What Trump’s Interest in Australia’s Superannuation System Could Mean for Retirement Plans
By: Tony Roda and Joshua Campbell, Williams & Jensen, PLLC
In December 2025, President Trump praised Australia’s superannuation retirement fund, often simply called “super,” as a model for the U.S. to address the lack of financial preparedness facing many Americans as they approach retirement. “We’re looking at it very seriously,” Trump said, indicating that he would like to see American policymakers adopt elements of Australia’s “good plan.” For the President and several senior American officials, such as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, superannuation already had been on their radar screen. In February 2025, Bessent spoke at a superannuation summit in Washington where he lauded the Aussie system as “fantastic.”
In April 2026, President Trump signed an executive order expanding retirement coverage by making Thrift Savings Plan-style accounts, which are defined contribution plans currently accessible by federal workers, broadly available to all Americans who do not have access to an employer-provided retirement plan. This would mean that such accounts, the value of which are dependent on a combination of employee and employer contributions and investment earnings, would be available to many more American citizens. Director of the National Economic Council Kevin Hassett called the executive order a “first step” and the basis upon which additional action could be taken. Pressed on what additional action Hassett had in mind, he pointed to the “huge success of Australia’s superannuation retirement system” as the model.
The Administration’s enthusiasm for a super-style retirement savings system has been consistent. President Trump remarked in July 2026 that he was “looking very strongly” at the super system to guide American policymaking. According to the President, officials such as Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick already are working on a proposal to integrate elements of the super system into America’s retirement structure. What is it about the super system that has Administration officials so captivated?
For context it is helpful to start by describing Australia’s three-part retirement structure. The first is the non-contributory, means-tested Age Pension, established in 1909, which is funded entirely by the government through public revenue. The maximum annual payment is roughly AU$ 28,000 for a single person and slightly over AU$ 42,000 for a couple (about $19,500 and $29,300 USD, respectively). In contrast, the average annual individual U.S. Social Security benefit is roughly $23,000 and $38,000 for couples.
The second and third parts of Australia’s retirement structure are part of a defined contribution superannuation with long-term investments that grow over time. A key feature of the Superannuation Guarantee requires employers to contribute 12 percent of each employee’s pay (up to AU$ 62,500 per quarter). Contributions go to the superannuation fund managed by the private sector and super fund accounts are easily portable if an employee changes jobs. President Trump and Administration officials seem most impressed by this first leg of the Australian system, as they have touted the system’s automatic payments, near-universal coverage, and preservation of savings until retirement as the best features of the system.
Finally, employees may voluntarily contribute to their super account in two different ways. First, employees can make up to AU$ 30,000 per year (including employer contributions) in concessional contributions (pre-tax dollars), which usually are taxed at a rate lower than the employee’s marginal rate. Second, employees also can make non-concessional contributions with after-tax dollars.
Many Americans rely on a patchwork of Social Security, defined benefit pensions, defined contribution plans, and IRAs to support their retirement. In today’s dollars, however, Social Security checks are covering a smaller portion of retirees’ expenses. Moreover, benefits are set for an across-the-board cut of 22 percent at the end of 2032, unless Congress acts to stabilize the program’s funding. A key factor in the funding predicament is the ratio of contributing workers to Social Security beneficiaries. In 1950, the ratio was 16.5 contributing workers to 1 beneficiary. Today, the ratio is 2.6 to 1, and the Social Security Administration projects that in 30 years it will be 2.1 to 1.
Given the demographic trends, it’s not surprising policymakers are drawn to defined contribution models, such as Trump Accounts and superannuation. If President Trump turns his fascination into a reality, there are various ways the U.S. could adopt super-style features. One possibility is a wholesale replacement of Social Security. This is unlikely due to the political consequences, high transition costs, and systematic disruption. Another approach would be for a portion of payroll taxes to be diverted to individual retirement accounts. This was attempted by President George W. Bush and was met with widespread opposition. Others have mentioned the creation of a sovereign wealth fund, but the actual funding for such a plan raises significant questions.
Given the political stakes while recognizing the financial pressures attending Social Security, a more likely solution may feature a long-term, glide path that gradually decreases reliance on Social Security while increasing investments in defined contribution accounts. Trump Accounts are one step in that direction and we may see the Administration take another step with a superannuation proposal.