“It’s just the beginning with the Bill set to be introduced to the Lower House,” Burgess told SMSF Adviser.

“It was originally meant to go through this process in Parliament’s last sitting days and I believe it will be pushed through to be debated next week as the government wants to try and get this finalised by the end of this financial year to give people 12 months to make any changes they may need.”

He expressed confidence that the Teals will attempt to introduce some amendments to the Bill. However, he also believes that the bill will pass with minimal challenge, as the Greens are expected to align their vote with the government.

“It is the last opportunity when the Bill gets to the Lower House to make any changes so we are still pushing hard to get some simple amendments through,” he said.

“We have been in discussion with the Senate crossbench and although it is unusual for them to block a Bill, they may vote for some amendments to improve it.”

He continued that two of the “simple” amendments include indexing the cap and replacing the complicated calculation on unrealised gains with a proxy, namely an earning rate equal to the 90-day bank bill rate.

“The large funds are saying they don’t have the ability to know what taxable income is at a member level, but we argue that if that is not possible, then something that is a close proxy to doing that would be the 90-day bank bill rate,” he said.

Burgess said that although he had the opportunity to present to the inquiry, he was disappointed he was not given the chance to raise a number of the association’s concerns, including the controversial aspect of unrealised capital gains and the lack of indexation.

He said he was also shocked to hear evidence presented to the inquiry that suggested that it was not unusual to see superannuation caps not indexed in line with inflation.

“That is something with which we disagree,” he said.

“We can only now live in hope that they may index the cap. We have not heard anything from Treasury that there may be any changes to the Bill, and because they only called for supplementary submissions to be done by 2 May before a 10 May report it’s unlikely there would have been enough time to make any changes.”