Retirement Income Covenant Position Paper You have to prove how it can work. Submission by MAX LEWIS The Writers Background: 10 years in NSW Public Service, Land Titles, Companies Office, Attorney General's Department; 20 years in law practices; 33 years providing clients with financial advice and proud to have gone through life with some who have been my clients for more than 30 years (yes I am quite old). The Attachments be appreciated as demonstrating a 'not negotiable' commitment to what I consider has been my profession and involvement in the area of retirement planning and acting in the interests of retirees, irrespective of whether they were personal clients or otherwise. For many, many years, I have always believed and encouraged peers and clients to have faith that Governments in this country, of either persuasion, would deal honestly with retirees and those who were prepared to embrace honestly the superannuation system. That means of course, that unintended consequences would be addressed and logically unfair consequences would be addressed. So it was, the result achieved, as evidenced by 'Attachment 1,' was quite significant at the time although it still took me four years to succeed with my submissions. that somewhat simplistic faith in the Government of the day was shattered with the deceptions involved in the Defined Benefit Legislation as evidenced in my submission ('Attachment 2') and the seeming continuing frivolous regard to treating might be a ‘what legitimate of capital’ as income for Centrelink purposes. . ‘return So no longer can one deal with confidence with what the Government says. It is now clear that if it suits, a precedent has been set to enshrine something one day and the next day call it an One must fear therefore that something, which on one day is not compulsory or not ‘ANOMALY’. mandated, will become just that. Having regard to all of the above, it is hoped that my decision to make comment in this instance, is not considered pretentious.
Retirement Income Covenant Position Paper You have to prove how it can work. Submission by MAX LEWIS The Writers Background: 10 years in NSW Public Service, Land Titles, Companies Office, Attorney General's Department; 20 years in law practices; 33 years providing clients with financial advice and proud to have gone through life with some who have been my clients for more than 30 years (yes I am quite old). The Attachments be appreciated as demonstrating a 'not negotiable' commitment to what I consider has been my profession and involvement in the area of retirement planning and acting in the interests of retirees, irrespective of whether they were personal clients or otherwise. For many, many years, I have always believed and encouraged peers and clients to have faith that Governments in this country, of either persuasion, would deal honestly with retirees and those who were prepared to embrace honestly the superannuation system. That means of course, that unintended consequences would be addressed and logically unfair consequences would be addressed. So it was, the result achieved, as evidenced by 'Attachment 1,' was quite significant at the time although it still took me four years to succeed with my submissions. that somewhat simplistic faith in the Government of the day was shattered with the deceptions involved in the Defined Benefit Legislation as evidenced in my submission ('Attachment 2') and the seeming continuing frivolous regard to treating ‘what might be a legitimate ‘return of capital’ as income for Centrelink purposes. . So no longer can one deal with confidence with what the Government says. It is now clear that if it suits, a precedent has been set to enshrine something one day and the next day call it an ‘ANOMALY’. One must fear therefore that something, which on one day is not compulsory or not mandated, will become just that. Having regard to all of the above, it is hoped that my decision to make comment in this instance, is not considered pretentious.
c2018-t285219-Max-Lewis.docx