A review of disclosure to investors by the unlisted property industry has been “disappointing”, particularly in light of the rise in SMSF property investment, according to ASIC.
The review was part of a recent broader surveillance of the managed investment and superannuation sectors, including listed and unlisted property funds, ASIC said.
In a statement released yesterday, ASIC said it found unlisted property schemes were “failing to adequately disclose against benchmarks put in place to improve investors’ awareness of the risks of investing in these products”.
“The results are disappointing, especially when, at a time in the rise of SMSFs, many Australians are looking to invest in real estate. Property schemes have become popular investment vehicles for such people, but they do carry risks as well as opportunities,” said ASIC commissioner Greg Tanzer.
“When schemes aren’t adequately disclosing those risks, investors are put in a vulnerable position.”
In 2012, ASIC introduced benchmarks that unlisted property schemes are required to address on an ‘if not, why not’ basis. The benchmarks addressed issues including schemes’ gearing policy, interest cover policy and related-party transactions.
ASIC’s review found schemes’ responsible entities either failed to address certain benchmarks or did not provide enough information. They also failed to provide the information in a single location on their website and/or in a single designated document, ASIC stated.
“While we are disappointed at the quality of the disclosure against the ASIC benchmarks, it was helpful to observe that the levels of leverage in the sample we reviewed appeared manageable,” Mr Tanzer said.
Following ASIC’s review, one scheme withdrew its product disclosure statement from the market and a further three entities will be questioned about their disclosure.
ASIC stated it will also be meeting with industry to discuss its concerns and follow up compliance.
SUBSCRIBE TO THE SMSF ADVISER BULLETIN
- 22 Sep 2017ASIC permanently bans SMSF property spruikerBy Miranda Brownlee
- 22 Sep 2017Male SMSF investors ‘bigger risk takers’, says reportBy Staff Reporter
- 22 Sep 2017Lawyer flags subdivision trap with downsizer contributionsBy Miranda Brownlee
- 22 Sep 2017ATO urged to address ‘unknowns’ with LRBA reportingBy Miranda Brownlee
- 21 Sep 2017Lost and unclaimed super climbs to $18 billionBy Lara Bullock
- 21 Sep 2017ATO to release further guidance on reservesBy Miranda Brownlee
- view all
- Male SMSF investors ‘bigger risk takers’, says report
Male SMSF members tend to hold a greater share of assets in higher risk investments including domestic shares and property in comparison to ...read more
- Lawyer flags subdivision trap with downsizer contributions
SMSF trustees planning to make downsizer contributions have been warned that if a property has been subject to a partial sale in the 10 yea...read more
- ATO urged to address ‘unknowns’ with LRBA reporting
The ATO has been asked to provide further clarity around the events based reporting requirements for LRBA repayments, with the new requireme...read more
- view all