The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has called for consistency when comparing information about superannuation products, particularly around the treatment of investment goals and return targets, and asset allocation information.
The corporate regulator has asked for feedback around attaining consistency between the disclosure requirements by ASIC, and the data needed to be reported under the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) reporting standards.
The ASIC consultation paper addresses section 29QC of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993, which contains consistency requirements between APRA reporting standards and the information given by licensees of registrable superannuation entities (RSE licensees).
"The provision of inconsistent information can inhibit informed decision-making," ASIC Commissioner Greg Tanzer said.
"Given the compulsory nature of superannuation, it is appropriate that trustees do everything they reasonably can to ensure there is adequate transparency and to support improved comparability."
The industry has raised concerns around the inconsistency around return targets, where ASIC sees the return target of the MySuper product dashboard as the same as the investment return objective in the shorter product disclosure statement.
But feedback showed the industry sees these two items as quite different and unsuitable to merge the two requirements.
In terms of asset allocation, ASIC has the view that the asset class definitions in APRA's reporting standard would apply to the strategic asset allocation requirements in the shorter PDS.
"Industry had sought legal advice which suggested that there is no calculation involved in presenting strategic asset allocation information," the consultation paper said.
"Further, it was suggested by industry that the asset class definitions used in SRS 533.0 may not be appropriate for disclosure purposes, even assuming that a calculation is involved."
ASIC has asked for submissions until 13 March.
