The Federal Election may have less impact on super funds than usual if the effects of the Budget are anything to go by, as Treasurer Josh Frydenberg’s announcements two weeks ago went largely unnoticed by both markets and the superannuation industry.
Superannuation returns had not been heavily impacted by the Budget, as the market had already anticipated many of the tax and infrastructure spending measures. Furthermore, superannuation’s usual status as a political football in Budgets went unfulfilled and is unlikely to be a major election issue.
“The federal budget delivered no surprises either for markets or for the super industry,” SuperRatings executive director Kirby Rappell, said. “This is not a bad thing, because often the best thing a government can do is leave super alone.”
Rappell flagged however, that Labor’s proposed changes around contribution caps and imputation credits would be a focus of the election for the self-managed portion of the sector, as they would have a “significant impact” on SMSFs.
Rather that the election impacting retirees over the next few months, Rappell thought that the biggest impact would come from the combined effects of weakening share market performance and falling house prices.
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.