Add new comment

Submitted by Jim Daly on Thu, 08/23/2018 - 22:12

Is someone from the super industry, including Industry funds, able to explain why maintaining a percentage fee on 'large' (begging definition) accumulated super amounts, and on funds converted to private pensions, is justified. Does it take more business cost to transact a particular asset within the portfolio that has an investment of say, $35,000 compared to one which has the same asset invested at, for example, $3,500? Is this the elephant in the room? Why can't costs be capped? Are funds open to an accumulator or pensioner negotiating a change to his/her advantage with the super fund through, say, lowering the percentage, or establishing a capped amount?

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
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. ...

5 months ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

5 months 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 ...

5 months ago

The newly created role comes amid the fund’s ambitions to be a ‘merger partner of choice’ in the superannuation industry....

12 hours ago

Iress has issued an update denying the validity of “certain statements” made today by an alleged threat actor....

3 days 11 hours ago

The research house has offered a silver lining after super fund returns saw the end of a five-month streak last month....

4 days 11 hours ago