SMSFs should pay SuperStream levy: AISTBY ALEX DUNNIN | FRIDAY, 22 JUN 2012 12:50PMSelf-managed super funds are the biggest superannuation sector by dollars and will be major beneficiaries of the SuperStream reforms and so should contribute to the levy being imposed on other fund members, argues the AIST. |
Editor's Choice
Perennial to close three responsible investment funds
Perennial Partners will shutter three responsible investment funds that manage $140 million in combined assets, as they fall short of reaching scale and achieving their investment objectives.
LGT Wealth Management hires five advisers from rival
LGT Wealth Management Australia has expanded its Syndey private client advisers' team with five senior hires from UBS Wealth Management.
MSC Group awarded mandates for natural resources strategy
MSC Group will provide administration capability and trusteeship for a natural resources strategy focusing on the energy sector and select commodities.
Norges Bank slashes exposure to US government bonds
Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), the investment manager of Norway's sovereign wealth fund, the Government Pension Fund Global, has proposed a major restructuring of the fund's exposure on US government bonds.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile

Sarah Shaw
GLOBAL PORTFOLIO MANAGER
4D INFRASTRUCTURE
4D INFRASTRUCTURE
It wasn't confidence that prompted Sarah Shaw to walk away from established investment houses and co-found 4D Infrastructure in 2015. It was something she believes is far more important: courage. By Vinny Vucago.







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!
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!!!