Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 260

'Rorts and rip-offs’ prevention in super legislation

The ‘Treasury Laws Amendment (Protecting Your Superannuation Savings Package) Bill 2018’ was tabled in Parliament on 21 June 2018, with superannuation measures foreshadowed in the last Federal Budget.

Key provisions of the Bill

1. A cap on fees and no exit fees

The Bill prevents superannuation funds from charging administration and investment fees exceeding 3% per annum on balances of accounts below $6,000. It also prevents exit fees when members close or rollover their superannuation accounts, no matter their balance. This will remove a disincentive to superannuation fund members consolidating and closing unwanted accounts.

2. Life insurance within super only if chosen

Fund trustees can provide life insurance and charge premiums only on an opt-in basis, and only to new members aged under 25 years, members with account balances below $6,000, and members with inactive accounts, unless a member has directed otherwise. Fund members can choose lesser cover or seek other providers, saving their nest egg from unintended diminution.

3. Consolidation

Accounts below $6,000 will be transferred to the Commissioner of Taxation if they have been inactive for a continuous period of 13 months. The Commissioner will be empowered to then proactively pay these amounts, plus those lost accounts already held by the ATO, into the rightful owner's active superannuation account. In conjunction with the ban on exit fees, this will assist consolidation.

A political stab at Labor

The first paragraph of Federal Minister Kelly O’Dwyer’s media release on the new Bill said it was:

“… action to protect the hard-earned superannuation savings of millions of Australians from rorts and rip-offs ... These measures address significant issues associated with the current default insurance arrangements in superannuation, which were also put in place in 2013 by then Minister for Superannuation, Bill Shorten.”

This is a justifiable shot across the political bow, given that Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Choice of fund) Bill 2016 acknowledged that, due to enterprise bargaining agreements:

“Some employees cannot choose the superannuation fund into which their compulsory employer superannuation is paid. This prevents them making key decisions around their retirement savings, can result in the payment of unnecessary fees and insurance premiums, and can reduce competition between superannuation funds.”

In May this year, O’Dwyer opined that “about one-third of accounts were unintended multiple accounts because employers have forced them into a particular fund of their choice or unions have through enterprise agreements”.

Industry reactions

Industry reactions to the legislation is expected to be largely positive, although the loss of accounts will adversely impact some superannuation administrators and life companies.

Reaction to the consolidation measures included Julie Dolan, a principal of SMSF Consulting, who told SMSFAdviser:

“The ATO has already been tightening up on the efficiency of its current process of dealing with inactive accounts in order to transfer them into active accounts more quickly. The ATO are spending quite a lot of money on their data matching process and this latest measure is expected to push an extra $6 billion into super across 3 million active superannuation accounts. So that's a good thing.”

Treasury officials have estimated that there are roughly six million inactive super accounts in Australia belonging to four million members.

On the opt-out measure, AustralianSuper, Australia’s largest super fund, has already stopped signing up new members under 25 into life insurance automatically. According to a Rice Warner, an actuarial consultancy firm:

“At the highest premiums, a blue collar worker could be up to 34% worse off upon retirement age, or around $600,000 short compared to a blue collar worker without insurance in their super.”

Canstar, a financial comparison website, also reported that:

“There’s been an average premium rise of 215% for death and TPD cover and 82% for income protection over the last four years means the impact of insurance on a super balance is greater than ever.”

A person below 25 with no dependents and a low salary may not benefit from such a high dilution, or at least would benefit from greater tailoring of their life insurance needs. However, the industry should ensure the changes do not lead to under-insurance for people who need it.

 

Vinay Kolhatkar is an Assistant Editor of Cuffelinks.

 

  •   28 June 2018
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Testamentary trusts have secured the CGT exemption

Meg on SMSFs: How wide is the ban on LRBAs?

Meg on SMSFs: The CGT changes don’t impact super but what about Div 296 tax decisions?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.