ISA urges government to keep super safety netBY ALEX BURKE | FRIDAY, 24 APR 2015 12:40PMIndustry Super Australia has called for the super safety net to be retained, arguing that scrapping it would collectively cost employers $1.8 billion.
Related News |
Editor's Choice
Antipodes acquires boutique manager
|Antipodes has acquired a fund manager specialising in Asian equity and fixed income strategies that has about $170 million in assets under management.
The funds delivering up to 30% returns: Mercer
|Mercer released its investment performance charts, revealing the top 10 funds delivering massive returns.
ClearBridge launches first local global equity fund
|ClearBridge Investments has launched its first global equity strategy in Australia as it looks to introduce more in the future.
Plenary Group sells 49% stake to ADQ
|Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund ADQ has acquired a 49% stake in Plenary Group as it marks its first investment in an Australian company.
Further Reading
Sponsored by | Where do advisers invest their time?The stage 3 tax cuts have sparked discussions on bracket creep. Implementing a tax-effective investment strategy is crucial now more than ever. |
Sponsored by | Quality and Yield. A Powerful combination.With central bank rates seemingly peaked, investors are not awaiting yield increases. We're bucking the trend with investment rates at decadal highs |
Sponsored by | Why it could be a good time to be a growth contrarianGrowth-style companies are in vogue, but you may need to think outside the box to ensure you don't overpay. |
Products
Featured Profile
Fiona Mann
HEAD OF LISTED EQUITIES AND ESG
BRIGHTER SUPER
BRIGHTER SUPER
Brighter Super head of listed equities and ESG Fiona Mann was shaped by a childhood steeped in military-like discipline and global nomadism. Andrew McKean writes.
The fact that it is referred to as a safety net is half the problem - it should be called what it is, red tape and an anti-competitive loophole.
"More than eight million Australians don't choose their own super fund and rely on their employer to place them in a high performing fund. These funds are selected in a merit-based process overseen by the Fair Work Commission," said the ISA chief executive.
Are you kidding me? Under what basis are employers making judgement calls on "a high performing fund"? And under what basis is that employer responsible if the expectation on performance is not achieved?
Does this mean that employers are assuming that past performance is an indicator of future performance?
What a load of rubbish. It's all about the unions, nothing else.
Now, pardon me but I just have to get to my Corporate Box at the MCG tonight as a guest of an industry super fund ....run only to profit members don't forget.
This regime is anti-competitive and not in the best interests of consumers. ISA has the attitude that "big brother knows best". ISA should have to compete in the open market and not be provided with a tied stream of members. Let's see how they perform when it is a level playing field.