Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Register

19 July 2025

Home / 109

An SMSF journal entry is not enough

Some things in life are not easy and some things don’t make much sense. Unfortunately superannuation often falls into both categories.

Take the situation where a husband and wife have established an SMSF. After many years of managing their SMSF successfully and accumulating much wealth in their fund, the husband passes away.

Under the superannuation law, the death triggers a compulsory payment where the deceased member’s superannuation savings must be paid out as a lump sum death benefit either to a dependant or to his estate as soon as possible.

In this case, the wife does not need the lump sum death benefit payment as she has enough income without it. She would rather the money be retained in the SMSF. In fact if the lump sum payment is made to her, she would simply deposit the money back into her SMSF. So the wife, with the agreement of her accountant, records a journal entry in the SMSF’s financial accounts that reflects a lump sum death benefit was paid to her and then was deposited back into the SMSF.

Sounds fine, what’s the problem?

There was no problem in the wife being able to put the money back as she hasn’t exceeded her contribution caps and she also meets the work test in order to make contributions into her SMSF. So what is the problem?

Well, superannuation law requires the death benefit payment to be ‘cashed’. This means, it must be paid out of the SMSF. If assets need to be sold to fund the payment, that must be done. Once paid, it can then be contributed back into the SMSF if the recipient so wishes. You cannot simply make a journal entry without physically making the payment.

The ATO has recently issued two publications, ATOID 2015/2 and ATOID 2015/3 that address this issue. In these documents, the ATO explains that cashing involves an SMSF making a payment which reduces the member’s benefits in the fund. A journal entry to reduce the deceased’s member account would not amount to cashing, and therefore, would not satisfy the law.

Even if there are no tax implications, in order to comply with the superannuation law, a death benefit must be paid out. Otherwise you would have contravened the law. It’s a silly law and one that doesn’t make much sense to those who are already grieving the loss of a loved one.

 

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

 

6 Comments
Monica Rule
May 19, 2015

Ramani, you are correct.

There is nothing stopping a contribution being made using assets as long as it complies with all the superannuation law requirements. That is, it needs to be an asset that the SMSF is able to acquire from a member/beneficiary (therefore you need to be careful if the asset is not a business real property); the contributor needs to be a member of the SMSF; the contributor must meet the part time work test if over the age of 65 or more etc.

Ramani
May 14, 2015

Monica

Thanks for the response.

In regard to your answer about in specie payment of death benefits as a lump sum (probably supplemented with the anti-detriment clawback), I suppose nothing would preclude the same assets being contributed back to the SMSF (subject to contribution rules & governing rules allowing in-specie contributions or at least not prohibiting them, and the assets being stock-exchange listed)?

I accept that this is getting farcical, really, but compliance is sacrosanct compliance.

Bruce
May 14, 2015

Can you please advise me if the same requirement applies when a SMSF is in the pension phase and the beneficiary is a child under the age of 18?
What are the options when a fund is in the pension phase and the spouse is dependent on the income from the fund? If she is over 65 and not working she is limited as to what she can contribute back into the fund.
If the SMSF held its assets as equities/managed funds or property, would transferring these equities/managed funds/property to the wife on the death of the husband qualify as cashing out? Or is the only option a cash payment.

Monica Rule
May 15, 2015

Hi Bruce,

Yes, the same rule applies if the beneficiary is a child under the age of 18 and the deceased is in pension phase and a lump sum death benefit is required to be paid from the SMSF. However, if the requirement is for the child to continue to receive the pension, then pension payments would continue to be paid from the SMSF. There would be no need for a lump sum death benefit to be paid from the SMSF. The deceased’s superannuation savings will simply continue to be paid to the child.

Also, if the death benefit is to be paid to the surviving spouse as a continuation of the deceased’s pension, then the pension will continue to be paid to the dependent. This would not require a lump sum death benefit to be paid, and therefore, there is no need for money to be paid out from the SMSF and for the wife to be working to be able to contribute the money back.

A lump sum death benefit can be paid in-specie using assets of the SMSF. Therefore, cashing out includes payment of a lump sum benefit by transferring assets of the SMSF to dependents. The ATO would check for the legal ownership of assets transfer as evidence.

Ramani
May 14, 2015

Monica

A helpful guide to the need to pander to the silly nature of this requirement.

How would this work (or not) if the wife receiving a cheque endorses it (as she can under banking law, a cheque being a negotiable instrument) back to the Fund for making a contribution?

Monica Rule
May 15, 2015

Hi Ramani,

Regardless of whether the death benefit is paid by cash or cheque, what the ATO would be looking for is money leaving the SMSF’s bank account. The SMSF would need to show evidence of cash being available to pay out the death benefit and an entry in the SMSF’s bank account showing the money leaving the SMSF. The SMSF would also need to show evidence of the receipt of contributions from the wife with an entry in the SMSF’s bank account. If that can be achieved with a cheque endorsement, then I guess it is possible.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Ensure death benefit nominations are upheld

Are death bed benefit super withdrawals effective?

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

Firstlinks is sponsored by:
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Raising the GST to 15%

Treasurer Jim Chalmers aims to tackle tax reform but faces challenges. Previous reviews struggled due to political sensitivities, highlighting the need for comprehensive and politically feasible change.

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.

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

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.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

Trump's US dollar assault is fuelling CBA's rise

Australian-based investors have been perplexed by the steep rise in CBA's share price But it's becoming clear that US funds are buying into our largest bank as a hedge against potential QE and further falls in the US dollar.

Investment strategies

With markets near record highs, here's what you should do with your portfolio

Markets have weathered geopolitical turmoil, hitting near record highs. Investors face tough decisions on valuations, asset concentration, and strategic portfolio rebalancing for risk control and future returns.

Property

Soaring house prices may be locking people into marriages

Soaring house prices are deepening Australia's cost of living crisis - and possibly distorting marriage decisions. New research links unexpected price changes to whether couples separate or silently struggle together.

Investment strategies

Google is facing 'the innovator's dilemma'

Artificial intelligence is forcing Google to rethink search - and its future. As usage shifts and rivals close in, will it adapt in time, or become a cautionary tale of disrupted disruptors?

Investment strategies

Study supports what many suspected about passive investing

The surge in passive investing doesn’t just mirror the market—it shapes it, often amplifying the rise of the largest firms and creating new risks and opportunities. For investors, understanding these effects is essential.

Property

Should we dump stamp duties for land taxes?

Economists have long flagged the idea of swapping property taxes for land taxes for fairness and equity reasons. This looks at why what seems fairer may not deliver the outcomes that we expect.

Investing

Being human means being a bad investor

Many of the behaviours that have made humans such a successful species also make it difficult for us to be good, long-term investors. The key to better decision making is to understand what makes us human and adapt.

Sponsors

Alliances

Site Map

About Firstlinks

© 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.