Robin Bowerman

It has been a big year for the SMSF industry given the major policy changes the federal government made to super in the 2016 budget.

Last week the Self-managed Super Fund Association held its national conference in Sydney and it provided a natural forum for the leading practitioners in the SMSF industry to reflect on and debate the impact of the changes on SMSF trustees and how it will affect the operation of funds in the future.

Industry practitioners – be they advisers, accountants or lawyers – have had a busy 12 months getting to grips with a myriad of technical changes in the way funds can be managed and reported on.

A persistent theme running through the three day conference was that industry practitioners are concerned that their clients, the SMSF trustees, do not appreciate the complexity of the changes the government’s policy changes bring with them.

At the core of the reform package was the reduction of concessional contribution caps and the introduction of the $1.6 million tax-free pension limit.

The government argued at the time the changes were announced that it would only affect about 4 per cent of superannuation accounts. No doubt many people with considerably less than $1.6 million in their super fund account filed the changes away under the category of nice problem to have, or wake me up when I get there.

But as always the devil is in the detail – particularly when unforeseen circumstances happen.

The SMSFA technical director, Peter Hogan, provided an overview of the administration of pensions under the new rules.

For example a key technical change that took effect in July last year was to the definition of a death benefit. The result is that upon the death of a fund member the death benefit has to be cashed out of the super system either by payment of a pension or a lump sum.

But complexity arises depending on the type of pension that is setup and how that works with other estate planning issues.

To illustrate this, consider a couple who are both comfortably under the $1.6 million cap in pension phase. Joe and Jane each have $1 million in their member accounts. As they are nearing retirement and about to commence pensions they are not concerned about the $1.6 million cap – now referred to in industry parlance as Total Balance Cap (TBC).

But if one of the couple was to die and leave their remaining superannuation to their spouse then the $1.6 million cap suddenly comes into calculations.

The cap is an individual entitlement and not transferable/inheritable to beneficiaries. So if Joe has died unexpectedly, Jane is in a position of now having $2 million in her pension account – her original $1 million pension balance plus the beneficial pension left by Joe.

People with accounts with much lower balances may well be unsympathetic to Jane’s situation. However when you consider that a woman living beyond 90 is far from unusual today, Jane is looking at funding her retirement lifestyle for around 30 years. In this context, making her $1 million last that long can look challenging, particularly in a low-return world.

The complexity of the regime becomes painfully clear when you consider there are a range of different options available to Jane that involve cashing out her surplus pension amount (and therefore losing its concessional tax treatment), commuting part of her existing pension back into the accumulation phase, and using Joe’s reversionary pension to pay the majority of her superannuation income to maximise the superannuation assets that are tax free.

There are complex regulations and potential minefields for the unsuspecting in making sure the SMSF fund is managed efficiently from the trustee’s perspective and remains compliant with the new laws.

But depending on Jane’s individual circumstances and needs, the differences between options chosen can involve significant amounts of money.

The regulations do not apply solely to self-managed super funds. The same rules apply to retail and industry super funds so these are challenges the entire super industry will have to grapple with over the foreseeable future. However, due to the role of trustees and their responsibility for the administration of the fund, this is emerging as a critical area for SMSF trustees to get specialist advice.

Estate planning has always been part of a professional financial plan but what emerged at the SMSFA conference is that the rule changes in the pension phase have opened up a new area where technical structures and strategies can have a significant impact on income in retirement.

By Robin Bowerman, Head of Market Strategy and Communications

The post Potential pension minefields appeared first on AdviserVoice.

The announcement coincides with the 15-year anniversary of Vanguard’s range of index funds for wholesale investors in Australia.

Speaking at a briefing in Sydney today, Vanguard’s Head of Product Management and Development, Robyn Laidlaw said the decision to reduce fees was possible due to significant growth in these funds and Vanguard’s ongoing commitment to maintain low cost fund offerings for investors.

“In an environment where costs matter more than ever, we are delighted to provide greater value to our investors,” Ms Laidlaw said.

“This announcement today sees some of our funds moving to about one fifth1 of the average Australian managed fund fee of the comparable asset classes.

“As a subsidiary of a client-owned parent company, which now manages in excess of $1.9 trillion for investors globally, we are well positioned to be able to pass on the benefit of growth in our funds back to our clients,” she said.

The reduced fees will take effect as at 1 August 2012.

Robin Bowerman, Vanguard’s Head of Corporate Affairs and Market Development explained what lower costs might mean in today’s investment environment.

 “This month marks 15 years since Vanguard began offering low cost index funds to Australian investors. Over that time, for every $100,000 invested in Vanguard’s Australian Shares Index Fund2, an investor would have made a saving due to a lower headline fee of over $25,000 versus a fund with an industry average fee.

“Both institutional and advisory businesses today are facing greater pressures on the fees they charge, with regulatory changes and market conditions shining a spotlight on fee structures,” said Mr Bowerman.

“Investors are no longer accepting of paying high fees for volatile performance, and rightly so.

“In bear markets, investors unfortunately see the compounding effect of higher fees, when returns are in single digit or negative territory,” said Mr Bowerman.

The post Vanguard upholds its client-first promise with fee cut to seven index fund offerings appeared first on AdviserVoice.