Nearly three-quarters of trustees and executives working in the superannuation industry were opposed to significant changes being made to superannuation tax and policy settings, according to a survey conducted by Super Review at the Conference of Major Superannuation Funds (CMSF) 2013.
The survey is significant because it was conducted little more than a fortnight before the changes announced last Friday by the Treasurer, Wayne Swan and the Minister for Financial Services, Bill Shorten and reflects the attitudes of most industry fund trustees and executives.
Asked whether changing the superannuation tax settings was advisable, 72.4 per cent of respondents to the survey answered ‘no' with just 23.1 per cent of respondents saying it would be appropriate.
However, the respondents were much more evenly divided on the issue of targeting upper income earners, with 45.6 per cent of respondents in favour while 52.8 per cent thought it would be a bad idea.
The survey also showed that most of those in the superannuation industry believed only those on salaries over $200,000 a year should be counted as upper income earners.
When defining an upper income earner, 36.2 per cent of respondents nominated $200,000 to $250,000 a year, while 38.4 per cent nominated over $250,000 a year.
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.