\u2019s \u201canti-worker\u201d agenda.<\/p>\n \u201cIf Pauline Hanson wanted to help people with the cost of living, she could have backed minimum wage rises, penalty rates and safer workplaces that unions have fought for,\u201d Mitchell said. \u201cShe voted the other way every time.\u201d<\/p>\n Is super too high? <\/p>\n The compulsory rate of super contributions has crept up since the system was established. It sat at 9% from 2002 to 2013 and hit 12% in July 2025.<\/p>\n The system has generated a $4.4tn pool to fund Australians\u2019 retirement living, reducing our reliance on the age pension. The government estimates the share of retirees receiving the full pension will fall from about 44% in 2023-24 to about 21% by 2063.<\/p>\n Graph: Australian retirees are expected to become less reliant on the pension<\/a><\/p>\n