The Government’s design and distribution obligations legislation may be ineffective in dealing with choice superannuation products because of the sheer scale of the exercise, according to the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST).
Providing an answer to questions on notice from the Senate Economic Legislation Committee, the AIST said it believed the legislation was deficient because the regulators would be hamstrung by not having access to reports or disclosures.
The AIST told the committee it was concerned that the Bill would not be effective, given the practical impossibility of the regulator being able to identify which of the 40,000 choices should be subject to the product intervention power.
“Additionally, the regulators are placed in a difficult situation given that there is a lack of a level playing field regarding both disclosure and reporting to the regulators,” the AIST answer said.
It outlined the AIST’s key concerns as being:
• A lack of dashboards for Choice products.
• APRA does not collect or publish statistics for Choice products. This – and the lack of Choice dashboards – will also render a regulator assessment of member outcomes ineffective.
• Regulatory Guide 97 fee and cost disclosure has numerous carveouts which mean fees and costs cannot be compared.
The AIST submission argued that the carveouts to both disclosure and reporting requirements were systemic and provided the Senate committee with an analysis citing the inequity of not including choice products within the member outcomes regime.
The Future Fund’s CIO Ben Samild has announced his resignation, with his deputy to assume the role of interim CIO.
The fund has unveiled reforms to streamline death benefit payments, cut processing times, and reduce complexity.
A ratings firm has placed more prominence on governance in its fund ratings, highlighting that it’s not just about how much money a fund makes today, but whether the people running it are trustworthy, disciplined, and able to deliver for members in the future.
AMP has reached an agreement in principle to settle a landmark class action over fees charged to members of its superannuation funds, with $120 million earmarked for affected members.