POWERED BY MOMENTUM MEDIA
Industry levies lack transparency
The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) has called for a thorough review of the supervisory levy determination process.
It said due to the length of time in setting up the parameters of the levy and the lack of transparency, it was reasonable that a review be undertaken.
ASFA suggested it could be performed by the Productivity Commission to ascertain the basis for levy determination and the underlying methodology used.
RSE licensees would pay over $180 million this year in supervisory levies, representing an increase of $134 million over last year’s levies.
ASFA said given the money could otherwise have been attributed to member accounts, it was critical that all agencies that received the levy were accountable for the costs and expenditure they incurred.
It was important a review determined that the costs incurred were justifiable, that there was transparency and accountability with respect to the cost of activities undertaken, and that the supervisory levy methodology was appropriate.
Funding agencies through levies represented a moral hazard, according to ASFA, in that the party which provided the funding had no control over the resourcing decisions made by the agency. It meant agencies could be relatively unconstrained as to the approach they took, the scope and size of projects and the costs they incurred as a result, according to ASFA.
The Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) said it was concerned that the Cost Recovery Guidelines (CRG) had not been applied to the financial services levies and that a Cost Recovery Impact Statement (CRIS) had not been prepared.
It said it created a lack of transparency which restricted AIST’s opinion on the appropriateness of the calculation model to be used.
AIST provided two different methodologies for the determination of the levy to show the significant impact of using different methodologies.
AUTHOR
Staff Writer
Money Management staff writers are writers who contribute to the website from time to time. If you would like to discuss the content contained within this article please contact us.
Recommended for you
A major super fund has defended its use of private markets in a submission to ASIC, asserting that appropriate governance and information-sharing practices are present in both public and private markets.
A member body representing some prominent wealth managers is concerned super funds’ dominance is sidelining small companies in capital markets.
Earlier this month, several Australian superannuation funds fell victim to credential stuffing attacks, which saw a small number of members lose more than $500,000.
Small- to medium-sized funds have become collateral damage in an "imperfect" model for super industry levies, a financial institution has said.
TOP PERFORMING FUNDS
ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Fund name
3y(%)pa
1
DomaCom DFS Mortgage
93.34 3 y p.a(%)
2
Global X GlobalX FANG+ ETF
36.96 3 y p.a(%)
3
GAM LSA Private Shares AU I
34.22 3 y p.a(%)
4
Fidante Credit Suisse Global Private Equity
29.68 3 y p.a(%)
5
VanEck Video Gaming and eSports ETF (AU)
28.89 3 y p.a(%)
