Platforms disguise investment costs - ISA
Retail superannuation funds have been able to disguise the true cost of their products via the use of investment platforms, according to Industry Super Australia (ISA).
In a submission to the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) responding to a discussion paper on superannuation reporting standards, the ISA pointed to platforms as being problematic.
It stated, "a fundamental problem with the fee and cost disclosure regime for indirectly held assets is that entities invested in via a platform at an investor's direction are automatically excluded from the definition of ‘interposed vehicle'."
"The retail superannuation sector typically provides its choice superannuation products through platforms. As a result of this exclusion, the fees and costs for retail superannuation products will appear less expensive than investments offered by funds that are not held via a platform," the ISA submission said.
It claimed that this would affect the accuracy of product disclosure statements (PDSs), periodic statements, and analysis by independent commentators which was based in part on fee information produced by superannuation funds.
"This is at odds with the policy objectives of improving the accuracy of disclosure of fees and costs, enabling consumers to compare true fees and costs across products and drive down fees," the submission said.
It said the ISA "has significant concerns about the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC's) proposed approach which undermine transparent, consistent and comparable fee disclosure" .
"ISA has made submissions to ASIC about these concerns and we are continuing to engage with ASIC about these issues and work towards satisfactory solutions. However, until this achieved, ISA does not support APRA's proposal for alignment between the information registrable superannuation entity (RSE) licensees are required to disclose in PDSs under the Corporations Regulations, as modifed by ASIC, and the information required to be reported under APRA's reporting standards," the ISA submission said.
Recommended for you
ASIC has launched court proceedings against the responsible entity of three managed investment schemes with around 600 retail investors.
There is a gap in the market for Australian advisers to help individuals with succession planning as the country has been noted by Capital Group for being overly “hands off” around inheritances.
ASIC has cancelled the AFSL of an advice firm associated with Shield and First Guardian collapses, and permanently banned its responsible manager.
Having peaked at more than 40 per cent growth since the first M&A bid, Insignia Financial shares have returned to earth six months later as the company awaits a final decision from CC Capital.
