MySuper comparisons must exclude services: AIST

17 January 2012
| By Staff |

MySuper products should only be compared based on the net returns they deliver to members, says the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST).

In a submission to the Government on the recently announced Stronger Super changes, the AIST has argued ancillary services such as financial advice, insurance and online services should be completely excluded from the comparison of MySuper products.

The AIST denied that such services should form part of a member's financial interests, arguing that they "do not directly improve net returns".

"It would be an unsatisfactory outcome if the comparison model resulting from this requirement ended up looking like those currently used by superannuation ratings agencies," the submission said.

But at the same time, the AIST argued that beneficiaries should not have the right to pursue compensation (under the contravention of scale requirements) if their fund achieved lower net returns than another fund.

"A net annual return comparison is counterintuitive to the long-term nature of superannuation investment, and accordingly should not be a factor in creating a cause of action for individual fund members, of a potential class action," the submission said.

The AIST also called for further protections for responsible superannuation entities (RSEs) from the cancellation of a MySuper authorisation by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA).

"Cancellation of a MySuper authorisation (or an RSE licence) will result in lasting damage to a fund and the reputation of its directors, even if it is subsequently overturned," the submission said.

The AIST also recommended that the new concept of a 'prudent superannuation trustee' be abandoned, since "it appears to be higher and different from the 'prudent person of business' test". The submission referenced the separate 'office of superannuation trustee director' which was rejected in the Stronger Super consultation process (partly because it had no been tested in law).

Finally, the submission expressed some concerns about the new power granted to APRA to issue prudential standards for superannuation.

"The prudential standards making power is very wide, and could be used to circumvent parliamentary processes unless further protections and limitations are included in the legislation," the submission said.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

11 months ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

11 months 1 week ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

11 months 1 week ago

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 Co...

2 days 12 hours ago

Demand from institutional investors was the main driver of growth in Australia’s responsible investment (RI) market in 2023, as the industry continued to gain momentum....

2 days 12 hours ago

In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges....

2 days 13 hours ago