The head of the financial system inquiry would prefer the Abbott government respond to his recommendations sooner rather than later to prevent speculation about what's coming.
Finance Minister Mathias Cormann said on Sunday a response to the inquiry is still months away.
Inquiry chair David Murray said while his report is a blueprint for the future of Australia's financial system, it's probably better for the government to clarify its position.
"In the markets, people will wonder about something and make decisions and guess which way the government might jump. So it is healthier to move on it," the former Commonwealth Bank chief told Sky News.
Meanwhile the country awaits a final decision on a bank deposit levy, a policy announced by the Rudd government in 2013 that's due to start in 2016.
It's meant to pay for a government guarantee should a bank collapse, but the Murray inquiry doubted it would cover the size of the problem.
"So there wasn't a lot of point doing it," Mr Murray said.
He said while a fee was charged for an explicit guarantee during the 2008-2009 global financial crisis, unless the money is put aside from other government expenditures to deal with the problem, it would leave taxpayers vulnerable.
Instead the inquiry has recommended banks increase their capital requirements, an option that banks say could lead to higher interest rates.
"We weren't so concerned about the banking system, we were concerned about the taxpayer," Mr Murray said.
The financial inquiry is one of several reviews being undertaken by the government, which also includes the tax system and federation.
The government has already ruled out changes to the GST without the agreement of all the states, and it won't be touching superannuation tax, negative gearing or bracket creep.
Senator Cormann said there is a process underway and in the coming months it will become clear where the government thinks the tax system should go.
"I don't believe everything has been ruled out at all," he told Sky News.
But Mr Murray is concerned that running policy by ruling things out is a symptom of a community that has had 25 years of continuous economic growth.
If the community believes there is no reason why their welfare or pension payments could be threatened "it's hard to make a case to the community that things need adjustment", he said.
Share
