No reason for APRA to regulate SMSFs
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0fc30/0fc3022b1b4530ec653efa2e1a961d6bf953b154" alt="image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0fc30/0fc3022b1b4530ec653efa2e1a961d6bf953b154" alt="image"
Self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) should not be propelled under the jurisdiction of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and should remain within the remit of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), according to the Self-Managed Super Fund Professionals' Association (SPAA).
Reacting to claims by officials within the industry funds sector that SMSFs should be subject to the same oversight as APRA-regulated funds, SPAA chief executive Andrea Slattery said the ATO represented the right regulatory body to oversee the SMSF sector.
"The claim is that the SMSF sector is under-regulated; nothing could be further from the truth," she said.
Slattery pointed out that the ATO had always regulated the taxation of SMSFs and APRA-regulated funds, and had regulated the administration and operation of SMSFs since 1999.
She said that under the Labor government, the ATO had been handed prudential powers by APRA to regulate the auditors, actuaries and trustees of SMSFs, and that the ATO's powers included regulating fraud and theft - something which APRA could not do with respect to the Trio collapse.
"The fact remains that APRA does not have the resources to oversee nearly 500,000 SMSFs, with its audit program simply not structured to handle small funds," Slattery said.
"By contrast, the ATO has been able to build the resources and the expertise, which is why SMSFs were transferred to the ATO in 1999."
Recommended for you
Sequoia Financial Group has declined by five financial advisers in the past week, four of whom have opened up a new AFSL, according to Wealth Data.
Insignia Financial chief executive Scott Hartley has detailed whether the firm will be selecting an exclusive bidder for the second phase of due diligence as it awaits revised bids from three private equity players.
Insignia Financial has reported a statutory net loss after tax of $17 million in its first half results, although the firm has noted cost optimisation means this is an improvement from a $50 million loss last year.
With alternative funds being described as “impossible” for fund managers to target towards advisers without the support of BDMs for education, Money Management explores the evolving nature of the distribution role.