Requirements for scaled and intra-fund advice need to be reviewed to determine whether modification of further guidance is needed to facilitate the provision of comprehensive income products in retirement (CIPRs), according to a committee.
The Committee for Sustainable Retirement Incomes (CSRI) said pre-retirees no later than age 50 would need guidance around CIPRs.
CSRI’s latest policy engagement report said while most retirees preferred to not rely on expensive personal financial planning advice, they needed iterative engagement as they considered when they intended to retire, or transitioned to retirement, and whether to vary their voluntary contributions to achieve their target retirement income.
It said strategies to increase the role of financial advice in relation to retirees managing their super balances included:
CSRI said the challenges for CIPRs were not only about product design but also the obligations of trustees, and protections for trustees, the regulatory retirements for the product offers, and the degree of compulsion on funds to offer them.
“The process will only work well if tax and transfer settings in retirement complement the arrangements for superannuation in the accumulation phase, and are sufficiently stable for the purposes of planning and for decision-making at retirement,” the report said.
“The superannuation funds are the central players in this, but it is vital that the consumer voice is heard and is given first priority. The aim has to be to make our defined contributions based system look much more like a defined benefit scheme.”
APRA’s latest data has revealed that superannuation funds spent $1.3 billion on advice fees, with the vast majority sent to external financial advisers.
Cbus Super has unveiled Advice Essentials Plus, a new service offering affordable financial advice to both members and their partners.
The fund has launched a new tool to help deliver personalised financial education and digital personal advice to eligible members.
The QAR lead reviewer has told a Senate committee that the government’s demands of super funds conflict with their original purpose.