SMSFs should pay SuperStream levy: AIST

  

Can Fiona Reynolds please explain how SMSFs will benefit from SuperStream when the trustees and their advisers do most of the work and / or make their contributions directly themselves.
This is just another attempt by the industry funds influenced AIST to grab funds from areas over which they should mind their own business.

  

One of the many reasons for setting up an SMSF is to avoid the costs associated with membership of a large superannuation fund. SMSFs do not have a "back office" and have no isues in handling contributions to their fund. Automation through Superstream will have no impact on the efficiency of runing an SMSF and to suggest that SMSFs should contribute to the costs of automation in their more cumbersome and less efficient counterparts is outrageous!

  This needs very little comment. To put it in the simplest of terms, as the previous commentor says, " it is outrageous" - (an I add) If the AIST was as efficient as the majority of SMSFs there would be no need to add further costs.

The ATO already gets $180 per annum for an SMSF Supervisory Levy, which is included in the income tax assessment. What value flow-back does the SMSF get for this cost ??

  

There are a couple of negative words, which when conjoined make a positive. "Yeah-Right". Why on earth should SMSFs be involved in this madness. It is for this exact reason (cost and efficient control) that SMSFs exist.

  

Then perhaps you should go back and look at the press releases from SPAA and co talking about how much self managed funds will benefit from super stream!!!