Home / 142

The merits of reversionary versus non-reversionary pensions

Superannuation legislation is full of complexity which unfortunately disguises valuable financial planning opportunities. One example is the decision whether to commence a reversionary pension or a non-reversionary pension as part of estate planning. Both pensions can be paid from an SMSF provided the Trust Deed allows for these benefits, but it’s important to know the differences.

A reversionary pension is a pension that, upon the member’s death, continues to be paid to the nominated reversionary beneficiary as though the reversionary pensioner were the original pensioner. The reversionary pensioner retains the same percentages of tax-free and taxable components of the deceased’s pension account calculated at the beginning of the pension. Therefore, if the deceased pension account commenced with a 100% tax-free component, then the pension will continue as 100% tax-free.

A non-reversionary pension is a pension that ceases upon the member’s death. Because the pension stops, the deceased’s remaining superannuation at their death will need to be paid from the SMSF as either a lump sum death benefit and/or a new pension to the deceased’s beneficiaries as soon as practicable. If a lump sum death benefit is payable, assets may need to be sold to make a cash payment. If a new pension is to commence, the percentages of the tax-free and taxable components of the pension may need to be re-calculated as explained below.

Benefits of a reversionary pension

1. Favourable tax treatment of insurance proceeds

If insurance proceeds from the deceased member’s life insurance policy are paid to the reversionary beneficiary, then the proceeds also retain the tax-free and taxable components of the reversionary pension. The components are not re-calculated despite the insurance proceeds having a taxable component.

However, if the pension were non-reversionary, then the insurance proceeds are added to the taxable component of the new pension. This may make a difference to the amount of tax payable by the deceased’s beneficiary if they are under the age of 60.

2. Estate security

Upon the death of an SMSF member who was in receipt of a reversionary pension, the trustee is not required to make a determination as to who should receive the deceased’s superannuation as the pension will revert to the nominated beneficiary. This provides some level of certainty to the member as to whom their benefit will go to once they die. If the deceased member has a binding death benefit nomination, the nomination would need to state that the nominated reversionary pensioner is entitled to the receipt of the deceased’s pension.

3. Assets can be retained in the SMSF

As the reversionary pension automatically reverts to the nominated beneficiary, there is no need to sell assets to pay out a lump sum death benefit.

Disadvantage of a reversionary pension

Where a member divorces or separates from the reversionary beneficiary, the member will need to commute the pension and start a new one with new terms and conditions (i.e. such as naming a new beneficiary).

ATO officials were asked at a technical meeting in March 2013 whether it was possible to change a non-reversionary pension to a reversionary pension. The ATO said it was possible as long as the terms under which the pension was payable and the SMSF’s Trust Deed allowed it. However, the ATO also stated that a pension cannot be changed after the death of the pensioner. As the ATO has not made their view widely known, I would suggest you seek the ATO’s approval if you are intending to change your non-reversionary pension to a reversionary pension.

 

Monica Rule is an SMSF specialist, adviser and author. See www.monicarule.com.au for her books and seminars on managing SMSFs.

RELATED ARTICLES

What happens at death of an SMSF member?

Moving your SMSF into pension phase

Five urban myths about super changes

4 Comments

Ken

June 28, 2017

Thank you for your very prompt reply clarifying my query.

I had just read Alex Denham’s article “Is it time to review your super pension” in Cufflinks newsletter 206 of 16 June 2017 and realised the example was very similar to my own situation. I did not understand Denham’s comment in the example “that Jenny cannot roll over any of Brian’s pension” and therefore wondered how my wife would be able to remove the excess. But I think that means she still can remove the excess by cashing it in and taking it out of the super system.

Monica Rule

June 27, 2017

Dear Ken,

If on 1 July 2017, the balance of your retirement account based pension is in excess of $1.6 million transfer balance cap by no more than $100,000, you have until 31 December to remove the excess. Provided the excess is removed within 6 months, the Tax Office will not impose any excess transfer balance tax on the excess amount.

If your retirement account based pension is "reversionary", it means, upon your death the balance of your pension account on the date of death will count towards your spouse's transfer balance cap. However, it will not count until 12 months from the date of your death. This will give your spouse time to remove any excess above her transfer balance cap from the SMSF.

As the excess transfer balance cap ceases upon a member's death, I assume the death benefit rules will take affect upon your death if you did not remove the excess within the 6 month time period prior to your death. This means, as long as your spouse removes the excess from her transfer balance cap, she will not have the excess transfer balance tax imposed on her.

I hope this answers your question.

Kind regards

Monica Rule
www.monicarule.com.au

Ken

June 27, 2017

Reversionary Pensions: I read the article on reversionary pensions and the transfer balance cap which triggered a concern. At June 30 the balance in my account based pension will be in the transition zone between 1.6M and 1.7M. I understand that I have 6 months to remove the excess. The pension is reversionary to my wife. What happens if I die before I have been able to remove the excess? regards Ken

ken

October 27, 2018

a sobering assessment of the opportunistic hypocritical role of government in despoiling retirement vehicles created for self funding.


 

Leave a Comment:

     

Most viewed in recent weeks

Most investors are wrong on dividend yield as income

The current yield on a share or trust is simply the latest dividend divided by the current share price, an abstract number at a point in time. What really matters is the income delivered in the long run.

My 10 biggest investment management lessons

A Chris Cuffe classic article that never ages. Every experienced investor develops a set of beliefs about how markets operate.

Seven major trends affecting Australians in retirement

Retirement planning will become increasingly complex in the face of trends in home ownership, wealth dispersion, life expectancy, health and aged care costs, work patterns and pension dependency.

Lessons from the Future Fund for retail investors

The Annual Report from Australia's sovereign wealth fund reveals new ways it is investing in fixed income and alternatives. The Fund considers its portfolio as one overall risk position with downside protection in one asset class allowing more risk in another.

Four companies riding the healthcare boom

There are strong demographic trends in ageing and consumer spending and investing in the right healthcare companies can ride this wave as well as produce better health outcomes for people. 

Five reasons SMSFs are making asset allocation changes

Substantial changes are underway in SMSFs which until recently held a narrow range of assets dominated by cash, term deposits and Australian equities. Trustees have never faced so many choices.

Fidelity

Sponsors

Alliances

Special eBooks

Specially-selected collections of the best articles 

Read more

Earn CPD Hours

Accredited CPD hours reading Firstlinks

Read more

Pandora Archive

Firstlinks articles are collected in Pandora, Australia's national archive.

Read more