The Institute of Actuaries has sought to place the appropriateness of self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) within the scope of the Government's Financial Systems Review (FSR).
In a detailed submission dealing with the proposed terms of reference for the FSR, the Institute of Actuaries suggested the Inquiry "could investigate the extent to which the financial system supports, encourages and is effective in the pre-planning and build-up of savings or wealth to meet foreseeable long-term needs of individuals and Australian society overall".
It said considerations in this area could include development of a market for transferring longevity risk, sustainability of retirement lump sum payment preferences, appropriateness of SMSFs, and alignment of superannuation tax incentives with community needs.
The submission also raised the question of the manner in which the various areas of the financial services industry are regulated in circumstances where major funds are regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) while SMSFs are regulated by the Australian Taxation Office.
"Where appropriate we believe it is important to review the harmonisation of regulation between different types of manufacturers such as banks, wealth managers, retail insurers, industry funds, and SMSFs," it said.
"This should also extend to different parts of the supply chain to ensure that there are at least no material regulatory misalignments between customers, distributors, manufacturers and broader stakeholders such as regulators and government," the submission said.
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.