FSC urges disclosure of superannuation remuneration
Superannuation funds should be required under the new Stronger Super arrangements to disclose the remuneration of responsible persons such as trustee executives, according to a Financial Services Council (FSC) submission filed with the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) this week.
The submission, responding to an APRA discussion paper, argues that while the Government's Super System Review process indicated its support for remuneration disclosure, it ultimately did not make an explicit recommendation.
The FSC said that this was despite the fact that the remuneration of responsible persons by superannuation funds was one of the most relevant issues to members.
"Remuneration of responsible persons which is drawn from the trust should be disclosed to members," it said. "Remuneration which is not paid from trust assets should not be disclosed unless it is captured by other disclosure requirements."
The submission said that, for instance, where executives were required to disclose their remuneration under the Corporations Act 2001 or the ASX Corporate Governance Guidelines, this should continue to apply to listed entities which contained Registrable Superannuation Entity Licensees.
Elsewhere in its submission, the FSC also called for a narrowing of the 'responsible person' definition so that it solely captured trustee directors and responsible officers and excluded service providers.
It argued that responsible officers, as determined by the trustee, should be defined as having a degree of control over the superannuation entity.
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.
