Should I get my super as a $1.7m lump sum, or a yearly pension?
I have the choice of taking either a $1.753 million lump sum or a defined benefit pension of approximately $135,000 per year plus a $174,000 lump sum. My superannuation will be my sole source of retirement funding. My main concern is that the defined benefit pension is not indexed, so its purchasing power will decline over time with inflation.Given my age, retirement plans and reliance on super for retirement income, how would you assess the trade-off between the pension and the lump sum?
- ▪I have the choice of taking either a $1.753 million lump sum or a defined benefit pension of approximately $135,000 per year plus a $174,000 lump sum.
- ▪My superannuation will be my sole source of retirement funding.
- ▪My main concern is that the defined benefit pension is not indexed, so its purchasing power will decline over time with inflation.Given my age, retirement plans and reliance on super for retirement income, how would you assess the trade-off
Sydney Morning Herald publishes from Australia and files mainly under world. We currently carry 3,323 of its stories.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","dateModified":"2026-07-25T19:01:00Z","datePublished":"2026-07-25T19:01:00Z","description":"The lump sum versus pension debate can get more complicated when defined benefit schemes start to enter the mix.","headline":"Should I get my super as a $1.7m lump sum, or a yearly pension?","keywords":"Ask an expert, Just in, Opinion, For subscribers","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Paul Benson","jobTitle":"Money…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Sydney Morning Herald.