A lack of knowledge on superannuation laws is one of the biggest issues the tax office has found when reviewing the performance of self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) auditors.
This was one of eight issues the Australian Tax Office found that also included auditor independence, insufficient documentation, and insufficient evaluation of evidence obtained to show the auditor appropriately formed an opinion on the fund’s compliance with the relevant super laws.
It noted that it would refer an SMSF auditor to the corporate watchdog if they had failed to perform their duties under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA), had breached a provision of the SISA or Superannuation Industry (Supervision Regulations 1994 (SISR), or was not “fit and proper” to be an approved SMSF auditor.
One of the common areas where auditors failed to obtain sufficient evident to support their opinion were:
Unsigned documentation was also an issue including for trustee representation letters, engagement letters, management letters, and financial statements in particular.
The ATO also noted other issues were:
The impact of identity theft and its threat to superannuation savings were highlighted in a case that went before the Federal Court at the end of 2023.
A recent NSW Supreme Court decision is an important reminder that while super funds may be subject to restrictive superannuation and tax laws, in essence they are still a trust and subject to equitable and common law claims, says a legal expert.
New research from the University of Adelaide has found SMSFs outperformed APRA funds by more than 4 per cent in 2021–22.
The SMSF Association has made a number of policy recommendations for the superannuation sector in its pre-budget submission to the government.