![]() |
Forcing super funds to hold certain levels of capital reserves could stymie future mergers between funds with different reserve balances, according to managing director of Towers Watson Andrew Boal.
Speaking at the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia briefing in Melbourne last week, Boal suggested that dictating a compulsory level of capital reserves could become a stumbling block to future fund mergers as members of a fund with greater reserves try to prevent the other fund from gaining access to those reserves in case of investment loss.
“I can see this situation coming through in our industry, [that] if one fund has a reserve of 1.3 per cent of assets, and other fund has a reserve of 0.2 per cent of assets, the members [can say]: ‘If we merge, I don’t want those members to have access to my reserve’,” Boal said.
“So that can actually start to become a bit of a roadblock to mergers or complications down the track of how reserves get used, post-merger environment,” he added.
Such a situation had already arisen with corporate super funds, Boal said.
While he was in favour of the Cooper Review’s recommendations of risk reserves being established and being used by fund members, talking about a minimum and maximum level of reserves was “a little strange”, Boal said.
“Reserves are there to be built up, and when you have an incident you use them. So I can foresee situations where the reserve will be run back down to zero, and then you start again. That’s the nature of reserving,” he said.
Superannuation funds have posted another year of strong returns, but this time, the gains weren’t powered solely by Silicon Valley.
Australia’s $4.1 trillion superannuation system is doing more than funding retirements – it’s quietly fuelling the nation’s productivity, lifting GDP, and adding thousands to workers’ pay packets, according to new analysis from the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA).
Large superannuation accounts may need to find funds outside their accounts or take the extreme step of selling non-liquid assets under the proposed $3 million super tax legislation, according to new analysis from ANU.
Economists have been left scrambling to recalibrate after the Reserve Bank wrong-footed markets on Tuesday, holding the cash rate steady despite widespread expectations of a cut.