Australian Taxation Office (ATO) Deputy Commissioner, James O’Halloran, has warned that compensation payments from superannuation funds in the fallout of the Banking Royal Commission could have both tax and super implications.
At a presentation at KPMG’s quarterly superannuation sessions this week, O’Halloran said that the ATO was finalising its views on the implications of remediation, with targeted consultation to start shortly.
He said that there were various scenarios that had arisen in remediation talks from industry practices, which the Association of Super Funds of Australia (ASFA), the Financial Services Council (FSC) and KPMG were assisting the ATO to understand.
The ATO had so far received around 30 requests for advice from individuals, advisers and funds about their individual circumstances, which O’Halloran said had helped the organisation understand the various permutations that existed.
The Deputy Commissioner also said that it was working with other regulators on the remediation aspect: “Recognising the intersection with other regulatory requirements underpinning remediation, we’ve more recently engaged with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) to understand that framework and ensure we’re providing consistent guidance to industry.”
O’Halloran said that the ATO would publish its position on remediation implications across both tax and super once the consultation period was finished.
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.