Add new comment

Interesting analysis and which as stated is a very creatively structured way of transitioning monies to trade unions. If there were a very small number of directors that individually elected to donate their own fees to a particular movement then it would not necessarily appear to be a structured strategy of transitioning enormous volumes of funds.
If directors elected not to receive any fees, these monies could be left within the funds to benefit the members.
If it doesn't technically breach the Sole Purpose Test because of the way in which it is structured, then it probably does push the moral and ethical boundaries, the best interest duty and provides an enormous amount of bargaining power to the recipient.
When Industry Super Funds spend millions of dollars by having the AFL repeat "Compare the Pair" at every single opportunity, how does this meet the fiduciary duty of the Trustees to be acting in the interest of their members?
They may well argue that by increasing the numbers of members and volume of funds this will create economies of scale in operating costs and therefore result in a lower fee cost per member, but how is that monitored and how do we ever know that the extra funds are simply directed toward higher advertising and promotional expenses and higher directors fees which are then in turn donated to the trade unions as currently is the practice.
When HostPlus provide discounted tickets to members who want to go and see a game of rugby, how is this decision
enhancing the retirement incomes of their members ??
No wait....I can hear the answer from ISA now......the money those members save on their rugby tickets can be contributed to their superannuation account, thereby growing their superannuation nest egg !!!.........yeah right.