Clarify goals and purpose of super: IPA
The Australian superannuation system lacked a measured purpose, the Institute of Public Accountants (IPA) said, as it welcomed Federal Treasuer Scott Morrison's push for a Productivity Commission's inquiry into the sector.
IPA chief executive, Andrew Conway, said the super system should be measured on achieving its clearly defined purpose, otherwise it would not be able to support the needs of the ageing population.
"With the upcoming budget expected to tinker even more with superannuation, the need to clarify the goals and purpose of superannuation becomes even more imperative," he said.
Consumers needed to be engaged with their super, and financial literacy needed to vastly be improved, Conway added.
"At the very least, consumers should be able to adequately compare fees and returns with other similar funds on a like-for-like basis, which means information needs to be disclosed in a more effective way."
He said the IPA believed the objective of the super system should be based around three main themes, which took social and fiscal considerations into account.
Those themes are "adequacy", to ensure that all retirees had a replacement income which gave a minimum standard of living, "sustainability", so the system could support itself financially and "be capable of delivery require benefits into the future", and "integrity", so the system was transparent, well governed, regulated, and had the public's confidence.
Recommended for you
ASIC has cancelled the AFSL of a Perth financial services firm following payments to its clients by the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort after a failed managed investment scheme.
Bravura chief executive Andrew Russell has announced he will be stepping down from the company, just under two years after his appointment.
Financial advice businesses with a younger, wealthier client base are enjoying higher valuations and increased attention from potential buyers than those with older clients.
A financial advice firm has been penalised $11 million in the Federal Court for providing ‘cookie cutter advice’ to its clients and breaching conflicted remuneration rules.
