5 November 2025

Law passes to make bosses pay super the same time as wages

| By Chris Johnson
Join the conversation
41
Australia banknotes and a crystal ball

Superannuation will have to be paid the same time as wages are paid under laws that have just passed parliament. Photo: Josie Elias.

Labor’s Superannuation Guarantee bill has passed through Federal Parliament, meaning a new law will require employers from July next year to pay their workers’ super at the same time they pay their salary and wages.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino were so pleased with the outcome of the vote that they issued a joint statement on Tuesday (4 November) to applaud the development.

“From the 1st of July next year, employers will be required to deposit their employees’ super into accounts within seven business days of payday,” they said.

“This will strengthen Australia’s superannuation system and help deliver a more secure retirement to more Australian workers.

“Employees will benefit from more frequent and earlier super contributions that will grow and compound over their working life.

“In a typical unpaid super case for a 35-year-old, recovering their super leaves their retirement balance more than $30,000 better off in today’s dollars.

“While most employers do the right thing, the Australian Taxation Office estimates $6.25 billion worth of super went unpaid on the most recent financial year data.”

Employers will be liable for a redesigned superannuation guarantee charge if the employee’s fund is not paid within seven business days of their payday.

READ ALSO Ten points of failure led to Optus triple-zero deaths, Senate told

The Council on the Ageing (COTA) welcomed the successful passage of the legislation, describing it as a significant step in helping Australians secure their retirement funds.

“Paying super on payday will help more Australians retire with dignity,” COTA chief executive officer Patricia Sparrow said.

“This is a really positive reform that means people will finally get their super when they earn it – not months later.

“It’s a simple, fair change that will make a big difference over a lifetime.

“Australians work hard for their super. This change will particularly benefit women, older workers and those in casual or part-time roles who often miss out the most.”

The Greens proposed an amendment to the bill aimed at ensuring that all 18-year-old workers receive super contributions, regardless of their hours worked.

To be eligible for super, under-18s need to work at least 30 hours a week for the same employer.

With many young people juggling paid work with school and study commitments, they are unable to reach the required 30 hours per week.

READ ALSO With friends like the Nationals …

Greens workplace relations spokesperson Barbara Pocock said that meant hundreds of thousands of young workers are missing out on super.

The Federal Government refused to support the Greens’ change and voted the amendment down.

“Labor had a chance to back young workers so that all of them are paid super contributions from their employers regardless of their hours. Instead, they voted against it,” Senator Pocock said.

“For too long, workers under 18 have been missing out on super, setting them back financially and costing them thousands early in their careers.

“The Greens want super contributions extended to all under-18s, ensuring every young person is paid super on every dollar they earn, no matter how many hours they work.

“Under 18s pay taxes and contribute to our economy, so why shouldn’t they receive super?”

Once the new law takes effect, it will also require employers to assist the ATO in enforcing the law and more quickly identify employers who are not making contributions.

The ATO is currently consulting on its approach to compliance for the 12 months following the change. It states that its approach will differentiate between low- and high-risk employers.

It will mean that employers who make an effort to pay contributions in line with each pay cycle can fall into the low-risk category.

The Treasurer said unions, industry, businesses and the broader community all provided valuable feedback, engagement and views on the legislation before it was finalised.

Free Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? We package the most-read Canberra stories and send them to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.
Loading
By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.

Join the conversation

41
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

The ATO is going to start categorising employers as “low risk” and “high risk” ?

Geez, what could possibly go wrong …. wonder what the penalties are for high risk employers, the naughty corner ?

For any small business that uses debt capital, such as an overdraft or loan secured against the home for example, this increases the cost of super by up to 2.5% due to the extra interest that will be incurred by paying earlier. While tech is improving, businesses have to pay for that extra tech and learning how to use the tech comes with costs as well. Those extra costs will get passed on to consumers or result in lower income tax collections. Both will negatively impact overall standards of living.

Coupled with the ATO rules around super that’s paid even one day late not counting against that period’s super obligation, but against the next one, this is a potential compliance nightmare for small businesses. Rather than 4 deadlines to be met through the year, there will now be 26 or 52 for most businesses. That will come with additional costs on top of those already mentioned which will result in another small hit to national productivity.

There are better ways of doing compulsory super that could make it simpler and fairer for everyone, helping boost productivity rather than detracting from it. It would take actual reform that politicians and public servants don’t seem capable of conceiving.

You mean, it has to be paid with other monetary entitlements which they pay, oh what is it, “26 or 52 times a year for most businesses”?

Productivity is measured by work rate, not business profit.

Super is part of your pay and should be paid each pay day not held as cash flow. If they need to do that a question of how viable the business is arises.

Axon, you do realise that making payments in regards to an employee 30 or 56 times a year is less work than 52 or 104 times a year? Small businesses will now spend a little more time on compliance, which increases the proportion of non-productive work time and so worsens productivity. It’s not just about business profit, and if you knew anything, you’d know that increased business costs get passed onto consumers, or result in less tax collected, or result in lower dividends paid into everyone’s super.

Elf your comment is indicative of a subconscious desire for an economy with fewer small businesses and more big businesses, meaning less opportunity for people to be entrepreneurial and so less opportunity for people to lift themselves up from the class into which they were born. Maybe you’re happy for everyone to be a mindless drone, but an economy starved of aspiration for a better life is one that under performs, and then all our standards of living suffer.

Both of you obviously have your blinkers on – workers good, businesses bad – and didn’t bother reading the last section. Unless of course you’re politicians or public servants without the ability to conceive a better path that works for everyone.

You seem to be offering a very inefficient proposition, although I would need to understand what is your own process. A payment through the ATO’s SBSCH, for example, is a single amount with computer-generated line items per employee. This is not onerous and most certainly not twice the work. You have a functional accounting system including for employee data?

Would you propose paying employees quarterly or annually to save the business some effort, at risk to the employee? There is no sound reason to object to the proposed change.

Just to put one thing aside, I am quite familiar with business both small and large.

I worked as a Fair Work Inspector for several years and the number of small businesses underpaying or not paying workers was dreadful. Its theft, fraud & robbery pure & simple.
If they can’t pay employees super on time they shouldn’t be running a business.

Capital Retro1:10 pm 08 Nov 25

So franky22, how many convictions did your enforcement the alleged offences result in?

And if no one wants to run a business anymore there will be no more jobs (including the one you used to have).

“And if no one wants to run a business anymore there will be no more jobs (including the one you used to have).”

So in this right wing fantasy, businesses are only viable if they exploit workers?

Typical Capital nonsense, plenty of businesses are success without needing to rip off workers, and we know for a fact that looking after employees drives engagement and productivity. If a business can’t pay people probably it wasn’t viable in the first place.

Probably 3 cases that went to court but probably a hundred voluntary rectifications for underpayments.
Retro you seem to imply that its quiet reasonable to not pay somebody for work done

3 convictions & scores of voluntary repayments to employees for underpayments.

Retro you seem to imply that asking businesses to pay what they owe is somewhat unfair. Maybe try not paying the electrician next time he comes round.

Only the most dimwitted of ideological fools would think its a bad thing for employees to get paid their earned benefits in a timely fashion.

Oh wait…. *looks at comment thread*

Only the most dimwitted of ideological fools would think there’s no downside in this change in terms of higher costs to businesses that impacts: the amount we pay for goods and services; income tax collected from businesses; and dividends earned in everyone’s super.

There’s no such thing as a free lunch. Just about all the improvements in Australia’s living standards have come from productivity growth. Productivity growth in advanced economies of 2-3% p.a. is regarded as healthy. Under the coalition it was lower than that. Now under Labor it’s rapidly approaching 0%.

This additional red tape will not help improve productivity and will most likely have another minor negative impact upon it. As such, the benefits accrued to employees of getting their super paid a little earlier will likely be very slightly outweighed by the broader economic negative, leaving the average Australian very slightly worse off.

Garfield,
The idea that its onerous for businesses to have to pay their employees their benefits on time is ridiculous.

They already have the systems in place.

“There’s no such thing as a free lunch.”

Except for businesses profiting off the entitlements and labour of their employees it would seem.

As a business owner, I originally looked at this change with wariness. My preparation for paying Super was intensive, and there was a good chance of making a mistake due to manual entries in the Clearing House forms (and really glad I did not do each payment manually). I was glad I only did this 4 times a year.
Fortunately, my online accounting tool now takes the information when I prepare the pays and sets up a direct debit/payment through their preferred clearing house. So, now, complying with this change is only a few mouse clicks. I will be transferring to payday super payments at the end of this quarter (6 months before I need to).

And once all that loverly cash is locked up, just wait until there is a law to capture some of it for the government. Either as tax or a law that a percentage of it must be invested as infrastructure (much as QLD did with their state superannuation)

There is no change in total cash contributed, only timing. What do you imagine to be the difference?

I guess you are just having one of those dumb anti-government rants devoid of relevance.

Should have always been this way!

Capital Retro10:19 am 06 Nov 25

The “old cash-flow acceleration” trick will benefit the super funds more that the contributors.

Another nonsensical Capital take.

Workers getting paid what they are owed on time will benefit…*checks notes* ….workers.

What nonsense are you talking now? How would it benefit contributors to wait three months or a year to get their funds invested?

CR, what are you talking about? Super fund fees are a mere fraction of average returns for members.

What is happening under this legislation is that the contributions are being paid at the same time as the pay, as opposed to (depending on the employer), as infrequently as quarterly.

The business community has been opposed to these changes because it

CR, what are you talking about? Average super returns to members are significantly higher than fees change by super funds. If you are being charged more than your fund is earning; move you

What is happening here is that members no longer have to wait up to 90 days for their employer to make the payments.

My wife’s previous employer had failed on 2 ocassions to make any superannuation contributions for 6 months. This wasn’t discovered until my wife’s super fund contacted her to ask if she still worked for this employer, because they hadn’t been receiving contributions.

Some employer have been opposed to this legislation because they can no longer use the employee’s super funds as cashflow in their businesses.

CR perhaps next our wonderful government will mandate all business invoices must be settled within 24 hours.

Except for the unions of course.

Form and timing of payment of business invoices is a contractual matter between the parties. Pay for employees is subject to Fair Work Commission orders, with timing based on pay period. All this really says is that employee monetary entitlements for a period must be paid on the same day, not deferring some part.

There is no benefit to superannuation providers because their fees are based on quantum and performance, not frequency.

Superannuation funds have what’s known as treasury functions Axon. These clever fund managers invest money for the fund and its members.

The earlier they receive monies the earlier they invest and the more income they earn. This is also known as a benefit. 🧑‍🎓

That is a benefit to members, dingbat, exactly as Seano, Colin Wood and I said. My comment was directed at Capital Retro’s implication that funds would profit more greater frequency of payments without consequential benefit to members.

Do keep up.

You’re on fire Axon. Not only have you learned that more income is good for the fund and for members, but hopefully you can now deduce that your statement:

“There is no benefit to superannuation providers”

is blatantly false.

Happy to help, as always.

Why retract what I actually said? I made clear the context, Capital Retro’s statement on frequency. You have tried to imply otherwise by truncating my sentence which showed clearly the context and meaning. I wrote: “There is no benefit to superannuation providers because their fees are based on quantum and performance, not frequency.”

Capital Retro tried to imply that changes to frequency preferentially advantaged the fund. Do you agree with him and if so, on what basis?

Fees, Axon, are only one of a superfunds revenue streams. In the case of one very large industry fund, fees were barely 2% of investment income.

Perhaps it might be worth reading a annual report next time 👀

Funny how Penfold yet again omits words from my sentence to try to hang on to his point, whatever that is because it is all pretty meaningless.

Members benefit more than funds, not less as said by Capital Retro. Done.

Perhaps, Penfold thinks capitalism is dead.

Capital Retro10:51 pm 07 Nov 25

Er Axon, the members benefits depend on the decisions of the investors managing the fund unless it is a SMSF where the trustees are also members of the funds and generally make all the investment decisions.

This will only apply to super funds in accumulation mode.

Yes, Capital Retro? Your point please?

Ceteris paribus, more frequent contributions at any given earnings rate lead to slightly greater earnings, just like higher frequency payments on housing loans pay it down a shade faster even though the annual amount paid is the same. This applies whenever compounding is at a shorter interval than payment.

A very important reason for this change is to ensure payments are received with pay, given they rank equally, rather than building arrears which disappear in company liquidation. That is a benefit to some specifically, all in general.

Capital Retro7:37 pm 08 Nov 25

You still can’t see the point?

I’ll say it again and that is the employees don’t get superannuation contributions (you call them payments), the superannuation fund does and they have total control of where the money in invested.

Some superannuation funds have gone bust and had spectacular losses as well.

It’s all academic anyhow because soon our inept government will nationalize all superannuation and pay pensions instead.

No one “sees” your point Retro, because you are just going on one of your standard anti Super rants.

Individuals choose where their Super is invested and the vast majority make reasonable returns for their members.

“It’s all academic anyhow because soon our inept government will nationalize all superannuation and pay pensions instead.”

“Academic” like your Mercury laden headgear, you know you dont have to make a fool of yourself all the time right?

Finally. Workers should get the entire pay they are owned, including super, on payday. It makes no sense why this took so long to get through parliament

It used to be really cumbersome to pay super but with one touch payroll and super stream electronic payments it’s become much easier and the tech now supports more regular super
payments.

No it wasn’t, when I owned a business in the nineties early 2000’s and employed people, I either payed by check monthly or transferred it to their account through the banking system depending on the fund. It was normal monthly admin.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Region Canberra stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.