ING calls for super overhaul

australian financial services trustee superannuation funds cooper review financial services licence

11 November 2009
| By Lucinda Beaman |
image
image
expand image

ING has called for a major overhaul of longstanding components of superannuation in its submission to the Cooper Review.

Among its recommendations, ING canvassed the removal of the existing trust/trustee structure for super, claiming there were questions about the appropriateness of the model “given the nature of today’s public offer and other large super funds”.

“In an environment where most superannuation funds provide a level of investment choice, there is scope to question the relevance of the trust model for superannuation,” ING’s submission stated.

One option, according to ING, would be to allow providers to move to a model without a superannuation trust and trustee.

“In practical terms, we believe there is merit in allowing [Australian Financial Services Licensees] to offer a financial product for both superannuation and managed investment purposes,” ING stated.

The group said product rules for superannuation could be managed by the Australian Financial Services Licence, meaning consumer protection and prudential supervision were not diluted.

However, the group did note that “mandatory removal of the superannuation trust … may be disruptive for some and may not be justifiable”.

In its submission ING also suggested a removal of the work test and rationalisation of the preservation rules.

ING said while the work test is relatively easy to administer, it is a test that “catches out clients and advisers every year”, and sees clients enter “notional employment arrangements” solely to facilitate a superannuation contribution.

Super fund members must satisfy gainful employment work tests in order to contribute to super from age 65 to age 75.

ING also called for simplification of the preservation rules as the development of super over the years meant few members would still be affected by the preservation rules.

“Any rationalisation would be to split a person’s benefits into preserved and non-preserved components as at a particular date without the need to refer to those rules, which have little application for the vast majority of fund members,” ING said.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

GG

So shareholders lose a dividend plus have seen the erosion of value. Qantas decides to clawback remuneration from Alan ...

3 weeks 6 days ago
Denise Baker

This is why I left my last position. There was no interest in giving the client quality time, it was all about bumping ...

3 weeks 6 days ago
gonski

So the Hayne Royal Commission has left us with this. What a sad day for the financial planning industry. Clearly most ...

4 weeks ago

The decision whether to proceed with a $100 million settlement for members of the buyer of last resort class action against AMP has been decided in the Federal Court....

1 week 5 days ago

A former Brisbane financial adviser has been found guilty of 28 counts of fraud where his clients lost $5.9 million....

3 weeks 5 days ago

The Financial Advice Association Australia has addressed “pretty disturbing” instances where its financial adviser members have allegedly experienced “bullying” by produc...

2 weeks 6 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS