ASFA tells PC: Don’t dismiss insurance in super

4 May 2017
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) has again strongly questioned why the Productivity Commission (PC) has not appropriately included an assessment of insurance in its review of alternative default models.

In a submission responding to the PC’s draft report on alternative default models, ASFA said it rejected the PC’s draft finding that the assessment of ‘default’ products in all models should specifically exclude bundled insurance products and that bundled insurance is best dealt with as a “regulatory add‐on”.

ASFA said that, contrary to the views of in the draft PC report, superannuation funds had sought to use insurance as a means of differentiating themselves in the MySuper environment.

“…many funds have turned to improving their insurance offerings and adjusting a range of benefits and features (most commonly) to suit a like group of members. An example of innovation in insurance design is staggered total and permanent and Disability (TPD) benefits that promote rehabilitation and a return to work,” the submission said.

It said that in many cases, funds had been able to lessen their premiums at the direction of trustees – “who are constantly challenged to limit premia while providing valuable insurance benefits”.

“In the last quarter of 2016 alone, approximately 20 per cent of superannuation funds changed insurance rates or cover,” it said. “On average, cover per dollar of weekly premiums increased for members across all insurance types – death, TPD, and income protection.”

The submission said this highlighted that the insurance in superannuation market was continuing to adapt and sharpen its focus on pricing for risk in market segments.

“These characteristics demonstrate that a significant element of the competitive rivalry that exists between superannuation funds occurs because of differences in insurance benefits and features,” ASFA said. “Considering the mandate the commission has to develop models for a new formal competitive process, it is difficult to comprehend the exclusion of such a fundamentally competitive element.”

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

11 months ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

11 months 1 week ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

11 months 1 week ago

Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Co...

1 day 23 hours ago

Demand from institutional investors was the main driver of growth in Australia’s responsible investment (RI) market in 2023, as the industry continued to gain momentum....

1 day 23 hours ago

In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges....

2 days ago