Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 82

The will power of binding death nominations

There have been many articles in the media on disputes between SMSF trustees who are members of the same family. Judging by the outcomes, my recommendation is to put formal arrangements in place if you want your wishes to be respected in the event of your death.

Contrary to popular belief, superannuation assets do not automatically form part of a person’s estate pursuant to a will. If you want your superannuation to be distributed as part of your estate, you will need to check the wording of the Trust Deed and create a binding death benefit nomination (BDBN).

The way superannuation savings will be paid from an SMSF, in the event of death, is based on the SMSF’s Trust Deed. As well as stating how your benefits can be received by you while you’re alive, it should spell out how they will be distributed when you die.

The complication with SMSFs is that under superannuation law, it is not compulsory for an SMSF to have a BDBN. Without it, the surviving members in your SMSF determine who your benefit will be paid to. This may not be a problem if there is only you and your spouse and both want each other as beneficiaries. But what if you want some or all of your superannuation to go to your children?

As the BDBN is not compulsory, there are no restrictions on what it can contain. Normally a BDBN needs to be witnessed by two individuals who are not beneficiaries to the estate. It also needs to be updated every three years for it to remain valid, but even here there are exceptions. The SMSF Trust Deed can spell out under what terms a BDBN will be accepted. For example, it can offer a BDBN that does not have to be updated on a regular basis (a non-lapsing binding nomination) or does not need to be witnessed by two people. A non-lapsing nomination remains valid until the member changes it or revokes it. Please talk to a lawyer on what you should put in your Trust Deed as well as in a BDBN.

The two court decisions described below show how disputes were resolved both with and without a BDBN.

Ioppolo & Hesford v Conti [2013] WASC 389

Mr and Mrs Conti were trustees of their SMSF but were estranged. Mrs Conti made a will stating her superannuation entitlements were to go to her four children and expressly stated she did not want any of it to go to her estranged husband. She did not have a BDBN. The terms of their Trust Deed were that in the absence of a BDBN, the surviving trustee could use their discretion to pay the benefit. Mr Conti paid Mrs Conti’s benefit to himself. Mrs Conti’s children took action against their father. The court ruled in Mr Conti’s favour as he acted within the requirements of the trust deed. Mrs Conti’s will carried no weight in the court’s decision.

Wooster v Morris [2013] VSC 934

Mr Morris and his second wife were trustees of their SMSF. Mr Morris made a BDBN in March 2008 in favour of his daughters from his first marriage. Mr Morris died in February 2010. Mrs Morris decided that the BDBN was not binding and paid herself all of Mr Morris’ superannuation entitlement. The daughters took action against her. The court found in favour of the daughters, but because Mrs Morris controlled the SMSF, it took many years for Mr Morris’ daughters to claim their benefit and their court costs. Unfortunately Mrs Morris died and her estate filed for bankruptcy which consequently left the daughters with a large shortfall in their entitlements.

In conclusion, the correct wording in both an SMSF’s Trust Deed and a BDBN are critical to ensure that your wishes are carried out in timely manner.

 

Monica Rule is the author of The Self Managed Super Handbook. Monica is running an SMSF seminar in Sydney on 7 November 2014, with special guests Noel Whittaker, Graham Hand and Chris Cuffe. For more details visit www.monicarule.com.au

 

  •   2 October 2014
  • 4
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Meg on SMSFs: Why a trust deed is still important

Meg on SMSFs: Is a binding death benefit nomination worth it?

Limits to a will’s power over an SMSF

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

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.

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

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.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

Latest Updates

Exchange traded products

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?

Taxation

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.

Retirement

Three considerations before reshaping your legacy plan

Many retirees hope to leave a legacy. Proposed trust tax reforms could force families to rethink. The question is not how much to leave behind, but whether today's inheritance plans will still make sense as circumstances change.

Investment strategies

Why experienced investors still get markets wrong

Retirement is approaching. Markets are noisy. And every headline seems to demand action. The biggest investment risk isn't fear, greed or market volatility, it often arrives disguised as research and sensible risk management.

Shares

Why pay more for less?

Conditions were stacked in favour of professional investors in 2026. Most still fell short, raising questions about where investors should look for value. Meanwhile, an alternative strategy continued to make its case.

Investment strategies

Bleeding air out of the bubble

Equity valuations have fallen sharply over the past year, yet investors have largely been spared the volatility and losses that typically accompany a de-rating. What explains this unusually orderly reset? Here are five key drivers.

Strategy

Has AI gone rogue?

We worry about AI becoming conscious. But what if consciousness isn't the issue? The more unsettling possibility is a machine capable of pursuing objectives relentlessly, without motives, emotions, or awareness of any kind.

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.