Add new comment

I don't beleive this is a contrvention of the sole purpose test. this is a secondary donation of the money paid to the directors. (ie after the super fund has paid the directors). This is unlike using super fund for advertising for new members, which is outside of the sole purpose test as I understand it, or using money to pay lobby groups. What would be interesting is if directors were held responsible for breaching the sole purpose test and had pay a fine. Perhaps gifting the money away would be a little less appealing if there was a chance you could be held responsible for things done while you were a director.... this is what has occurred with AMP where we have seen a number of directors leave the company, but I am not aware of any fines imposed.