Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 22

An SMSF inequity that cries out for attention

With Australia’s ageing population, more and more SMSFs are moving from the pure accumulation phase into a hybrid phase with the use of transition-to-retirement (TTR) pensions and eventually into the pure pension phase. This transformation introduces many significant challenges for the trustee members and their professional advisers: continued relevance of investment strategies, segregation versus non-segregation of assets, actuarial certification of the proportion of exempt pensions income, compliance with minimum and maximum pensions, tax deductions on TTR pensions and the practical implications of advancing age in managing the SMSF.

A particular concern is the need to manage fund cash flows to meet emerging pension obligations to comply with ATO minimum and maximum limits, without resorting to fire sale of assets. The global financial crisis demonstrated these difficulties, with the Government reducing the payment obligations in the past. From 2013/14, the normal limits are restored. While lump sum benefits are able to be paid in specie, circumventing the need for a fire sale, pension benefits must be paid in cash. This makes careful cash flow management even more critical in the pensions phase.

In addressing the issue, SMSFs need all the help they can get. Whilst pro-active investment planning, retaining a portion in readily-liquefiable assets and taking account of potential pension drawdowns are useful, the scope for enlisting the assistance of the ATO, the SMSF regulator, has received scant attention from trustees and their advisers. This article explains the issue.

Many SMSFs invest in assets that pay franked income. With pensions income being tax-exempt (based on segregated assets or the actuarial certification of exempt income proportion in the case of unsegregated assets), the only tax payable would relate to the concessional contributions and taxable income attributable to accumulation assets (ignoring non arms-length income). As a result, such SMSFs do claim large amounts as refunds in their annual tax returns. The refunds that accrue over the financial year are not able to be used in the SMSFs for many months. This delay could be almost a year for a fund that lodges its return by the due date of 15 May, following the fund year.

This delay affects SMSFs in two ways: reduced liquidity and forgone investment earnings, not to mention the work and pressure on trustees to navigate stressed conditions.

ATO requirements

Where any taxpayer (including a super fund) is expected to have a net tax obligation in a financial year, the ATO requires periodical payments of the estimated tax for the year. Based on the last return lodged, the ATO estimates the advance tax the fund must pay. The frequency of payments is determined having regard to the total tax liability: the larger the liability, the more frequent the payment. Here, the ATO acts to protect the cash flows of the government, as indeed it should. Taxpayers have an ability to request a variation of the ATO estimate, based on changed circumstances.

While a fund can seek to reduce its advance tax payment to nil, if it can justify it, it is worth noting that the payment cannot be negative: the fund cannot require the ATO to pay its expected refund in advance, even where it can make out a case for it. Exempt pension income, substantial franking credits (due to say, share buybacks where a part of the buyback price is often deemed to be franked income) or reduced concessional contributions (as happened during the global financial crisis) could all result in refunds (or increase their quantum) rather than a liability.

By law, trustees are obliged to act in members’ best interests. This includes following up all receivables periodically, receiving them in cash and reinvesting them promptly in accordance with the investment strategy. Where, as in the case of tax refunds accruing during the year, the receivables are from the regulator itself, this duty is in no way diminished.

My enquiries show that while there are express provisions that enable the ATO to collect taxes in advance, there is no corresponding provision enabling the ATO to release refunds progressively over their accrual period, based on an estimate. While this explains how the current asymmetry (of collecting taxes in advance, but not paying refunds like-wise) arises, it does not explain why it should be so. It fails the reasonableness test.

The ATO’s apparently conflicted role (of holding trustees to account in their conduct, while maximising government revenue) adds another dimension.

I have focused largely on SMSFs in explaining this issue, because in practice, others are able to estimate their franking credits, exempt income and taxable contributions and earnings for the forthcoming year and request a reduction by way of an amendment to their tax payments (limited to zero, as noted above). Most non-SMSFs would expect to receive large taxable contributions and earnings in accumulation phase and would be net payers to the ATO. To be viable, they have to be so. With no loss of liquidity for the fund, equitable treatment of pension and accumulation members in large funds needs consideration.

Many SMSFs in pension or hybrid phases, on the other hand, would be net receivers of refunds.  They cannot adjust their cash-flow like their bigger cousins to seek progressive refunds.

As our population and SMSF membership age, this issue will loom larger. The hidden subsidy from the pensioner population to the government, in cash flow and lost income terms, will only increase.

It is about time that those concerned with equity, looking after our retirees and assisting them in cash-flow management, achieve an amendment to the current symmetry. The vocal SMSF lobby has its work cut out. SMSFs should be able to estimate their likely refunds for the future year, and receive a reasonable proportion (say 80%) in advance through quarterly or monthly ATO payments. This should be adjusted in the final return as lodged. As always, measures to prevent abuse can and should be implemented.

What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Ramani Venkatramani is an actuary and Principal of Ramani Consulting Pty Ltd. Between 1996 and 2011, he was a senior executive at ISC/APRA, supervising pension funds.

 

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Update on super changes, the levy and contribution caps

Getting the most from your age pension

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Is it better to rent or own a home under the age pension?

With 62% of Australians aged 65 and over relying at least partially on the age pension, are they better off owning their home or renting? There is an extra pension asset allowance for those not owning a home.

Too many retirees miss out on this valuable super fund benefit

With 700 Australians retiring every day, retirement income solutions are more important than ever. Why do millions of retirees eligible for a more tax-efficient pension account hold money in accumulation?

Is the fossil fuel narrative simply too convenient?

A fund manager argues it is immoral to deny poor countries access to relatively cheap energy from fossil fuels. Wealthy countries must recognise the transition is a multi-decade challenge and continue to invest.

Reece Birtles on selecting stocks for income in retirement

Equity investing comes with volatility that makes many retirees uncomfortable. A focus on income which is less volatile than share prices, and quality companies delivering robust earnings, offers more reassurance.

Comparing generations and the nine dimensions of our well-being

Using the nine dimensions of well-being used by the OECD, and dividing Australians into Baby Boomers, Generation Xers or Millennials, it is surprisingly easy to identify the winners and losers for most dimensions.

Anton in 2006 v 2022, it's deja vu (all over again)

What was bothering markets in 2006? Try the end of cheap money, bond yields rising, high energy prices and record high commodity prices feeding inflation. Who says these are 'unprecedented' times? It's 2006 v 2022.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Superannuation: a 30+ year journey but now stop fiddling

Few people have been closer to superannuation policy over the years than Noel Whittaker, especially when he established his eponymous financial planning business. He takes us on a quick guided tour.

Survey: share your retirement experiences

All Baby Boomers are now over 55 and many are either in retirement or thinking about a transition from work. But what is retirement like? Is it the golden years or a drag? Do you have tips for making the most of it?

Interviews

Time for value as ‘promise generators’ fail to deliver

A $28 billion global manager still sees far more potential in value than growth stocks, believes energy stocks are undervalued including an Australian company, and describes the need for resilience in investing.

Superannuation

Paul Keating's long-term plans for super and imputation

Paul Keating not only designed compulsory superannuation but in the 30 years since its introduction, he has maintained the rage. Here are highlights of three articles on SG's origins and two more recent interviews.

Fixed interest

On interest rates and credit, do you feel the need for speed?

Central bank support for credit and equity markets is reversing, which has led to wider spreads and higher rates. But what does that mean and is it time to jump at higher rates or do they have some way to go?

Investment strategies

Death notices for the 60/40 portfolio are premature

Pundits have once again declared the death of the 60% stock/40% bond portfolio amid sharp declines in both stock and bond prices. Based on history, balanced portfolios are apt to prove the naysayers wrong, again.

Exchange traded products

ETFs and the eight biggest worries in index investing

Both passive investing and ETFs have withstood criticism as their popularity has grown. They have been blamed for causing bubbles, distorting the market, and concentrating share ownership. Are any of these criticisms valid?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2022 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. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). 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.

Website Development by Master Publisher.