In its response to the FSI’s interim report, SPAA stated the inquiry has no cause for concern over the operating expenses of SMSFs.
SMSF costs are low, SPAA stated, driven by a range of SMSF administration service offerings that suit different trustees’ needs.
SPAA also reiterated it does not support the introduction of “arbitrary barriers” to establishing an SMSF.
Restoring the general prohibition on direct leverage of super funds on a prospective basis is unnecessary to mitigate risks of direct leverage as an investment strategy used by super funds, SPAA also stated.
However, the inclusion of LRBAs in the AFSL regime could help ensure trustees are being properly advised on the suitability of borrowing for their fund, according to SPAA.
As an integrity measure, SPAA suggested limiting the use of personal guarantees for SMSF loans and tightening related-party borrowings.
SPAA also specified it does not support policy incentives that encourage retirees to purchase one particular type of retirement income product over another or mandating retirement income products in full, in part or for certain stages of retirement.