Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 302

SMSF trustees may lose insurance after super changes

The ‘Protecting Your Superannuation’ package, proposed in the 2018 Federal Budget, was passed earlier this year, and while the changes were designed to protect small superannuation balances, there may be significant implications for others. Many SMSF members, or others with large super balances, maintain smaller public offer accounts solely to access well-priced group life insurance. This legislation may place those life policies at risk unless members take action.

Super changes already legislated

The key changes in this legislation take effect from 1 July 2019, and are designed to limit the erosion of small balances in the following ways:

  • Fees will be limited to no more than 3% per annum for accounts with a balance of less than $6,000.
  • Exit fees on all super accounts will be banned to remove barriers to consolidation.
  • Insurance will be maintained on an opt-in basis for inactive accounts, defined as those that have not received a contribution in 16 months. Funds will be required to contact inactive members before 1 May 2019 to confirm whether they wish to maintain their existing cover.
  • Super trustees will also be required to transfer all inactive accounts with balances below $6,000 to the ATO, which will then strive to transfer these balances to the owner’s active superannuation account.

(Please note: The proposal to make insurance an ‘opt-in’ for those commencing a superannuation account under the age of 25, or with a balance of less than $6,000, was dropped from this legislation and will be proposed in a separate bill, which has not yet passed).

If you have been maintaining a small inactive superannuation fund for insurance purposes, it is likely this legislation will affect you. You may have your insurance policy cancelled, or, if your balance is below $6,000, your policy cancelled AND your balance transferred to the ATO. Neither of these outcomes is desirable if you are intentionally arranging insurance cover in an account separate from your existing active super balance.

Benefits of insurance through a large fund

If you have an inactive account, your superannuation fund should contact you soon requesting that you opt in to maintain your insurance cover. However you will need to ensure they have the correct mailing details etc in order to contact you. If you have not heard from your fund by 1 May, it is strongly advised that you contact them directly to confirm that you wish to maintain your cover, if you wish to do so.

The implications of having insurance cancelled can be significant. It is widely accepted that thousands of small superannuation accounts are maintained in the public system by SMSF trustees purely for insurance purposes.

Superannuation funds can hold life, total and permanent disablement and income protection policies on your behalf. Large funds are also generally able to access group policies that offer lower premiums than personal policies such as those you can access through an SMSF. Large super funds also often offer ‘automatic acceptance limits’, which allow you take out cover up to pre-specified limits without having to undergo personal underwriting, which may include medical tests and so on.

In the event your existing cover is cancelled, you may not be able to get new cover on the same terms. You may need to disclose medical conditions that have arisen since you originally applied, and have higher premiums or exclusions as a result, or you may no longer be eligible for cover at all through that fund. In many circumstances, particularly if you are older, or have poor health or a high-risk occupation, your existing policy may be the only insurance policy you hold. It may also be the only affordable insurance you are able to get.

Qualifying a fund as active

Insurance is critical if you have debt, dependents or rely on your income for your financial security. If that insurance is held in a super fund you’re not contributing to, you will need to consider whether to make the fund active, or at least ensure that the trustee of the fund knows you want it by opting in. Part of the new legislation lists actions that qualify a fund as active, which include making contributions, rolling funds into the account, changing investment options, making changes to your insurance or making a declaration to the ATO. If you’re not sure what you have, exactly, this could also present a great opportunity to review your insurance and ensure you have the cover you need.


Gemma Dale is Director of SMSF and Investor Behaviour at nabtrade, a sponsor of Cuffelinks. Any information in this publication is of a general nature only. It is not intended to be a substitute for specialised advice and nabtrade is not a registered tax agent.

For more articles and papers from nabtrade, please click here.

April 21, 2019

As someone who can no longer be underwritten for any new life insurance, I have three of these public offer funds specifically for the insurance, as well as an SMSF where most of the money sits.

I contacted each fund to confirm what they need to mainatain a ‘active’ status. The Mercer fund nominated a contribution each 16 months. The IOOF fund said as long as i enquired each 16 months i would be ok. The Plum fund is my current corporate plan so is active.

To keep things simple, and so I don’t need to remember to do anything further, I set up a regular $5 monthly contribution to the Mercer and IOOF funds. Job done.

There will definitely be people who lose critical insurance via these changes. I have not had any communication about these changes from any of the 3 funds that i hold. 1st May is 10 days away, and everyone is on holidays.

Yet another example of why it is necessary for people to engage wth their super.

April 21, 2019

Craig should review the wisdom of having cover with 3 funds. I read that if you have a claim you can only claim on one policy.

Can anybody support my contention ?

April 22, 2019

This is a common and unfortunate misperception.

Ultimately it depends on the specific rules of each fund and insurance product involved. So be sure to read the fine print and/or get proper advice for your specific situation. But generally speaking it is quite OK to claim on multiple policies. The main area of restriction is with income protection. The overriding rule is not being able to claim more than about 75% of pre illness income in total across multiple income protection policies.

April 17, 2019

Thanks for reminding me about this. It's why I keep my public fund.


Leave a Comment:



What super changes should you know from 1 July?


Most viewed in recent weeks

Is it better to rent or own a home under the age pension?

With 62% of Australians aged 65 and over relying at least partially on the age pension, are they better off owning their home or renting? There is an extra pension asset allowance for those not owning a home.

Too many retirees miss out on this valuable super fund benefit

With 700 Australians retiring every day, retirement income solutions are more important than ever. Why do millions of retirees eligible for a more tax-efficient pension account hold money in accumulation?

Is the fossil fuel narrative simply too convenient?

A fund manager argues it is immoral to deny poor countries access to relatively cheap energy from fossil fuels. Wealthy countries must recognise the transition is a multi-decade challenge and continue to invest.

Reece Birtles on selecting stocks for income in retirement

Equity investing comes with volatility that makes many retirees uncomfortable. A focus on income which is less volatile than share prices, and quality companies delivering robust earnings, offers more reassurance.

Comparing generations and the nine dimensions of our well-being

Using the nine dimensions of well-being used by the OECD, and dividing Australians into Baby Boomers, Generation Xers or Millennials, it is surprisingly easy to identify the winners and losers for most dimensions.

Anton in 2006 v 2022, it's deja vu (all over again)

What was bothering markets in 2006? Try the end of cheap money, bond yields rising, high energy prices and record high commodity prices feeding inflation. Who says these are 'unprecedented' times? It's 2006 v 2022.

Latest Updates


Superannuation: a 30+ year journey but now stop fiddling

Few people have been closer to superannuation policy over the years than Noel Whittaker, especially when he established his eponymous financial planning business. He takes us on a quick guided tour.

Survey: share your retirement experiences

All Baby Boomers are now over 55 and many are either in retirement or thinking about a transition from work. But what is retirement like? Is it the golden years or a drag? Do you have tips for making the most of it?


Time for value as ‘promise generators’ fail to deliver

A $28 billion global manager still sees far more potential in value than growth stocks, believes energy stocks are undervalued including an Australian company, and describes the need for resilience in investing.


Paul Keating's long-term plans for super and imputation

Paul Keating not only designed compulsory superannuation but in the 30 years since its introduction, he has maintained the rage. Here are highlights of three articles on SG's origins and two more recent interviews.

Fixed interest

On interest rates and credit, do you feel the need for speed?

Central bank support for credit and equity markets is reversing, which has led to wider spreads and higher rates. But what does that mean and is it time to jump at higher rates or do they have some way to go?

Investment strategies

Death notices for the 60/40 portfolio are premature

Pundits have once again declared the death of the 60% stock/40% bond portfolio amid sharp declines in both stock and bond prices. Based on history, balanced portfolios are apt to prove the naysayers wrong, again.

Exchange traded products

ETFs and the eight biggest worries in index investing

Both passive investing and ETFs have withstood criticism as their popularity has grown. They have been blamed for causing bubbles, distorting the market, and concentrating share ownership. Are any of these criticisms valid?



© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

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 ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). 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.