Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

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 15, 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 15, 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 15, 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

The impact of our marriage breakdown on our SMSF

SMSFs the new battleground in family disputes

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Five ways the Retirement Review points to new policies

The Retirement Income Review goes much further than an innocent-sounding 'fact base', and is sure to guide policies in the run up to the next election. It will change how we think about retirement incomes.

Graeme Shaw on why investing is at a pivotal moment

Company profits have not improved for many years but higher valuations have been driven by falling rates and excess liquidity. Conditions do not suit a value and contrarian manager but here are some opportunities.

Retirement Review gives strong views on hoarding of super

The Review includes some profound findings, most notable that retirement income should include drawing down far more capital. Expect post-retirement products to proliferate under a Retirement Income Covenant.

11 key findings on retirement dreams during the pandemic

A mid-pandemic survey of over 1,000 people near or in retirement found three in four are not confident how long their money will last. Only 18% felt their money was safe during a strong economic downturn.

Bank scorecard 2020: when will the mojo return?

Banks severely cut dividends in 2020 but are expected to improve payments in 2021. History provides clues to when the banks will return to their 2019 levels of profitability, but who is positioned the best?

Generational wealth transfers will affect all investors

It's not only that 60 is the new 40, but 80 is the new 60. Many Baby Boomers spend up in retirement and are less inclined to leave a nest egg to their children. The ways wealth transfers will affect all investors.

Latest Updates

Shares

Hamish Douglass on big tech and life after COVID

On the sidelines of the Morningstar Conference, the Magellan co-founder reflects on the pandemic and which sectors are set to gain and lose. He says we were lucky the pandemic hit when it did (videos and transcripts).

Superannuation

Cost of running an SMSF receives updated judgement

Administration costs can rise for complexity, especially owning property in an SMSF, but fees are highly competitive from a wide range of service providers. The break-even cost is less than previously reported.

SMSF strategies

Three areas SMSFs should consider outsourcing

SMSF trustees often cite ‘control of my investments’ as the number one motivation for setting up their own fund. But it still makes sense to outsource some parts of a well-diversified portfolio.

Retirement

Apparently, retirees should learn to SKI

The Retirement Income Review demonstrated limited understanding of the risks faced by self-funded retirees implementing rational human behaviour. Spending to qualify for the age pension is not a solution.

Retirement

7-point checklist for managing the uncertain timing of death

Average life expectancies are a weak predictor of individual outcomes, and it's better to consider a range of probable lifespans. A plan that lasts to the average will disappoint every second retiree.

Exchange traded products

'Quality' ETFs under the microscope

Interest in 'quality' factor ETFs has increased this year, helped by very attractive returns. However, not all ETFs are created alike and there are divergences in portfolio traits which investors can identify.

Shares

Is growth of zombie companies real or fiction?

Much has been written about the rise of 'zombie firms' which should have gone bankrupt, but new research should be comforting to economists and investors alike, with focus on a particular segment.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2020 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.
Any general advice or class service prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, has been prepared by without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. Refer to our Financial Services Guide (FSG) for more information. 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.

Website Development by Master Publisher.