Call for SuperStream costs to include employers and SMSFs

superannuation funds association of superannuation funds self-managed superannuation funds ATO SMSFs ASFA APRA superannuation industry treasury federal government australian taxation office government

31 August 2012
| By Staff |
image
image
expand image

The superannuation industry is continuing to complain that the Federal Government has unjustly imposed the developmental costs of its new SuperStream arrangements on superannuation funds, when other sectors will also benefit.

The industry's continuing discontent at the Government's approach is revealed in a new submission to Treasury by the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA), in which it points to other beneficiaries including major employers, self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) and government departments, but they are not being asked to carry any of the cost.

"We note that the cost of providing these enabling services will be met through the SuperStream Levy which is being imposed on all Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) regulated superannuation funds," the submission said.

"In this context, ASFA would like to raise its concerns about the lack of transparency over the actual costs of the various components of SuperStream and the allocation of all of the costs to APRA regulated funds," the submission said.

It said that the most amount of detail APRA-regulated funds have been able to obtain is contained in an Australian Taxation Office document on SuperStream that states that provision of the validation services will cost $60 million ($57 million in IT costs and $3 million in non-IT costs).

"ASFA considers that this level of detail is insufficient to enable the industry, which is paying for the delivery of two separate services, to understand where the actual costs lie," the submission said.

"Separately we note that one of the enabling services will be used to enable employers to check the personal information provided to them by employees," it said.

"ASFA would argue that, whilst this service will assist superannuation funds, it will also assist employers and deliver benefits to the Government with respect to the accuracy of tax-related employment information."

The submission said that, in this context, "ASFA questions the reasoning behind the totality of the development costs being levied against APRA-regulated superannuation funds with no component being recovered from employers and self-managed superannuation funds or carried by the Commonwealth despite those parties benefiting from the service".

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

3 weeks 2 days ago

This verdict highlights something deeply wrong and rotten at the heart of the FSCP. We are witnessing a heavy-handed, op...

4 weeks ago

Interesting. Would be good to know the details of the StrategyOne deal....

1 month ago

Insignia Financial has confirmed it is considering a preliminary non-binding proposal received from a US private equity giant to acquire the firm. ...

1 week ago

Six of the seven listed financial advice licensees have reported positive share price growth in 2024, with AMP and Insignia successfully reversing earlier losses. ...

2 days 22 hours ago

Specialist wealth platform provider Mason Stevens has become the latest target of an acquisition as it enters a binding agreement with a leading Sydney-based private equi...

2 days 2 hours ago