The adequacy of Australians' superannuation savings has been big news, but now the conversation has turned to women's super savings.
And the picture is somewhat grim, particularly for those aged 50 and above.
Research and marketing consultancy CoreData is soon to release a report, "Invisible Sex 2010", which reveals much about the differences between men and women when it comes to financial consumption and behaviour.
Almost half of women respondents (49.7 per cent) expected to be able to finance their desired lifestyle in retirement, with only 12.5 per cent believing this to be highly likely.
"Women are far more empowered than they were 50 years ago and have significantly bridged the gap in gender equality," CoreData analyst Kristen Paech said.
"However, the study has revealed that for many women financial independence is still a long way off and this is reflected in their funding expectations in retirement."
Superannuation is also the number one financial concern for women (as it is for men), ahead of saving, investing, tax, property investing, paying off loans and family financial matters.
Paech said the results could reinforce the stereotypes about women earning less then men and feeling less financially prepared for retirement.
The Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) certainly agrees.
"We all know that an important ingredient in maximising our retirement savings is the magic of compound interest and continuing contributions across our working life," AIST chief executive Fiona Reynolds told Investor Weekly.
"Women tend to earn less than men, yet they live longer than men and need to fund a longer retirement period."
The lowering of the contribution caps from $100,000 to $50,000 for those over 50 and $25,000 for those under 50 may be of particular concern for women.
"We don't believe that we should take the next step and lower the caps to $25,000 for over 50s, as is supposed to happen next financial year. The lowering of the caps does not take into consideration that as well as hitting those with money who use the caps for tax minimisation, that it also disadvantages those who are trying to catch up and make additional contributions in later life," Reynolds said.
"Women in particular who are out of the workforce with career breaks need to be able to put additional money away for retirement when they return to the workforce."
She said the caps did not recognise that before the age of 50 people might be paying off mortgages and raising children, but later in life was when they could afford to put more money into super.
First State Super (FSS) has gathered member statistics and discovered that once women reached the age of 50 there was an increase in contributions.
In 2007/08, 55 per cent of women had concessional contributions exceeding $50,000. For the same time period for those under 50, 45 per cent exceeded $25,000.
For men aged over 50 for the same time period, 44 per cent had concessional contributions exceeding $50,000.
FSS chief executive Michael Dwyer said more work needed to go into the cap arrangements.
"Many of our members are women, such as teachers and nurses, who return to the workforce after raising a family and then hope to catch up with their super on returning to work," Dwyer said.
"The caps are punishing and could mean that investors will turn to other types of investments as opposed to super, which is highly regulated."
Reynolds agreed.
"The government co-contribution scheme has been very successful in assisting women; it should be extended to assist more women and, of course, ensure the caps for those over 50 do not go below $50, 000," she said.
"If the government wants to stop what it perceives to be high net worth individuals putting too much super away at concessional rates, it could simply allow those with low balances to have access to higher caps."
