Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 606

Navigating SMSF property compliance

Property investment within SMSFs remains a popular strategy for building retirement wealth. Navigating SMSF property compliance, however, requires a holistic approach to ensure that SMSFs operate within the legal framework administered by the ATO and ASIC.

One of the problems is that SMSF trustees investing in property do not appreciate how the superannuation rules interact. Areas that can cause the most concern are the sole purpose test, the non-arm’s length income (NALI) provisions and property development.

The sole purpose test

The sole purpose test lies at the heart of a complying SMSF. It mandates that an SMSF must be maintained solely to provide retirement benefits to its members or their dependents in the event of a member’s death.

Until then, SMSF assets must not be misused for personal or business purposes unrelated to retirement benefits.

Breaches of the sole purpose test can have severe repercussions because an SMSF can risk losing its complying status and be subject to higher tax rates.

Non-compliance may arise from various scenarios, such as:

  1. occupying residential property by a related party for personal purposes
  2. undertaking property development activities where transactions are not at arm’s length
  3. not leasing business real property at market rates if used by related parties

Where the trustees of an SMSF are involved in property development ventures in various capacities, they must demonstrate that their decision-making is solely pursuing the retirement purpose of the SMSF and is not influenced by other goals or objectives concerning those business or other entities.

Non-arm’s length income (NALI)

NALI is another critical area of property compliance for SMSFs. The NALI provisions target income derived from arrangements not conducted on commercial terms. The provisions act as a powerful deterrent against arrangements that could unfairly increase member entitlements.

Where income is classified as NALI, it is taxed at the highest marginal rate instead of the concessional superannuation tax rate of 15%.

Identifying NALI involves examining transactions to ensure they are conducted on arm’s length terms. For example, if an SMSF acquires an asset for less than its market value or receives income under non-commercial terms, such arrangements may be deemed non-arm’s length triggering the NALI provisions.

ATO flags property development issues

NALI provisions are particularly relevant in the context of property development projects. The ATO has flagged concerns about property development arrangements where income gets diverted to SMSFs through non-arm’s length dealings.

For instance, SMSFs may hold direct or indirect interests in entities that invest in property development projects that engage in non-arm’s length transactions, such as entering into loans with related parties at a 0% interest rate, to maximise profits.

No specific prohibitions prevent an SMSF from investing directly or indirectly in property development. It can be a legitimate investment for SMSFs if the fund’s property development activities comply with the superannuation legislation.

The ATO, however, is concerned about the structure of certain schemes and arrangements that divert income into super, creating potential breaches of the sole purpose test, other SIS issues and NALI.

The ATO has provided guidance to SMSFs through its regulatory updates cautioning that care needs to be taken by SMSF trustees.

Joint ventures

The ATO has affirmed that a joint venture (JV) agreement involving related parties is an ‘in-house asset’. As a result, the SMSF must hold a proprietary interest in any real property being developed so that the ATO is comfortable with the SMSF investment being ‘in’ that property and not an investment ‘in’ the related party.

One of the leading indicators that the investment may be an in-house asset is that the fund provides capital for the joint venture and has no other rights than receiving a return on the final investment. The ATO has flagged that this will depend on the terms of the JV.

Where outside influences affect the trustee’s decision, such as ceasing to pay a pension to make a cash injection into a struggling property development venture, a contravention of the sole purpose test may occur.

The SMSF should not be involved in ensuring the success of a property development joint venture at its peril.

Ungeared entities

Investing in ungeared entities is another area where compliance with the requirements is complex. Ensuring the ungeared entity does not borrow, all transactions are at arm’s length, any related party acquisitions are at market value, and the entity does not operate a business can avoid the investment becoming an in-house asset. Once an in-house asset, the investment can never be returned to its former exempt status, even if the trustee fixes the issue/s that caused the assets to cease meeting the relevant conditions.

It can be difficult, therefore, for SMSFs to meet and maintain these conditions while undertaking property development investments.

Special purpose vehicle

The ATO has now set a higher bar for property development schemes by focusing on a 'controlling mind'. It makes the decisions for one or more property development groups by selecting the project and establishing an SPV who are typically the members of the fund.

The ATO has adopted a broader approach and is less prescriptive about specific arrangements and structures that could potentially fail SISA compliance with property development.

The ATO has acknowledged that non-arm’s length dealings by any party, with respect to any step in relation to a scheme, can give rise to NALI as defined in the Tax Act.

It gives the ATO a much wider net to cast, which ensures that trustees cannot circumvent the rules and can try to get more money into an SMSF.

Conclusion

Understanding the connections between NALI and the sole purpose test is crucial for an SMSF’s successful and compliant operation.

SMSF trustees must ensure that their funds are maintained exclusively for retirement purposes and that all transactions are conducted on arm’s length terms. Non-compliance with these requirements can lead to severe consequences, including significant tax penalties and potential disqualification.

 

Shelley Banton is Head of Education at ASF Audits. Read more articles in this SMSF property development series.

 


 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

A guide to valuing SMSF assets correctly

Which shares and funds do SMSFs invest in?

Tips and traps: a final check for your tax return this year

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.