The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has approved IOOF Holdings Ltd and Australian Wealth Management Limited (a wholly owned subsidiary of IOOF Holdings Ltd) application to hold a controlling stake in OnePath Custodians Pty Limited and Oasis Fund Management Limited.
OnePath and Oasis are currently owned by Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ).
In an announcement, APRA said under sector 29HD of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act) it had no reason to believe that, because of IOOF’s controlling stake in OnePath or Oasis, the registrable superannuation entity (RSE) licensees may be unable to satisfy one or more of the trustee’s obligations contained in a covenant set out in the SIS Act.
“APRA’s decision recognises IOOF’s progress in strengthening governance structures and management of conflicts within its existing RSE licensees, in response to additional licence conditions imposed by APRA in December 2018,” it said.
APRA noted that IOOF had:
It said these changes provided the necessary framework for IOOF RSE licensees to operate independently within the IOOF group.
“They also enhance the RSE licensees’ ability to comply with their fiduciary obligations, including to always act in the best interests of their members,” APRA said.
“APRA will maintain close supervisory attention on IOOF to encourage a culture of ongoing improvement in its governance and business operations, consistent with APRA’s industry-wide focus on improving outcomes for superannuation members.”
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 Coalition, which has pledged to reverse any changes if it wins next year’s election.
In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges.
Chant West analysis suggests super could be well placed to deliver a double-digit result by the end of the calendar year.
Specific valuation decisions made by the $88 billion fund at the beginning of the pandemic were “not adequate for the deteriorating market conditions”, according to the prudential regulator.