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
ASIC sues First Guardian-linked auditors
ASIC has commenced proceedings against Auditeo Australia and two auditors for their involvement in the First Guardian Master Fund failure.
Acclime acquires Melbourne's Polar 993
Acclime, a provider of corporate, governance, advisory and fund services across Asia Pacific and global markets, has signed an agreement to acquire the independent trustee and fund administration business from Melbourne.
Platforms are not solution providers: AZ NGA
AZ NGA group chief executive Paul Barrett warned platforms should stay in their lane rather than overstep to improve financial adviser productivity, reiterating that it is the advice business' responsibility to do so.
Nesta pulls $247m mandate from Northern Trust over climate stance
UK research and innovation foundation Nesta Trust has transferred £120 million ($247m) of assets from Northern Trust Asset Management to Amundi after the US manager withdrew from major global climate initiatives, highlighting the growing commercial consequences of fund managers stepping back from climate ...
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.







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!!!