Poor advice identified behind some low-balance SMSFs

compliance financial planning SMSFs ASIC investors australian securities and investments commission

2 September 2013
| By Staff |
image
image
expand image

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC's) so-called Self Managed Superannuation Fund (SMSF) Taskforce has revealed that a targeted examination of SMSFs with member balances of $150,000 or less entailed only one piece of advice which was graded as "good".

This disturbing outcome has been revealed by ASIC commissioner Greg Tanzer in an address to the Tax Institute last week in which he said the taskforce had reviewed over 100 investor files relating to the establishment of an SMSF, the majority of which had a fund balance of $150,000 or less and included features such as older members, members with a low income, and borrowing or investment in a single asset class such as real property.

Tanzer said the taskforce then rated the personal advice involved as being "good, adequate or poor".

"Overall, we concluded that the majority of investors in the sample reviewed received adequate advice," he said. "We graded one piece of advice as good."

While pointing out the factors which contributed to the provision of good advice, Tanzer said the taskforce had identified pockets of poor advice, adding that "much of this advice involved recommendations that investors set up an SMSF to gear into real property".

"Where this advice was inappropriate for the individual investors, ASIC has been following up and taking regulatory action," he said.

"Through our file reviews, we found that there is room for significant improvement in aspects of the SMSF advice-giving process. Where we found problems with the advice, it tended to be in the following areas:

* the advice was not sufficiently tailored

* replacement product disclosure was absent or inadequate

* insurance recommendations were absent or inadequate

* an inappropriate single asset class was provided to investors

* suitable alternatives to an SMSF were not considered

* there was inadequate consideration of the investor's long-term retirement planning objectives.

"Notably, we also found that investors were not warned about the very real risk of not having access to a statutory compensation scheme in the event of theft or fraud. Going forward, this will be an area of focus for us. We expect to see advisers warning investors about this risk," Tanzer 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 ...

4 weeks 2 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 ...

1 month ago
gonski

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

1 month 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....

2 weeks 2 days ago

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

3 weeks 3 days ago

ASIC has released the percentage of candidates who passed its August financial advice exam with the volume dropping to the lowest since November 2022....

2 weeks 2 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS