美国总统川普近日表示，他正以澳洲的私人退休金制度——「超级年金」（superannuation）为蓝本，研究改革美国退休体系的方案。川普下令财政部长贝森特与商务部长卢特尼克研究澳洲模式，并与国会讨论如何扩大美国的退休保障制度。贝莱德执行长芬克多年来一直是澳洲模式的倡导者，也在近期与川普会面。
澳洲的退休金制度始于1990年代初期，立法要求雇主为员工薪资额外提拨至私人管理的退休基金，目前提拨率已逐步提升至薪资的12%，涵盖兼职员工。该体系总规模已达3.1兆美元，预计十年内将成为全球第二大退休金计划。相较之下，美国社会安全信托基金预计在2032年耗尽，约40%的私人部门劳工甚至无法参与401(k)类型的退休计划，中位数帐户余额仅约44,115美元。
然而，退休政策专家警告，澳洲模式并非美国的万灵丹。美国仍须处理已承诺的社会安全福利，而强制雇主提拨可能引发企业界强烈反弹。布鲁金斯学会与波士顿学院的专家指出，美国现有制度（结合401(k)与社会安全）设计上并非不如澳洲，关键在于修复社会安全制度并扩大劳工参与职场退休计划。白宫官员也表示，最终方案未必完全照搬澳洲模式。
President Donald Trump has expressed interest in Australia's superannuation system as a model for reforming the US retirement system. He directed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to study the Australian approach and discuss potential implementation with Congress. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, a longtime advocate of Australia's model, recently met with Trump to discuss retirement reform.
Australia's retirement system, established in the early 1990s, mandates employer contributions to privately managed pension funds at a rate of 12% of employee salaries, covering even part-time workers. The system has grown to $3.1 trillion and is projected to become the world's second-largest retirement plan within a decade. By contrast, the US Social Security trust fund faces depletion by 2032, roughly 40% of private-sector workers lack access to 401(k)-type plans, and the median balance among those who do is only $44,115.
Retirement experts warn that adopting Australia's model is far from straightforward for the US. The government must address already-promised Social Security benefits currently funded through payroll taxes, and mandatory employer contributions would likely face fierce business opposition. Analysts at the Brookings Institution and Boston College argue that the US system's combination of 401(k) plans and inflation-adjusted Social Security is well-designed in principle — the priority should be fixing Social Security and expanding workplace retirement plan coverage. The White House has indicated that any final proposal may differ significantly from the Australian approach.