Low balance members hit with fees under super changesBY ALICE URIBE | MONDAY, 8 APR 2013 12:25PMExtra administration costs borne out of the federal government's proposed superannuation changes could be passed onto all superannuation fund members, even those with small balances according to Deloitte. |
Editor's Choice
Brighter Super launches lifetime income product in accumulation phase
The $38 billion super fund has teamed up with TAL to offer members a lifetime income product while still in the accumulation phase.
FinCap beefs up treasury capabilities
FinCap has welcomed a new member to help scale the firm's private markets managed accounts offering.
smartMonday tweaks fees, MySuper structure
The super fund is transforming its MySuper LifeCycle structure by shrinking nine options into four distinct categories, while making changes to its investment and administration fees
Former Berndale director jailed for $700k in misused funds
Former Berndale Capital Securities director Stavro D'Amore has been sentenced to almost four years' imprisonment after admitting to dishonestly misusing nearly $700,000 of company funds and authorising false statements to ASIC.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile

Hugh Killen
MANAGING DIRECTOR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
For Hugh Killen, several life lessons came from spending time on pastoral properties stretching across northern New South Wales and South-West Queensland.







Likewise, the comment that smaller balances will be hit is jumping the gun. The Govt made a reasonable assumption that funds in retirement will earn 5% pa on average. Such funds tend to be more conservatively invested so this is sensible. The SMSF brigade is quick off the mark, trying to keep their tax minimisation plans going and maintaining a tax haven for large balances.
A little more analysis and insight, and a little less histrionics will help the industry move forward.
The basket known as "unintended consequences" is already full as a result of poorly thought through policy and this whole tranche of changes has simply caused us to get a second bucket to catch the overflow.
I would have thought that "unintended consequences" are those not identified at the outset. What do you call it when these consequences have been identified, but you arrogantly still push the changes through?
I call it "policy just to make it hard for the new government when they come into power to repeal".
The first term of the new parliament is going to be full time unravelling all the mistakes of this current one and the list continues to grow and grow and grow.
Why not make it official? Why don't they ask us all to give up our super for the greater good of the entire population?
Bad luck if you've made sacrifices along the way to stay off the dole and tried hard to make something of your life....too bad, we'll have that...thank you very much....I guess I better get back to work to pay my taxes so that I can be told that, even having donated my fair share to government coffers, it's still not enough...!!
Bring on September 14.