Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 680

Individual SMSF Trusteeship directly liable for ATO fines

For years, the debate has raged between advisors and their clients. Should we go to the trouble and expense of getting a corporate trustee for our self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF), or should we just be individual trustees? After all, we as the members are still all involved in any decision making either way, so what’s the real difference – other than the extra costs and hassle?

It’s not a bad question. Under section 17A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA), all members of a SMSF have to either be trustees personally, or alternatively if there is a corporate trustee then they must be the directors of the company. This ensures that every member has a say in the management and investment of their own super.

However, it also means that every member is personally responsible to ensure that their SMSF complies with all the legal requirements for its complying (and hence tax concessional) status to be retained. And if things go wrong, it also means that each and every member will personally suffer the consequences of getting it wrong.

This is where having a corporate trustee of your SMSF comes into its own – limitation of personal liability. Remember that a company is a separate legal entity from its directors and shareholders, and this carries over into the SMSF context. That separate entity status brings with it three clear advantages over having individual members being the trustees of their SMSF:

  1. There is no need to change the trustee if a member dies or leaves the SMSF for any reason – all you need to do is remove or retire the outgoing director. If it was a two-member fund becoming a single member fund, the remaining member can become the sole director (assuming the company constitution allows for this – if not, it can usually be amended accordingly). This is to be contrasted with a fund with individual trustees, where a sole member would need to appoint a second person as co-trustee to satisfy the definition of “self-managed superannuation fund” under section 17A(2)(b) of SISA. There is also no need to advise banks or share registries of a change in trustee, since only the directors of the corporate trustee have changed rather than the trustee itself.
  2. The personal liability of directors of a corporate trustee is limited to the assets held within the SMSF, assuming that the rules of the fund indemnify the trustee against liabilities incurred in the exercise of its trustee duties. In contrast, individual trustees (being the legal persons who transact on behalf of the SMSF) will be directly liable for any liabilities incurred as trustees, and whilst they may have an indemnity from the fund if the assets are insufficient, they may be personally responsible for the excess.
  3. Part 20 of SISA sets out the ‘speeding tickets’ regime which applies to impose administrative and other penalties on SMSF trustees for breaches of the SIS laws – including fines of up to $21,840. Where the SMSF trustee is a body corporate, its directors at the time it becomes liable to the penalty will be jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of the penalty. However, where there are individual trustees, the fine is personally imposed on each and every trustee – so if there are four individual trustees, then the total fines may amount to $87,360! Or, $131,040 if there are six individual trustees. Moreover, these fines cannot be paid or reimbursed out of the fund.

These amounts are the maximum fines which can be imposed as of 1 July 2026. Actual fines imposed depend on which section has been infringed and whether there are any mitigating circumstances. Administrative penalties can be imposed on directors of corporate trustees if the director breaches a SIS provision which directly imposes an obligation on the director (rather than on a trustee) – such as s104A (obligation to sign statement recognising a trustees obligations and responsibilities).

So if you are an individual trustee of your SMSF, the message is clear – make the switch to a corporate trustee as soon as possible. The inconvenience, initial investment and ongoing costs of doing so may pale into insignificance compared to the future inconvenience and costs of staying as you are in the name of ‘keeping it simple’.

 

Michael Hallinan is a superannuation and financial services lawyer with over 25 years legal and superannuation experience gained in both private practice and corporate counsel positions. His work in the superannuation field in various capacities has given him an extensive understanding of the specialised field of superannuation and the superannuation industry.

He is Special Counsel – Superannuation, for SUPERCentral, an independent online platform provider of SMSFs, advice, legal documentation and wealth management services to accounting and financial planning firms throughout Australia.

Please note that these comments are for your consideration only and are provided to assist you in deciding whether to proceed to obtain a formal opinion on the issue. These comments cannot be relied upon by either you or any of your clients until and unless we issue that formal opinion.

 

  •   16 September 2026
  • 4
  •      
  •   
4 Comments
Rob W
September 17, 2026

Agree 100%

4
Nic
September 20, 2026

I try to never breach the rules, however I have been caught a couple of times. They were "accidents" and not intended. The ATO told me I was a naughty boy and don't do it again. This was quite some time ago. (SMSF started in 1999). From the reading I do, it appears that the "generosity" of the ATO has disappeared and instead of informing and educating, it has become punitive.

Mike
September 21, 2026

The ATO, just like the UK TV Licensing authorities, rely on scare tactics and empty threats.

Every year around tax-time, the ATO sends out letters to scare people into including all of their sources of income (because Big Brother is watching you and knows everything) and to not claim what are probably legitimate deductions (by giving examples where unusual claims were denied).

Well, I'm sorry, but they need to get their own house in order (Operations Protego and Elbrus, the 2026 scandal) before they lecture the rest of us.

1
 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Why SMSFs should have a corporate trustee

Importance of updating your SMSF Trust Deed

Red flags to watch out for when considering an SMSF

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

The retirement scorecard: how many of these questions can you answer?

From the maths of retirement, estimating spending and picking the right asset allocation to survive a poor decade, here are the questions every retiree – current or future – should be able to answer for themselves.

Testamentary trusts: Treasury has picked the wrong reading

A decades-old estate planning tool has survived one tax crackdown only to be caught by another. The surprise isn't who the reform is targeting, but who could end up paying the price for drafting choices made years ago.

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

The housing slide could become a crash

House prices are sliding across Australia, yet the most dangerous ingredient for a housing crash is still missing. If job losses surge amid growing economic risks, today's correction could become a historic property downturn.

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Division 296: the initial moves to make before the windows close

What if the best superannuation strategy isn't about earning more, but acting before your options disappear? Several overlooked planning windows are narrowing, with consequences that can last for decades.

Planning

Avoid unnecessary CGT with this estate planning clause

A simple estate plan can create a ticking time bomb. One overlooked clause can pit spouses against children, delay inheritances, and potentially leave a family facing an unexpected tax bill worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Exchange traded products

The hidden trade-off in fixed income ETFs

Some investment trade-offs are immediately visible. Others are embedded in the way a portfolio is constructed. Understanding the difference may explain why similar-looking investments can produce surprisingly different results.

Retirement

The mortgage free retirement is fading

What happens when a generation reaches retirement carrying obligations previous generations largely avoided? New research suggests we may need to rethink both how much we need in retirement and what life could look like.

Retirement

The key question to inspire a confident and purposeful retirement

Most people spend decades planning for retirement. Far fewer plan for what happens when they get there. The difference may explain why so many find the transition harder and less fulfilling than expected, despite careful preparation.

Latest from Morningstar

Making the case for a 'good enough' portfolio

Some investors spend years chasing the perfect strategy. Others choose a path that’s simply good enough and move on. Which approach is more likely to deliver both better outcomes and a happier financial life over the long run?

Investment strategies

Is the US market as expensive as CAPE says?

Many investing ideas survive for decades. But that does not make them right. A famous valuation measure implies that US shares are dangerously expensive, but the evidence may point to a very different conclusion.

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.