Consistency urged on advice fees in super
One of Australia’s largest superannuation industry organisations, the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA), has told the second phase of the Cooper Review that financial advice provided in relation to superannuation should not entail commission-based remuneration.
The ASFA submission, which substantially backs calls by the Institute of Actuaries for the separation of fees into four different categories, said there was a need to separate out advice fees because different superannuation funds offered markedly different service levels for advice.
“It is important for members to be able to understand what they are paying for and utilise the services accordingly,” it said.
“For example, if they do not want advice they may prefer to choose a fund that does not offer the service,” the submission said.
ASFA said it believed the level of advice fee should always be shown, including whether it could be turned on or off.
The submission also called for a consistent industry approach with respect to fees, with standard definitions and standard disclosure arrangements.
“There needs to be a consistent and enforced methodology for calculating superannuation fund investment performance, both in terms of the fees and costs deducted,” the submission said.
AUTHOR
Mike Taylor
Recommended for you
ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025, with 241 candidates attempting the test.
Quarterly Wealth Data analysis has uncovered positive improvements in financial adviser numbers compared with losses in the prior corresponding period.
Holding portfolios that are too complex or personalised can be a detractor for acquirers of financial advice firms as they require too much effort to maintain post-acquisition.
As the financial advice profession continues to wait on further DBFO legislation, industry commentators have encouraged advisers to act now in driving practice efficiency.
