Politics

Labour Says Your Boss Would Have to Pay Your KiwiSaver

Hana SinclairPublished 5d ago2 min readBased on 7 sources
Reading level
Labour Says Your Boss Would Have to Pay Your KiwiSaver
Photo by Doug Mountain / CC BY 4.0

Labour says bosses would have to pay KiwiSaver if it wins the election.

Leader Chris Hipkins announced the policy at the Sharesies office in Wellington, in reporting published on 13 September 2026. RNZ

KiwiSaver is a savings scheme for retirement. Workers pay in from their wages. Bosses add extra money on top.

Under the plan, boss payments would become compulsory on 1 July 2028. From then, bosses would pay for workers over 65. They would also keep paying while parents are on paid parental leave. The minimum boss payment would rise to 6% by 2032.

Think of it as a top-up that goes straight to savings, not into weekly pay.

Labour would also ban new contracts that count KiwiSaver as part of wages. It would set the usual worker payment at 4% and remove the minimum worker payment. Bosses would still pay the full 6% even if workers pay less or pause.

The boss payment would stand alone. It would not stop when a worker pays less. It would apply at all ages and on parental leave from 2028.

Current rules are as follows. According to Inland Revenue, bosses must now pay at least 3.5%. IRD The usual worker rate and the matching boss rate will rise from 3% to 4% in two steps. IRD

Other parties have their own plans. National proposes a staged rise to 6% from workers and 6% from bosses by April 2032. Stuff NZ First leader Winston Peters proposes lifting both payments to 10%. Stuff For comparison, Australia's rate is 12%. Stuff

The broader context here is a move from a scheme people can leave, with some exceptions, to a compulsory boss payment. A ban would stop the payment being counted as part of wages. Cover for over-65s and for parental leave would close two known gaps.

For the campaign, the question is what sets the parties apart. Labour, National and NZ First all point to 6% or more from bosses. They differ on compulsion, timing, pauses and who is covered. Those details will matter for bosses and for voters weighing weekly pay against savings for later.