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.
Comments
If only we could give advice based on averages and no consideration of circumstances. Surely front-bencher, Andrew Leigh has the skills to drill down further with ASIC and find that this information can be misleading to the House of Representatives Standing Committee.
Its a scam !
This is just a rehash of the ATO data they were reporting before. Its rubbish.
Add new comment