<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
	<title>Financial Standard Comments - Industry agrees: SMSFs are not for everyone</title>
	<description>Industry bodies have welcomed the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) consultation paper asking for better regulation for establishing and advising self-managed superannuation funds (SMSF).</description>
	<link>https://www.financialstandard.com.au/feed/latest?story=34740328</link>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:00:02 +1000</lastBuildDate>
	<pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:00:02 +1000</pubDate>
	<language>en-AU</language>
	<copyright>Copyright 2026 Financial Standard</copyright>
	<ttl>5</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Comment by Robert Buns (Retired)</title>
		<link></link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
<p>Clearly the identification of the costs associated with a SMSF are biased and/or badly researched. I pay considerably less than $1,000 for mine (a small fund) and there are no administration charges. Not everyone needs advice.</p><p><a href="">Reply to article</a></p><p>For original story, <a href="">Click Here.</a></p>
]]></description>
		<dc:creator>Robert Buns (Retired)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:00:02 +1000</pubDate>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>