IOOF has revealed the degree to which the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) will have the ultimate say on whether it finally acquires the superannuation businesses of ANZ.
The company revealed in its results announcement to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) this week that recent amendments to the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act (SIS Act) had effectively given APRA an approval power of the controversial transaction.
The status of IOOF’s acquisition of the OnePath Pensions and Investments Business has been up in the air since issues were raised during the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services industry.
The company told shareholders this week that final completion of the acquisition remained conditional on the receipt of notices from OnePath Custodians and ANZ that each had no objection to the transaction proceeding.
“IOOF continues to work cooperatively with OPC and ANZ to provide the information and resources necessary to facilitate those notices being given,” it said.
However, it then went on to state: “From 5 July, 2019, recent amendments to the SIS Act came into force, giving APRA an approval power in respect of the acquisition of controlling stakes in Registrable Superannuation Entity licensees. As such, receipt of an approval from APRA is now also a condition of completion of the Pensions and Investments acquisition.”
The announcement said IOOF was well advanced in preparation and submission of material to APRA “for due consideration of the matter”.
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.