Restricting trustees from making certain investments not in members’ best interests

1 April 2021
| By Jassmyn |
image
image
expand image

The Your Future, Your Super (YFYS) bill’s provision of prohibiting or restricting trustees from making certain investments on behalf of members contradicts existing law and prudential standards, according to AustralianSuper.

The superannuation fund’s submission into the Senate Standing Committee on Economic’s YFYS legislation said the Superannuation Industry (Supervision Act) 1993 and prudential standards made under the Act dictated that the formulation of investment strategy and selection of specific investments was the sole responsibility of a fund’s trustee.

Also, Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) regulated super fund trustees already had a fiduciary duty to act in members’ best financial interests.

“This includes that trustees are responsible for determining an appropriate level of diversification for each investment strategy,” the submission said.

“The notion that excluding assets from a trustee’s investment universe will improve outcomes is flawed. Further, that such a decision would be made by Parliament via regulation, to apply to all trustees regardless of their investment strategy or members’ investment choices, is not in members’ interests.

“The legislation also does not provide for any transitional provisions to ensure members’ existing investments aren’t adversely impacted as a result of the implementation of the provisions.”

AustralianSuper noted the potential impacts of this provision were quite broad and examples included:

  • A restriction could be in direct conflict with the investment choices made by a member.
  • The provisions may contradict or constrain a trustee’s investment strategy for an investment option; and
  • This could result in the following outcomes:
    • The trustee being unable to invest in attractively priced assets that would help meet investment return objectives, denying members the chance of better returns;
    • The trustee being unable to effectively diversify the portfolio against risks, as required under existing law/prudential standards, exposing members to greater risks of loss; and
    • If existing assets are owned by funds that are subsequently prohibited, it could result in the forced sale of assets, which would also expose members to loss of capital.
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 17 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 17 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 18 hours ago