Superannuation Australia
Australia Superannuation News and Information resource about Superannuation Funds in Australia.
Monday, March 16, 2015
Mortgaging our children’s future: Aussie ticking time bomb sparks fears should new GFC hit
AUSTRALIAN households are sitting on a ticking time bomb of debt, exposing the economy to risks in the event of another financial crisis, according to new analysis.
The Australian reports household debt in Australia is equal to 130 per cent of GDP, compared with an average across the advanced world of 78 per cent, according to Barclays chief economist Kieran Davies.
Household debt was at 116 per cent of GDP before the global financial crisis and held steady until 2013, when the property boom set it rising again.
Mr Davies said Australia’s debt levels were rising when those of other countries were falling, and the predicted rate cuts were likely to push borrowing even higher.
Reserve Bank governor Glenn Stevens warned of the dangers of taking on excessive debt last year, saying “we would surely be asking for trouble if we see a big step up from where we are”.
“The tricky thing for the Reserve Bank is that promoting leverage is the key channel for the transmission of lower interest rates through to the rest of the economy,” Mr Davies said.
The high popularity of real estate investment in Australia compared with other countries is being driven by the availability of negative gearing tax concessions and favourable capital gains tax treatment.
The level of household debt is higher now than at any other time in Australia’s history, with records going back to the 1850s. The level of bank lending as a share of GDP is now more than double the share of the previous peak, which was during the 1890s land boom.
Sunday, March 8, 2015
Using Super to Buy First Home a 'Pressing National Issue' Says REIA
Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey appears to have taken the real estate industry lobby group's advice in suggesting people should be able to use their superannuation to buy their first homes, as the peak superannuation body urged caution for such an approach.
The Real Estate Institute of Australia outlined the radical idea in its budget submission to Mr Hockey last month, with the treasurer saying Australians ought to start thinking seriously about the way in which their super savings can be used in the future because people were working and living for longer.
"We are prepared to look at a diverse range of proposals to help young Australians buy their first home," Mr Hockey said, suggesting that super could be used for a deposit on a first home or job retraining.
His comments were quickly criticised by Labor and some economists, but REIA chief executive Amanda Lynch said using super to help pay for a first home could make housing more affordable and build retirement savings.
"We believe that owning a home is the biggest generator of long-term financial security for Australians and the earlier you can access the housing market, the more secure your retirement will be because most Australians aspire to have paid of their home before they retire," Ms Lynch said.
Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen rejected the suggestion, saying it would have the opposite effect.
"[The] plan would have the likely effect of not only undermining retirement incomes but also driving housing prices up further and making it harder for first-home buyers," he said.
Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia chief executive Pauline Vamos said the plan would benefit the rich far more than the poor.
"There are significant equity issues when it comes to allowing the release of concessionally taxed superannuation contributions for home equity," she said, referring to higher income earners paying 45 cents in the dollar in income tax but only 15 cents in the dollar on superannuation contributions.
They would be able use concessionally taxed super money to buy a house and then top up their super, again at a low tax rate.
"There significant equity issues when it comes to allowing the release of concessionally taxed superannuation contributions for home equity," she said.
But Ms Lynch stood by the proposal.
"The fact about buying a house is that you are actually saving all that equity and the compounding interest will be beneficial. To say that investing in superannuation, which is mainly skewed towards shares, is a safe proposition doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
"In the years since the GFC we have actually seen super being more of a financial risk than previously and a lot of people close to retirement have found their super balances have been dwindling."
super, superannuation
super australia,
super news,
superannuation australia,
superannuation news
Australia
Sydney NSW, Australia
Monday, August 25, 2014
How Almost 300,000 SMSFs Avoid Paying Income Tax
Only a fraction of Australia's half-a-million self-managed superannuation funds pay any income tax, experts say, because of generous super concessions and franking credits that are undermining the federal budget.
Tax Office statistics show almost 300,000 self-managed superannuation funds eliminated or reduced their tax bills through exemptions on super and $2.5 billion in franking credits in 2011-12.
These are the most recent records available, although experts say the surge in dividend payments since then has further reduced the small amounts of tax paid by these funds, which are often the primary income of wealthy retirees.
At the time, 424,360 funds generated gross taxable income of $32.9 billion. About $15 billion of that was entirely exempt from income tax because the funds were in the pension phase, which doesn't incur income tax.
Self-managed funds contribute little to the tax system – because about half of the funds' assets are already in the pension phase, Tria Investment Partners principal Andrew Baker said. Also, most self-managed funds receive franked dividends, which cuts the tax bill of many other funds to zero.
"It's a problem isn't it?" Mr Baker said. "It's unlikely SMSFs are ever going to pay a substantial amount of tax as a segment."
The loss of revenue will rise because of an ageing population shifting assets into pension phase and the greater payment of dividends, he said.
Pressure is growing to focus on superannuation tax breaks in the Coalition's planned review of the taxation system. The government is desperate to find ways to reduce the budget deficit.
There have been frequent calls for the government to stop the concessions. The head of the Financial System Inquiry, David Murray, recently suggested Australia's dividend imputation system, which SMSFs are also capitalising on, needed to be looked at.
The roughly 1 million Australians with investments in self-managed super funds argue that having spent their careers paying income tax and following the rules they shouldn't be penalised for saving for retirement.
"Super funds, including SMSFs, are taxpayers, and franking credits should be available to all taxpayers," SMSF Professionals' Association of Australia's technical and professional standards director Graeme Colley said.
Experts say it would be better to tax the earnings of superannuation funds in pension phase at 15 per cent, rather than try to get rid of franking credits, which could see share prices plummet.
A fundamental change
Australia and New Zealand are now the only two developed countries that have full imputation of dividends.
Mr Baker said scrapping Australia's dividend imputation system, would involve "a fundamental change to the taxation system" that would be hard to implement. He said a better way to address the problem was a 15 per cent earnings tax for those in the pension stage. Another option was to copy the United States' minimum taxation rate, "that in short says everybody pays an amount of tax".
Ending franking credits could trigger a political backlash from investors and "would be reintroducing double taxation, so there are enormous problems with it", Mr Baker said.
"The UK did a similar thing 15 years ago, denying pension funds franking credits, and they got away with it . . . despite the protest." He said a tax rate on the pension phase would also stop gearing by SMSFs.
Tax Office data shows SMSFs have an interest expense bill of about $375 million a year, but Mr Baker said that's just the tip of the iceberg.
The data comes from SMSF tax returns, but it is common for SMSFs to achieve gearing outcomes by investing in private property trusts. He estimated the overall interest expense for the sector would be about $500 million annually.
Grattan Institute chief executive John Daley said any change to dividend imputation would have to be part of a package that also reduced the company tax rate and personal tax rates.
He said the difficulty with scrapping imputation was that it would "create incentives for companies to hoard capital rather than returning it to shareholders, which may reduce the efficiency of investment decisions".
Instead, the government should wind back superannuation tax breaks for the old and wealthy. "The easiest way to do this would be to tax the income and capital earnings of super funds in pension phase at 15 per cent," Mr Daley said. "These funds would then pay tax on earnings at the same rate as the super funds of those aged under 60."
He said there was no reason to grandfather this change.
"Anyone who is in pension phase can withdraw the entirety of their super fund tomorrow, and if they think they can find an investment on which they will pay less than 15 per cent tax, good luck to them," Mr Daley said.
"I'm guessing that there will be very few withdrawals."
'It ain't going to happen'
At the end of 2012, the average SMSF had $920,000 (typically funds are made up of more than one person: couples).
According to a 2012 ASX study, about 52 per cent of SMSFs directly hold Australian shares. Tax Office data shows of the $550 billion invested in SMSFs, $180 billion is directly invested in Australian-listed shares, which is already higher than the average of APRA-regulated funds.
Leading economist Saul Eslake said he was "undecided" about whether dividend imputation should be scrapped, although he had previously mentioned it is a costly tax break that the wealthy use to lower their marginal tax rates.
He said that like negative gearing, there are now so many who benefit from franking credits – SMSFs, investors and members of larger public or industry super funds – that "no matter what the intellectual merits of getting rid of it, it ain't going to happen for political reasons".
"Almost certainly, the benefits of franking credits are capitalised into the share prices of companies that have high franked dividend yields, so it seems almost inevitable that abolishing dividend imputation would cause share prices to fall, unless there were an equivalent reduction in the company tax rate," Mr Eslake said.
David Murray said in his review of the financial sector the imputation system – first introduced in 1987 and estimated to cost about $20 billion a year – had created a bias where individuals and super funds preferred shares and this had hindered the growth of the domestic corporate bond market.
PwC's submission to the Murray inquiry said "careful consideration should be given to whether there would be benefits to be obtained from modifications to the imputation system".
super, superannuation
australia super news,
smsf australia,
smsf income tax,
super australia,
superannuation australia
Australia
Melbourne VIC, Australia
Sunday, September 9, 2012
AustralianSuper to Manage Equity In-house
The Australian has reported that AustralianSuper, Australia's largest industry superfund, is planning to manage some of its $15 billion of Australian equity investments, which are currently managed externally.
AustralianSuper head of equities, Innes McKeand told The Australian that the fund was 'in the process of putting a platform in place' to oversee some of its Australian equity investments.
The move would be a blow to the funds management industry which is already struggling with low volumes, soft equity markets and fund outflows.
The moves come as active equities managers face pressure to perform in the face of a shrinking number of investment mandates, driven by super fund mergers and a shift to other asset classes.
Mr McKeand told The Australian that while AustralianSuper would continue to award mandates to external managers, its internal platform was being built 'to cope with a significant amount of funds' to be run by fewer than 10 fund managers.
It is thought that other funds such as UniSuper and Telstra Super are considering a similar move due to their build-up of an in-house stock-picking team.
super, superannuation
australia super news,
australia superannuation,
australian super,
australiansuper,
best super fund australia,
best super provider,
super australia,
super news australia
Australia
Melbourne VIC, Australia
Saturday, August 18, 2012
Home Owners Forced to Take Super - Australia Mortgage
HOME owners have raided their superannuation funds of a record $100 million in last-ditch bids to avoid foreclosure, new government figures have shown.
The surge in mortgage-holders seeking emergency access to their savings has alarmed housing and social welfare groups, who warn many families are still struggling to meet loan repayments despite steep cuts in the interest rate
With distressed owners receiving an average of $15,250 each, there are also concerns some super accounts could be drained of more than a third of their value. The number of households in serious financial trouble has worsened despite mortgage lending rates falling about 1 per cent in the past six months and nearly 3 per cent since their peak in mid-2008.
Figures obtained by The Sun-Herald showed 6500 home owners were given emergency access to their super last financial year to prevent an imminent foreclosure.
A Commonwealth Department of Human Services report found $99.38 million was released, up 25 per cent on 2010-11 and well above the disbursements in the aftermath of the global financial crisis.
It also marks the third year in a row that the number of people applying for, and being granted access to, their nest-egg has increased.
A campaign manager for Australians for Affordable Housing, Sarah Toohey, said years of house price growth had seen debt balloon and forced households to devote an unsustainable amount of income to meeting mortgage repayments.
''It's alarming and it shows that housing affordability is about more than just interest rates,'' she said.
''The sheer size of what people have to borrow to get into the housing market now really puts household finances under strain.'
Monday, August 13, 2012
Transparency Needed on Fees - Members Charged Too Much By Managers (Superannuation Australia)
While the Australian super industry has grown in scale, this has not translated into lower fees for members.
Despite the amazing growth of scale in Australia's superannuation industry, fees have grown instead of dropping in recent years and members should demand transparency from funds, a financial adviser has said.
Custom Wealth Solutions chief analyst Chris Appleyard said "typically, when a company increases its production or its supply of services, it achieves an economy of scale and can reduce the costs of doing business".
"Superannuation funds do not seem to have passed on these savings to fund members," Appleyard said.
"Although nobody likes to pay superannuation management fees, one may think they are just the price of doing business; a necessary evil one cannot avoid. Many super managers count on that attitude and are overcharging super members."
The local superannuation market has the fastest-growing pension sector in the world, having grown 17 per cent in the past 10 years. The $1.3-trillion business was more than triple the United States retirement market.
"However, despite this amazing growth in productivity, members and assets invested, super fees have grown instead of dropped in recent years. Consumers may think that paying fees is unavoidable if they want the benefits of a managed superannuation fund. They may also conclude that 1 per cent here or there won't make much of a difference in the long run. Unfortunately, they would be completely wrong," Appleyard said.
Not all super funds charged the same management fees, with the average charge being 1.3 per cent, according to super industry researcher SuperRatings.
"However, some funds will charge up to 4 per cent of the fund's assets in fees," Appleyard said.
"That's a huge difference. When it comes to super funds, just half of a point difference can mean $50,000 less at retirement."
The Australian Taxation Office's self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) overview for 2009/10 said the estimated average operating expense ratio of SMSFs fell from 0.69 per cent to 0.59 per cent and 0.54 per cent over the years ended 30 June 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively.
Most SMSFs had an estimated operating expense ratio of less than 1 per cent (64.7 per cent of SMSFs in 2010). The highest proportion (almost 38 per cent in 2010) had an estimated operating expense ratio of 0.25 per cent or less.
"Nevertheless, self-managed super funds do require a substantial investment in time and resources that could make them prohibitively expensive for members with small super fund balances," Appleyard said.
Often managers would charge fees for services that clients either did not need or did not know about. "It is crucial that super investors understand what services they are receiving and what it costs them or else you can end up paying for services you are not aware of and don't use," Appleyard said.
People should consider the cost and availability of insurance, the fees super funds charged, and their expected retirement age before choosing a super fund. For some people, a competitive industry or government super fund was a good fit, while others benefited from more flexible instruments, such as master trusts and SMSFs.
Despite the amazing growth of scale in Australia's superannuation industry, fees have grown instead of dropping in recent years and members should demand transparency from funds, a financial adviser has said.
Custom Wealth Solutions chief analyst Chris Appleyard said "typically, when a company increases its production or its supply of services, it achieves an economy of scale and can reduce the costs of doing business".
"Superannuation funds do not seem to have passed on these savings to fund members," Appleyard said.
"Although nobody likes to pay superannuation management fees, one may think they are just the price of doing business; a necessary evil one cannot avoid. Many super managers count on that attitude and are overcharging super members."
The local superannuation market has the fastest-growing pension sector in the world, having grown 17 per cent in the past 10 years. The $1.3-trillion business was more than triple the United States retirement market.
"However, despite this amazing growth in productivity, members and assets invested, super fees have grown instead of dropped in recent years. Consumers may think that paying fees is unavoidable if they want the benefits of a managed superannuation fund. They may also conclude that 1 per cent here or there won't make much of a difference in the long run. Unfortunately, they would be completely wrong," Appleyard said.
Not all super funds charged the same management fees, with the average charge being 1.3 per cent, according to super industry researcher SuperRatings.
"However, some funds will charge up to 4 per cent of the fund's assets in fees," Appleyard said.
"That's a huge difference. When it comes to super funds, just half of a point difference can mean $50,000 less at retirement."
The Australian Taxation Office's self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) overview for 2009/10 said the estimated average operating expense ratio of SMSFs fell from 0.69 per cent to 0.59 per cent and 0.54 per cent over the years ended 30 June 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively.
Most SMSFs had an estimated operating expense ratio of less than 1 per cent (64.7 per cent of SMSFs in 2010). The highest proportion (almost 38 per cent in 2010) had an estimated operating expense ratio of 0.25 per cent or less.
"Nevertheless, self-managed super funds do require a substantial investment in time and resources that could make them prohibitively expensive for members with small super fund balances," Appleyard said.
Often managers would charge fees for services that clients either did not need or did not know about. "It is crucial that super investors understand what services they are receiving and what it costs them or else you can end up paying for services you are not aware of and don't use," Appleyard said.
People should consider the cost and availability of insurance, the fees super funds charged, and their expected retirement age before choosing a super fund. For some people, a competitive industry or government super fund was a good fit, while others benefited from more flexible instruments, such as master trusts and SMSFs.
super, superannuation
australia super news,
australia superannuation,
super news australia,
superannuation australia
Australia
Vernon Cir, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Reviews of Hostplus by users - Superannuation Australia
Below are some user reviews and opinions of Hostplus offered by regular Australians who have had there money in Hostplus.
May 20th, 2010
Pros: Every hospitality company works with it, easy to compile different jobs' supers.
Cons: Watch out for the insurances, this guys are ripping you off! They put the insurance as default, and charge it to everyone, no form to cancel the insurance on their brochures; of course there's a form to increase your insurance. I've lost almost half of my money (I only work 15hrs per week) between insurance and fees! A lot of bureaucracy to get rid of the insurance!
Overall: They are ripping you off, read EVERYTHING, reject what you don't like and be carfeul with the fees they charge (they are high!)
1 out of 5
Reviewer: rodrigo
Member since: May 20, 2010
May 17th, 2009
Pros: A good fund if you were able to pick & choose your own portfolio.
Cons: They have a lot of fees that they try to cover.
Overall: Originally I thought this was a good fund when I entered when I was employed by the hospitality industry & I signed over my other super fund into Hostplus. But after a while I realised that I had made a mistake, yes it has come across as one of the best funds but it doesn't seem to be as good as it could have been by taking too many fees, some of these companies are getting very greedy.
2 out of 5
Reviewer: EileenGarraway
Member since: May 14, 2009
April 21st, 2009
Pros: average
Cons: some fees (that go to Hostplus) are taken out of investment returns, so its not as cheap as they make out
Overall: average fund, not all its cracked up so to be take a look at the fine print in the PDS
1 out of 5
Reviewer: Guest
Pros: As above, member fund, profits to members etc, great returns (except 08 of course, looking like an `8% loss)
Cons: BEWARE! The insurance situation is a minefield and very "cloak and dagger". My statements clearly advise no insurance cover and no deductions for insurance(I no longer work in hospitality), but when I call and ask they tell me I am paying insurance and dont like to go into detais, they send you the insurance booklet which you need a PhD to wade through, not nice.
Overall: On the balance, average. Great choices, very poor insurance situation that is possibly ripping off members without them knowing about it.
3 out of 5
Reviewer: scotty71
Member since: Aug 18, 2008
June 30th, 2008
Pros: This is an "Industry Super Fund" which means that it is non profit and they don't pay commissions to brokers. There is a lot of choice within the fund. I picked the fund that put all of my money into international shares. This is not for everyone but I really liked the fact that I had a choice of how my money is being invested.
Cons: They are slow to send out forms. The life insurance that is offered as part of the fund is impossible to understand. I wanted to get life insurance but it was far too complicated.
Overall: I have been happy with host especially given that all of the profit goes back to members. In particular, I chose them because of the options for how my super is invested. They could be better at sending out forms but I have only needed forms once so it was not too much of an issue.
4 out of 5
Reviewer: gmcopi
Member since: Jun 30, 2008
October 29th, 2007
Pros: great return (as at now Oct 07), low fees, easy admin
Cons: none so far
Overall: great fund with low fees easy to deal with admin and quick to get a job done. Has been in the top 5 performers for the last five years (as at Oct 07) averaging 15% return in the capital growth choice. Very happy to see my money grow. Hope it continues only time will tell. Also the capital stable account has been performing at over 10% for the last few years as well. So overall I highly recommend the fund for anyone who wants a simple superannaution fund to deal with and good performance.
4 out of 5
Reviewer: dijoca
Member since: Sep 17, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)