Cooper Partners director Jemma Sanderson said the education around SMSF advice could be improved, with mandatory qualifications currently bundled in with other streams of financial advice.
“I would like to see there be a separate SMSF accreditation for people to be able to provide advice on SMSFs,” Ms Sanderson said. “It’s a very specialised area and the education in the space could be improved.”
Ms Sanderson, who won the SMSF Adviser of the Year at the inaugural Women in Finance Awards 2017 recently, said that advisers could be a marketing win for clients, who are often swayed by additional accreditations.
“Clients are trusting all of the advisers in the SMSF space, and I guess that does cover the wider community in terms of accountants and financial advisers who will have clients who are in SMSFs, and I just feel it’s incredibly important that people who are advising on using an SMSF understand that as a separate structure, and it would be great to have a higher level of education for people in that space,” Ms Sanderson said.
“A lot of people are entrusting the management of their wealth to those in the industry and to really ensure that the industry maintains its status as being professionals with a high level of integrity and qualifications, that additional sort of qualification would be really beneficial from that perspective.”
Partner at Aquila Super, Chris Levy, said the lead up to June 30 this year was easily one of the busiest on record for his firm, largely because of the complexity of the super changes, particularly for wealthy clients.
Similarly, he believes SMSF advice is becoming its own specialist service line.
“We were so busy leading up to June just giving this very tailored advice. I’d have to say that last year it was easily the most disruptive… nine months in at least 10 years, probably even 20 years of me actually doing this. It wasn’t like the old $1 million into super that happened in 2007. This sort of stuff was very, very tailored,” he said.
“Having that higher level of knowledge I think is going to be critical. The whole way that we manage SMSF is going to look better, but I do worry that it’s going to be more expensive. And definitely, there is going to be higher demand for SMSF specialists. Definitely,” he said.
Having a specialist training is already required. As a licensed adviser we must undergo additional SMSF accreditation and product training (completing a course and around 20 additional PD hours P.A.) to be authorised to advise on SMSF and associated benefits. I don’t know what is happening in accountant land but most of the accountants I know are still merrily advising on SMSF with impunity.
Generally, I think accountants are often in a better position to understand the tax and admin position but lack the strategic level understanding and licensing to give advice on investment, insurance and estate planning challenges. Given the complexities of SMSF, I think the best SMSF adviser is an accountant who is licensed AND SMSF accredited. Discuss….
I certainly agree additional accreditation is not warranted as it is already required by most licensees to advice on SMSF anyway.
I also suggest that most accountants do not want to advise on investment and insurance products anyway and a licensed planner is best here, estate planning I am not so sure of as it involves a lot of potential structuring and taxation issues – the investments again are another issue and as mentioned accountants mostly do not want to know about them. Kym Bailey below has nailed it with the comment that the SMSF structure needs to be unhinged from the investment advise as it is only a vehicle to store the money in for the investments to happen. It is not different from a discretionary trust or company or individual in that sense which houses the investments
This is a great idea. I and others recommended to the Cooper Review back in 2010 that ASIC should carve out a separate SMSF product from the general superannuation product.
This would require separate training / accreditation on SMSFs.
Such a move is of greater importance now that the accountants exemption has been removed.
Absolutely no need for additional accreditation or qualification for SMSF advice. 80% of SMSF advising issues are consistent across all super products. The 20% differential can and should be self-studied, like any professional should. A further onerous obligation is yet another example of excessive red-tap.
Seriously. Unless advisers have a SMSF accreditation that is registered, they cannot advise within the SMSF space.
SMSFs are not some rare species that needs a specialization.
Super Reforms confirmed for me that success in this space requires a blend of accounting as well as financial planning experience. That is the rare commodity.
What is needed is for the investment vehicle to be unhinged from being classified as a financial product. Accounting qualification and experience has a lot to offer in this space and professionals should not have to sign up to being a financial planner to contribute, unless they want.
I think the two qualifications are part of the one coin but appreciate the challenge this can be for both professions. So, the compromise is for the high horse to be run out of town and for the two professions to form genuine partnerships.
Ideally, the investment vehicle advice being given by the Accountant and the investment advice by the Financial Adviser.