Are women more ethical than men?
A KiwiSaver survey shows they might be. Watch the video to find out more.
KiwiSaver - Review of Retirement Income Policies 2019
KiwiSaver - Review of Retirement Income Policies 2019
Out of 2000 New Zealanders surveyed, women were more likely than men to want certain categories banned from KiwiSaver funds.
Topping the list were:
Animal Cruelty: 83% of women want this category banned vs 73% of men
Worker exploitation: women 80% / men 70%
Whaling: women: 77% / men 69%
Weapons: women 70% / men 57%
74% of all members are interested in ethical investment, and it’s one of the topics being studied in this year’s Review of Retirement Income Policies. We wanted to know which investments you think should be excluded, and whether you think enough providers offer ethical fund options.
70% of members think there are, but are we taking providers’ word for it?
For more information about ethical investing visit: mindfulmoney.nz
And what about fees?
KiwiSaver providers charge fees to manage your money, and these can cost you tens of thousands of dollars over your working life.
Compared to UK and US pension schemes, New Zealander KiwiSavers pay much more in fees.
Why should this be?
More than 55% of members would support a fee cap.
Do you know how much you’re paying in fees? And are those fees fair when you think about the chunk they will take from your savings by the time you retire?
KiwiSaver – it’s come a long way
Launched in 2007, it’s grown from $767 million in 2008 to $56 billion now.
Membership has grown from 1.1 million in 2009 to 2.8 million now.
51% of members are women.
No matter who’s more ethical, we’re all hoping our nest egg will hatch to a great retirement. But we need to nurture it to make it better.
KiwiSaver for over 65s
Terms of Reference
Research
External reports were commissioned to enhance the evidence base for the review and specifically to address aspects of the Terms of Reference set by the Government for the review. The views expressed in these reports are entirely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect our views or the recommendations of the current review. Meanwhile, we have undertaken our own research; the outcomes from this are reflected within the ‘CFFC research’ report’.