SuperConcepts has revealed an analysis, based on 2,450 self-managed super funds (SMSF), which identified the top 10 exotic SMSF assets and why trustees typically invest in those assets.
Those were:
The most common exotic investments were split into two categories: “collectible” or “in-house assets”, with each of them having strict rules around how the assets should be treated.
Related News:
Bragg demands answers from super funds over US summit costs, compliance
Treasury says ‘we’re testing a hypothesis’ in reference to confidential document
The study described in-house assets as any asset subject to a loan or lease agreement with a related party or an investment in a related company or trust. SMSFs were not allowed to invest more than five per cent of its total fund assets in this category.
Additionally, some assets were specifically excluded from being an in-house asset, such as commercial property.
On the other hand, collectibles and personal use assets were a broader category that included artwork, jewellery, antiques, artefacts, coins medallions and bank notes, postage stamps and fist day covers, rare folios, manuscripts and books memorabilia, wine or spirits, cars, recreational boats, memberships of sporting or social clubs, and other assets used or kept primarily for person use or enjoyment.
According to the report, this category was characterised as the area where SMSF investment passion was on full display.
Simlarly to the first group, also collectibles are governed by a set of rules which included the following restrictions:
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.