Inquiries around non-concessional contribution caps have doubled in the last month, according to BT Financial Group.
BT's advice technical team found the leading queries for the September 2016 quarter were non-concessional contribution caps, Centrelink pension changes from 1 January 2017, and superannuation pension changes from 1 July 2017.
BT head of financial literacy and advocacy, Bryan Ashenden, said advisers were looking to know whether their clients would be affected by the changes, how much they could contribute this year and next, and how the transitional arrangements would work where a client had triggered, but not yet fully used their non-concessional contributions under the bring-forward provisions.
Ashenden said pension change including the rebalancing of assets test limits, are the second most topical query.
"The reality is that many clients will likely see some change in their pension entitlements. Advisers are acutely aware of this and quite rightly so. We're seeing advisers getting on the front foot and taking the lead to ensure a ‘no surprises' approach with their clients," he said.
"We know having those discussions earlier on can make a big difference to clients feeling comfortable with any legislative change.
"It's important to note that there is a silver lining. If there are changes to your client's pension, they will likely be eligible for a low income care card, and if they're of retirement age, they will receive the commonwealth seniors health card."
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.