Liberal moderates Russell Broadbent and Bridget Archer have broken ranks and endorsed the treasurer’s efforts to start a conversation about the fiscal sustainability of generous superannuation tax concessions.
Broadbent told the ABC on Monday it was unclear exactly what changes were being proposed but if the mooted overhaul was “fair and reasonable” then the Coalition should not stand in the way.
After triggering debate about the “sustainability” of the super tax concessions last week, Jim Chalmers has flagged a potential reform in the May budget capping superannuation tax concessions at balances of $3m.
While the opposition’s Treasury spokesperson, Angus Taylor, has declared the Coalition will fight any changes, Broadbent said on Monday: “There will be very few people affected by changes to very high superannuation balances because there are so few Australians [in that position].”
The Liberal MP said “the benefits that go to the upper income people in regards to superannuation are for a wealth creation area rather than an area for retirement savings” and he noted “the way superannuation is set up now is not doing the right thing by most women”.
“We need to have governments prepared to put policies forward during the lifetime of the government saying well, we find … the way this is set up is not … how we would have designed it, and not [in accordance with] the expectations of the Australian people.”
Archer told Guardian Australia she didn’t have a view yet on the merits of capping concessions, but she said it was important to have the debate.
“I don’t think we should shy away from having a conversation,” the Tasmanian Liberal moderate said.
Archer said it became impossible for governments to govern if they had to run the gauntlet about broken promises every time they floated a particular reform in the national interest. “I think people expect you to govern,” she said.
Broadbent said Labor did not have to wait until the next election to get a mandate from the Australian people. He said it would be possible for the government “to bring down the budget” or present a proposal on the viability of generous tax concessions to voters “and you’ll soon know whether you have their permission or not”.
Archer said if the Albanese government was proposing a root and branch overhaul of super tax concessions, it would be best to put that to voters at an election. But if the proposal was more surgical, then seeking a new mandate wasn’t so necessary.
The in-principle endorsement from two prominent Liberals comes ahead of the imminent release of a new tax expenditure statement that will quantify the costs to the budget of a number of generous concessions, including the arrangements for superannuation.
On Sunday, Chalmers said no decision had yet been made but the country needed to consider “whether we can afford” to keep giving large tax concessions to the small number of wealthy people with multimillion-dollar balances.
“We care about it [superannuation], we want to invest in it, we want to make sure that it delivers a decent retirement for people,” he said.
“So the fundamentals won’t change, the tax concessionality will still be there. But we do need to consider whether we can afford the degree of tax concessionality for people who’ve got very big balances.”
Less than 1% of Australians have $3m in their super accounts. The average Australian has about $150,000.
Most crossbench MPs have said they are open to the debate, and senators holding the balance of power have spoken up in favour of curbing generous tax concessions to help with budget repair.
The Greens have signalled they open to considering changes and Senate kingmaker David Pocock has said he is “not interested in attacking people’s super … [but I do want to see] an end to generous tax concessions for superannuation accounts with multimillion-dollar balances”.
But independent lower house MPs including Kylea Tink, Zoe Daniel and Zali Steggall have argued that capping superannuation tax concessions at $3m may undermine the confidence of people saving for retirement.
