Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 171

SMSFs need vigilance with money in and out

When an SMSF member deposits money into their fund’s bank account, it is treated as the member’s superannuation contribution. When cash is paid from an SMSF’s bank account to a member, the member has received a superannuation benefit. There are, however, legal grey areas where contributions could be made unintentionally and a benefit might not be considered paid when intended.

In Taxation Ruling 2010/1, the ATO states that a ‘contribution’ is anything of value that increases the capital of a superannuation fund, provided by a person whose purpose is to benefit one or more members of the fund or all of the members in general.

It’s a long-winded way of saying that when a member transfers an asset into their SMSF without receiving payment for the asset, that asset should be treated as a contribution. In the same way, if a member pays their SMSF’s expenses without obtaining reimbursement from the fund, the payment could be treated as a contribution as it extinguishes the liability of their SMSF and increases the fund’s capital.

Members need to also be careful when making renovations to properties owned by their SMSF. If the property increases in value as a result of the renovation, it is treated as a contribution and not only the cost of the building materials paid for by the member.

Timing is important

The timing of a contribution is also important as it determines the financial year in which the member can claim it as a tax deduction, as well as whether the member has exceeded their contributions caps in that financial year (under the current rules).

As TR 2010/1 states, the capital of an SMSF is increased when an amount is received, or ownership of an asset is obtained, or the SMSF otherwise obtains the benefit of an amount.

It’s easy to determine that a cash contribution has been made when the SMSF trustee receives the amount. However, when it comes to an asset transfer, a contribution is sometimes made when the SMSF becomes the beneficial owner of the asset rather than the legal owner. Take, for example, a member transferring land to their fund. The relevant transfer form is signed and given to their SMSF trustee on 30 June. The SMSF trustee lodges the form with the State Revenue Office on 15 July and seeks a transfer of title via the Land Title’s Office once duty is paid.

The trustee, by holding a duly executed transfer form and not requiring anything further from the member to perfect its title, possesses everything required to make the transfer of beneficial ownership of the property on 30 June, so a contribution is considered to be made on 30 June. This is provided the SMSF trustee retains sufficient evidence of the relevant transactions and events to identify when the change of beneficial ownership occurred.

Grey areas in benefits

Just as there are some grey areas in super contributions, there are grey areas when paying benefits. An SMSF can, for example, pay a lump sum benefit by transferring an asset to a fund member, whereas an SMSF cannot pay a pension benefit using assets unless the pension is either partially or fully commuted to a lump sum. Not all pensions can be partially commuted – for example, a transition to retirement pension can only be partially commuted if it has an unrestricted non-preserved component. A lump sum super benefit can be paid in any number of instalments, whereas a lump sum death benefit can only be paid in one or two instalments to the deceased’s beneficiaries.

Benefits not permitted via journal entry

While super contributions can be made with journal entries where the member and the SMSF trustee have a present liability or legal obligation to each other and they offset the liabilities against each other using a journal entry in the SMSF’s books, a super benefit cannot be made with a journal entry.

The ATO states in ATOID 2015/23 that a death benefit, for example, must actually be paid to the deceased’s beneficiaries by transfer of cash and/or the ownership of an SMSF’s asset. The payment must reduce a member’s benefit in the SMSF. A transfer to the deceased’s beneficiaries simply by way of journal entries in the books of the SMSF would not satisfy the requirement of the super law that a benefit has been made.

Understanding the basic requirements of what a super contribution is and when a benefit is made can save a member from contravening the superannuation and tax laws. Just remember, a contribution increases the capital of an SMSF while a benefit should reduce it.

 

Monica Rule is an SMSF specialist and author of The Self-Managed Super Handbook – www.monicarule.com.au. This article is general information and does not consider the needs of any individual.

 

  •   1 September 2016
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Who really loses from the SMSF borrowing ban?

Meg on SMSFs: Payday super – why should SMSF members even care?

Meg on SMSFs: Ageing and its financial challenges

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

Latest Updates

Exchange traded products

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Taxation

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Retirement

Three considerations before reshaping your legacy plan

Many retirees hope to leave a legacy. Proposed trust tax reforms could force families to rethink. The question is not how much to leave behind, but whether today's inheritance plans will still make sense as circumstances change.

Investment strategies

Why experienced investors still get markets wrong

Retirement is approaching. Markets are noisy. And every headline seems to demand action. The biggest investment risk isn't fear, greed or market volatility, it often arrives disguised as research and sensible risk management.

Shares

Why pay more for less?

Conditions were stacked in favour of professional investors in 2026. Most still fell short, raising questions about where investors should look for value. Meanwhile, an alternative strategy continued to make its case.

Investment strategies

Bleeding air out of the bubble

Equity valuations have fallen sharply over the past year, yet investors have largely been spared the volatility and losses that typically accompany a de-rating. What explains this unusually orderly reset? Here are five key drivers.

Strategy

Has AI gone rogue?

We worry about AI becoming conscious. But what if consciousness isn't the issue? The more unsettling possibility is a machine capable of pursuing objectives relentlessly, without motives, emotions, or awareness of any kind.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 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.