Data reveals that from 2019-20 to 2023-24 the number of auditors specialising in SMSF has decreased from 4,773 to 2,942.
However, Shelley Banton, director of Super Clarity, told SMSF Adviser that while the number of auditors appears to have dropped, this refers specifically to the number of registered auditors who are actively signing audit reports for those income years, not the year in which the audits were conducted.
“The actual number [of auditors] would be higher, as some practising auditors are not captured in this statistic,” Banton said.
Of those auditors recorded in the statistics, 40.2 per cent performed 5-50 audits per year, down from 45 per cent in 2019-20, with 27 per cent taking on 51-250 audits per year. Surprisingly, 11 per cent of auditors (up from 8.6 per cent in 2019-20) conducted more than 250 audits, representing 75 per cent of total SMSF audits. This is in comparison to just 0.3 per cent of funds that were audited by SMSF auditors who completed fewer than five audits.
The average audit fee was $651, while the median audit fee was $550, with just over half (52.1 per cent) of all audit fees between $500 and $999.
Banton said that regarding the reported median auditor fee of $550, it is important to note that the audit fee is not always reported separately in the SMSF Annual Return (SAR).
“Tax agents often include the audit fee within the overall administration fee, meaning it is not split out for individual reporting. This practice can further obscure the actual cost of SMSF audit services,” Banton said.
“A significant issue arising from the prevalence of low-cost SMSF audit fees is the potential impact on auditor independence.”
She continued that the competitive nature of the market raises questions about whether auditors can maintain the necessary objectivity and professional scepticism when operating under tight financial constraints.
“While low-cost SMSF audit fees are not in themselves a breach of independence requirements, it is essential to recognise that very low or ‘race-to-the-bottom’ pricing materially increases the risk to independence,” she said.
“The issue has garnered increased attention from both ASIC and the ATO, reflecting a clear regulatory focus on the implications of such pricing practices. The core issue is not simply the audit fee. Instead, the concern is whether the auditor can demonstrably comply with APES 110 and SIS audit obligations at such a low price point.”
Banton added that auditors must be able to demonstrate that their fee model enables a proper audit in accordance with the required standards, regardless of the amount charged.
“It is important to note that regulators are not setting a minimum audit fee. Instead, they expect to see evidence that the fee structure supports the delivery of quality audit work, including clear documentation of how independence threats are assessed and managed,” she said.
“This issue is particularly concerning given that independence is a fundamental principle of the audit profession. Several SMSF auditors have had action taken against them by ASIC this year for a lack of independence, resulting in several disqualifications.”
The ATO statistics also show that the number of auditor contravention reports (ACRs) reported by approved SMSF auditors in relation to the 2023 SMSF annual return at 30 June 2025 was 3.3 per cent of the total number of lodging SMSFs.
In 2023-24, ACRs were lodged for 16,500 SMSFs, reporting 43,100 contraventions. Of these, 41 per cent were reported as rectified.
The most commonly reported contraventions in 2023-24 continued to be loans or financial assistance to members (19 per cent), while in-house assets and administrative type contraventions constituted 15 per cent and 13 per cent, respectively.
