Blame lower caps, not property spruikers

property/funds-management/government-and-regulation/self-managed-superannuation-funds/SPAA/SMSFs/smsf-trustees/smsf-professionals/SMSF/government/chief-executive/financial-adviser/

2 October 2013
| By Staff |
image
image image
expand image

The Government's lowering of concessional contribution caps has had more to do with people opting for negative gearing outside of super than the siren call of property spruikers, according to SMSF Professionals' Association of Australia (SPAA) chief executive Andrea Slattery.

She said SPAA research had shown that the lower concessional caps had prompted the move to negative gearing outside of super, yet there had been little response from regulators and little discussion of the damage such moves were causing to Government revenue.

"It seems to us at SPAA that any train wreck will most likely occur there, and for one simple reason. "SMSF [self-managed superannuation funds] trustees, if they seek advice on any investment, require advice from a licensed financial adviser to assess whether the investment is appropriate to the circumstances of the fund and its members," Slattery said.

"Individuals don't require professional advice to consider their particular circumstances before they invest in geared property, suggesting these investments pose a higher risk compared with SMSFs, where far stricter protocols are in place."

In a column to SPAA members published this week, Slattery cited recent commentary by the regulators and the Reserve Bank suggesting that SMSFs were, potentially, a vehicle for speculative demand for residential property.

However she said that it would be wrong to suggest that property was an inappropriate investment for SMSFs.

"We have constantly warned that SMSFs must approach property, like all investments, armed with the best professional advice," Slattery said. "Property is not an inappropriate investment per se; but it must be appropriate to the fund and consider the member's circumstances, just like all investments."

She said that where SPAA strongly disagreed with regulators and critics of the sector was in the suggestion that SMSF trustees were "listening to the siren call of the property spruikers and gearing up to rush headlong into unsuitable residential property investments".

"The figures don't bear this out," Slattery said. "At June 30, property assets in SMSFs stood at $75 billion, of which $58 billion was mostly commercial; $17 billion was residential. With total assets at $495 billion, it means residential property comprises 3.4 per cent of all SMSF assets."

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

1 week 3 days ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

1 month ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month 1 week ago

AMP has settled on two court proceedings: one class action which affected superannuation members and a second regarding insurer policies. ...

3 days 9 hours ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

1 week 6 days ago

The inquiry into the collapse of Dixon Advisory and broader wealth management companies by the Senate economics references committee will not be re-adopted. ...

2 weeks 6 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo