SMSF Association dismisses ACTU claims

The SMSF Association has rejected a call by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACT) for a fresh inquiry into the self-managed super fund (SMSF) sector based on the recent Productivity Commission (PC) Review of Superannuation.

SMSF Association chief executive, John Maroney said the ACTU call was totally unwarranted.

His comments came at the same time as questions were asked at the Conference of Major Superannuation Funds on the Gold Coast questioned why SMSFs had been specifically excluded from the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry.

Related News:

Maroney dismissed the ACTU’s calls saying it had been clearly demonstrated that the PC’s analysis showing SMSFs with less than $500,000 were underperforming the APRA-regulated funds had used highly questionable data about SMSF investment returns and costs, as well as poor methodology, to reach the conclusion.

“Certainly, there are more than enough question marks about the PC’s analysis to dismiss any call for another inquiry, especially when the PC, in its final report, said there should be no barriers to individuals setting up an SMSF and that these funds provided a ‘key source of choice’ in Australia’s increasingly concentrated superannuation sector,” he said.

“In addition, this type of simplistic analysis ignores the non-financial benefits that many SMSF members believe they can only achieve in overseeing their own fund, including greater control, flexibility and transparency.”

The ACTU assistant secretary, Scott Connolly, has claimed there should be consistent scrutiny of SMSFs who he claimed were not providing for their members”. 

Maroney said it was often forgotten by critics of the SMSF sector that it has had three reviews in the past decade with none of them recommending any significant restrictions or changes to SMSFs.

“The Cooper Review (2010), the Murray Inquiry (2014) and the PC (2018) have not recommended restrictions for SMSFs or tighter regulation of the sector.”

Although disagreeing with the call for another review, Maroney adds that the Association “strongly endorses” calls by the PC and ASIC for financial advisers to be required to have undertaken specialist SMSF education before being allowed to advise SMSF clients.




Related Content

Positive changes for SMSF sector in Budget

The SMSF Association has welcomed the Government’s proposed changes regarding calculating exempt current pension income (ECPI) and increasing the ag...Read more

How the banks keep the sweetest morsels

When Westpac late last month announced that it was exiting its face-to-face financial advice business as part of a transaction with relatively little-...Read more

Two join SMSF Association board

The SMSF Association has appointed Tracey Scotchbrook and Michael Houlihan as board members.Scotchbrook, vice chair of the West Australian self-manage...Read more

Author

Comments

Comments

SMSF not providing for their members? Is the ACTU serious? They really arent happy that the SMSF growth is impacting their little FUM Castles, well bad luck!

"Maroney adds that the Association “strongly endorses” calls by the PC and ASIC for financial advisers to be required to have undertaken specialist SMSF education before being allowed to advise SMSF clients."

I think all providers should be at the same level and this includes accountants!

The unions are getting worried about SMSFs stealing "their" money!

Interesting that this attack has come directly from the ACTU rather than one of their thinly veiled disguises like "Industry Super" or "AIST" or "Labor Party".

Add new comment