Thank you Backstage. Look beyond just the structure/s. Currently, both employee and employer's contribution are taxed. So, even if I add a 3rd option - $100k salary of which $12k deducted for KS and no employer contribution. It made no difference financially whether it is option a, b or c, assuming law says $12k of the $100k pay package must go to KS. It will make a difference if a new tax law says, employer's contribution is tax free, then option "a" is a no brainer.

Thank you Simon for such a substantial and thought-provoking piece. You write that “the CoFI law creates the potential for the FMA to influence the supply of financial products and services, not just conduct in relation to such supply”, to which I would offer two replies: Yes; and About Time. Your piece (and also your submission on the draft Fair Outcomes Guide) do suggest a preference for Rational Choice Theory and the Efficient Market Hypothesis. The problems with this being: Humans are not ideally-rational agents, and even if they were, the market is problematically inefficient. The latter is by design, by and for the benefit of the financial institutions. Informational asymmetries mean that consumers often don’t/can’t obtain the information they need to make an informed choice about whether to acquire, retain, or dispose of a financial advice product. (Good luck finding out the actual/modelled loss ratio on optional benefit x on product y.) Extending conduct requirements/expectations beyond supply, into areas such as design and pricing over the full life cycle of products and service offered, should help rebalance the scales. I agree with you when you write: “What is “fair” is inherently vague and contestable.” It doesn’t follow that it is unsuitable. Financial services law is full of such terms: “reasonable,” “care,” “diligence,” and “skill” immediately spring to mind. “Unusually large transaction” and “unusual pattern of transactions” from 22(1)(c) of the AML/CFT Act are vague, and currently subject to contest in FMA v InvestNow. Finally, I agree that more FADC cases would be helpful. Also helpful would be more details from enforcement cases the FMA has taken over the years. For example: Where a FAP was found to have breached the Record Keeping standard condition, provide a couple of (suitably redacted) examples of deficient files, along with explanatory commentary. If your files look like that, then do better.

@WK agree with your summary and Murray, "exactly". Im a little confused about the statement, total rem has got to go? Even more confused by am mentat... blatant wage theft? Confused about young people not thinking about retirement or insurance? I have had the unfortunate experience at times working for multi national insurance companies and I do not recall them trying to get their mits on my wages, when did this happen? For centuries young people have not been able to picture themselves retired or believe that they will be multi-millionaires by this time. By the way, i bet they have a bank account. Hopefully am mentat works it out or, if he is a prosperous employer just continues to give give give to his employees with wild abandon and continues to cheer on any political parties that place more financial burdens on small business where generally the owner has risked all to try and get ahead. Employing people and helping in this way to provide for there families also.