The ATO director of SuperStream rollovers version 3 project, Ian Morgan, says that as part of the messaging framework under SuperStream, the receiving super fund must send back a rollover transaction outcome response where it has received a rollover message.
“This advises the transferring fund whether the rollover can be processed correctly or not, or if any issues may need correcting in order to perform the rollover,” said Mr Morgan in a recent webinar with the SMSF Association.
“That outcome response message is required to be sent within three days of receiving the rollover itself and allocating it to the member’s account.”
This requirement applied to both SMSF trustees and APRA fund trustees, he said.
“So, if an SMSF is rolling over to an APRA fund, they have that same requirement to provide the SMSF with an outcome response within three business days of allocating to the member’s account.”
While the standard did require the outcome response to be sent for any rollover transaction message, Mr Morgan said the ATO was aware of some situations where the APRA fund had not provided that outcome response.
“We’re aware of some scenarios, for example, where the payment itself has gone through a non-SuperStream standard channel and the APRA fund has accepted this as being what the member intends to do but it hasn’t come through the SuperStream channel, and as such, they’re advising that they’re unable to provide the outcome response,” he explained.
“Now, as we mentioned before, the outcome response is a requirement, and so we’re working with our APRA fund colleagues on how we can find a successful resolution to this matter so that outcome responses are provided for every rollover message.”
Where SMSFs had not received a response back from an APRA fund, they should first follow up with the APRA fund to ensure the rollover had been processed successfully, said Mr Morgan.
Just go back to the rollover benefit statement and common sense
So much simpler!!!
There was not enough initial thought given to the SMSF to APRA fund payment process. While the computer messaging seems to have been the focus, practicalities were ignored. One thinks the ATO would have liaised with the banking industry on this,
The requirement to make internet transfers from a SMSF bank account can be impossible, given banks daily internet transfer limits e.g. a SMSF winding up may want to rollover millions of $ to an APRA fund. Many banks are almost impossible to contact, with “chat” rooms in call centres only. These transfers can’t be done “over the counter” at the bank either as that doesn’t comply with the SuperStream payment standards. To date the ATO’s only and unhelpful advice is to “change banks”.
Similarly, clearing out a bank account for a winding up fund with the final rollover by a cheque for the balance of the account isn’t possible. With final interest or bank charges, it’s impossible to get a figure for the final rollover to use in SuperStream.
I don’t see why SMSFs can’t go back to paying rollovers by bank cheque. The ATO has its SuperStream messaging now which was all about tracking rollovers and protecting super with more robust ID process. We understand that, but why must this messaging be inexorably linked to the physical payment. It’s not necessary. Bank cheques are equally as safe.
More thought and common sense is required here. At least liaise with the banking sector so they are aware of the issue. Most banks don’t even know what you are talking about when you raise this.
[i]”More thought and common sense is required here.”[/i]
No such thing in the public service, I’m afraid………….
I’ve had one rollover in October 2021 where an SMSF was winding up, and rolling to an APRA Fund, where the payment was $0.01 different to the rollover sent through Superstream. The APRA Fund notified the client directly (not through Superstream), and then requested a paper copy of the rollover form to be sent. The rollover was accepted, but it is still (29th March 2022) showing as waiting for a response in our software, as the APRA fund never sent a response (either that it had failed, or that the paper copy was eventually accepted).