BGL Update

This has been a tumultuous year for BGL, our clients and the superannuation industry.

During the year, the government introduced another super early release scheme – this time in response to COVID-19.

I have asked our friends at mProjections to do a couple of calculations to demonstrate the impact of a withdrawal and how to engineer a higher retirement. Please check these out.

Example 1

Phillippa, 29, worked in the hospitality industry with 2 jobs, total income (pre Covid) of around $55,000pa, pre-tax. She is single and had built up a Super balance of $25,000.

Shortly after loosing one of those jobs, she withdrew $8,000 without thinking about the consequences to super. Her Super had been invested in a typical ‘Balanced’ Investment Option with 65% in growth assets.

Using the mProjections Report, Philippa moved her post-withdrawal balance to a High Growth Investment Option (85% in growth assets). She saw that, before withdrawal, she would have $55,194 pa annual retirement income for 25 years, but with a move to High-Growth – without additional contributions – she would enjoy a $57,415 projection. Most importantly, her upside for a considerable improvement in retirement spending would increase.

Example 2

Jonathan works as an electrician in the western suburbs of Sydney and had his hours reduced to 20 hours per week for 3 months. He decided to withdraw $8,500. Using figures in our Report, he saw how to increase his $79,747 tax-free pre-withdrawal retirement projection by moving the balance of his fund to a High Growth Investment Option and a consequent retirement income projection of $82,442.

He also noted the greater likelihood of upside. ‘Low’ here is 15% of assets in growth.

If you would like to prepare an mProjections report for your clients, check out their website.

BGL welcomes the release of the Rice Warner SMSF cost of operating an SMSF report prepared for the SMSF Association.

“It’s great to see a proper analysis of SMSF cost and return data” said BGL’s Managing Director, Ron Lesh. “And knowing the vast majority of the data came from BGL’s Simple Fund 360 clients makes me even more proud.”

“The report shows the cost of running an SMSF highlighting that larger balance SMSFs cost less to operate than any other type of superannuation fund or account” noted Lesh. “And for smaller balances, SMSFs are comparable with APRA regulated funds”

The report data was sourced from BGL’s Simple Fund 360 and Super Concepts SuperMate software. “It is great to see 2 industry software companies working with Rice Warner to provide the data required to prepare the report at no cost to the SMSFA” added Lesh. “It is unfortunate that not all industry software companies chose to participate”.

“The other data I also found fascinating was the table on Page 21 of the Report showing investment returns for the last 14 years “says Lesh. “From 2005 to 2018, for 9 of the 14 years returns shown in the table, SMSFs performed better than APRA regulated funds”

“Clearly this shows ASIC’s SMSFs are not for everyone flyer was absolute rubbish” stated Lesh. “I said this flyer was misleading and did not fairly represent the cost of running an SMSF. The Rice Warner report validates my statements and furthermore shows that SMSFs with a balance of less than $500,000 are clearly cost competitive with APRA funds dispelling statements made in the December 2018 Productivity Commission report”

BGL is dismayed at Treasury’s proposed 45 day SMSF accounts rule.

“It’s just dumb” said BGL’s Managing Director, Ron Lesh. “Why do SMSFs need to prepare their financial statements 45 days before their lodgement date? It just makes no sense”

In a draft amendment to the The Treasury Laws Amendment (Miscellaneous and Technical Amendments) Regulations 2020 it is proposed to insert a new regulation 8.02AA into the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 to require accounts and statements for SMSFs to be prepared at least 45 days before the annual return is required to be lodged.

“I am trying to understand why this is necessary or where this has come from” asked Lesh. “It will not improve SMSF reporting, it will not improve SMSF audits, it will not improve SMSF annual return lodgements – so why has it been proposed?”

“In fact, in my view it could do the opposite. It could put SMSF trustees in a position where they need to backdate accounts – for no reason or benefit” noted Lesh.

“The SMSF industry has clearly said this change is unnecessary and that it would simply be an additional burden on SMSF trustees, administrators and auditors” says Lesh. “I thought post COVID-19 we were trying to cut unnecessary red tape rather than add more regulations to an already incredibly over-regulated industry.”

“I hope Treasury is listening” stated Lesh. “I do not know who came up with this dumb idea, but one would suspect it was someone who has no experience in the real world. A clear statement from Treasury or the Government this change will be dropped is needed now before it causes more angst in the SMSF industry that has already suffered through a year of extreme stress.”