The Federal Government should use the May Budget to restore the general prohibition on direct borrowing by superannuation funds, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA).
In doing so, ASFA has pointed to an almost exponential increase in the amount of funds borrowed leveraging Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangements (LBRAs).
The ASFA has used its pre-Budget submission to point out that it has had a long-standing policy of opposing borrowing by superannuation funds and that the ban was something which was supported by the Financial System Inquiry (FSI).
“… the use of LRBAs by superannuation funds is not appropriate,” the submission said.
“The amount of funds borrowed using LRBAs has increased substantially, from $497 million in June 2009 to $25.4 billion in June 2016, an increase of around 5,000 per cent,” the ASFA submission said.
“Borrowing, even with LRBAs, magnifies the gains and losses from fluctuations in the prices of assets held in funds, and increases the probability of large losses within a fund. This puts individuals’ superannuation at risk,” it said.
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.
Big business has joined the chorus of opposition against the proposed Division 296 tax.
Broadly i agree with the philosophy of not attracting greater risk to retirement monies, but with the continual contraction of concessional and non concessional caps, this might be the last resort for those attempting to get greater balances into superannuation.
perhaps the level of borrowing (LVR) might be easier to restrict moving forward rather than to knock LRBA out fully