ASIC confirms sub-$200K SMSFs generate negative returns
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) appears to have validated the common industry belief that you need to have a balance in excess of $200,000 in a self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) if you want to generate a positive return.
The ASIC validation has been revealed in an answer to a question on notice from the House of Representatives Standing Committee on economics in which Labor front-bencher, Andrew Leigh asked whether, on average, SMSFs with balances below $200,000 actually produced negative returns.
ASIC confirmed Leigh’s question noting that for the period 2016-17 and for the preceding two financial years, SMSFs with a balance of less than $200,000 had a negative return on assets when compared to SMSFs with a balance of more than $200,000.
“In 2016-17, the ROA [return on assets] for SMSFs with a balance of more than $100,000, but less than $200,000 was -0.48%, whereas the ROA for SMSFs with a balance of more than $200,000, but less than $500,000 was 4.65%,” the ASIC answer said.
Recommended for you
With just 30 per cent of Australians knowing their superannuation balance to the nearest $1,000, Findex has emphasised the role of financial advice in addressing the critical super knowledge gap.
Underestimating the cost of insurance by almost $75,000 in a Statement of Advice is among multiple reasons that a relevant provider has faced action from the FSCP.
Financial Services Council chief executive, Blake Briggs, is urging Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, to take advantage of the QAR opportunity to reduce regulatory duplication and ensure advice is affordable.
Former chair of the House of Representatives’ Standing Economics Committee, Tim Wilson, is planning a return to politics after losing his seat in the 2022 federal election.
