Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 227

Mistakes in SMSFs on related party loans

There are a significant number of professionals giving out some seriously wrong advice on related party lending. Some believe that an SMSF can lend up to 5% of the value of its assets to fund its members or the members’ relatives.

Loans to members or their relatives are prohibited by the superannuation law and you can get into trouble with the Tax Office for going down this path.

Why are professionals getting this wrong?

The reason for the mistake is that superannuation law does allow lending of up to 5% to a ‘related party’ of an SMSF, but there is a qualification people miss. The law is referred to as ‘in-house asset’ and is covered by section 71 in Part 8 of the superannuation law.

I prefer to write in plain English and I don’t normally quote sections of legislations when I write, but bear with me and you will soon understand why I need to do so in this article.

Another area of the superannuation law prohibits a trustee of an SMSF from lending or giving financial assistance to members and relatives. This law appears at section 65 of the superannuation law.

Reading on to subsection 65 (7) of the law states, “Nothing in Part 8 limits the operation of this section”. Essentially, this means that section 65 overrides section 71 which is in Part 8 of the superannuation law. SMSFs can never lend to their members or members’ relatives, not even under the 5% in-house asset limit, regardless of what is allowed under section 71.

Can an SMSF lend to a party who is not a member or a relative of a member of an SMSF?

The good news is it can. An SMSF can lend up to 5% of the total value of its assets to a related entity such as a related company or a related unit trust. It can also lend an unlimited amount to a member’s cousin or their former spouse (who are not members of their SMSF) because they are not considered related parties.

The reason an SMSF can lend to a cousin or a former spouse is because the definition of a ‘relative’ under the general definition in section 10 of the superannuation law does not include a cousin and former spouse. However, just to keep us on our toes, the definition of a relative under section 17A does include a cousin and a former spouse.

The section 17A definition covers the legal structure of an SMSF. It determines which individuals can be in an SMSF together. The section 10 definition, on the other hand, covers investment transactions involving related parties.

So, if your cousin or your former spouse is not a member of your SMSF, then you can lend to them. But if they are members of your SMSF, then your SMSF cannot lend to them.

The superannuation law can be complex as it has various twists. The fact that professionals can get it wrong suggests that if you receive advice that seems too good to be true, get a second opinion. It helps to have a good working knowledge of the law in spotting advice that is not up to the mark.

 

Monica Rule is an SMSF Specialist and author of The Self Managed Super Handbook – Superannuation Law for SMSFs in plain English. See www.monicarule.com.au.

RELATED ARTICLES

The mechanics of the $3 million super tax must be fixed

Valuable super contribution changes are now law

The impact of our marriage breakdown on our SMSF

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian house prices close in on world record

Sydney is set to become the world’s most expensive city for housing over the next 12 months, a new report shows. Our other major cities aren’t far behind unless there are major changes to improve housing affordability.

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Latest Updates

Planning

Will young Australians be better off than their parents?

For much of Australia’s history, each new generation has been better off than the last: better jobs and incomes as well as improved living standards. A new report assesses whether this time may be different.

Superannuation

The rubbery numbers behind super tax concessions

In selling the super tax, Labor has repeated Treasury claims of there being $50 billion in super tax concessions annually, mostly flowing to high-income earners. This figure is vastly overstated.

Investment strategies

A steady road to getting rich

The latest lists of Australia’s wealthiest individuals show that while overall wealth has continued to rise, gains by individuals haven't been uniform. Many might have been better off adopting a simpler investment strategy.

Economy

Would a corporate tax cut boost productivity in Australia?

As inflation eases, the Albanese government is switching its focus to lifting Australia’s sluggish productivity. Can corporate tax cuts reboot growth - or are we chasing a theory that doesn’t quite work here?

Are V-shaped market recoveries becoming more frequent?

April’s sharp rebound may feel familiar, but are V-shaped recoveries really more common in the post-COVID world? A look at market history suggests otherwise and hints that a common bias might be skewing perceptions.

Investment strategies

Asset allocation in a world of riskier developed markets

Old distinctions between developed and emerging market bonds no longer hold true. At a time where true diversification matters more than ever, this has big ramifications for the way that portfolios should be constructed.

Investment strategies

Top 5 investment reads

As the July school holiday break nears, here are some investment classics to put onto your reading list. The books offer lessons in investment strategy, financial disasters, and mergers and acquisitions.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 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.