Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 196

How super changes impact insurance and estate planning

The introduction of the $1.6 million transfer balance cap, effective from July 1 this year, will impact the estate plans of many superannuation members. This article reviews the role of insurance as part of an SMSF’s investment strategy and the changes that people may need to make.

Making insurance part of an SMSF’s investment strategy

Superannuation law requires all SMSF trustees to formulate, regularly review and give effect to an investment strategy relevant to the whole of the fund’s circumstances. The investment strategy must set out the investment objectives of the fund and detail the methods the fund will adopt to achieve these objectives.

When formulating an investment strategy, trustees must consider:

  • the risk and likely return of investments
  • the diversification of the fund’s investment portfolio
  • the liquidity of the fund’s assets
  • the fund’s ability to pay benefits and other costs it incurs
  • whether the trustee should hold insurance policies for one or more members.

The mandate to consider the insurance needs of members has been law since 2012, but many trustees have not amended their investment strategies to comply with the requirement.

Considering the insurance needs of members generally involves the following steps:

  • determining the insurance needs of each SMSF member (including death, total and permanent disability insurance (TPD) and income protection insurance).
  • determining whether insurance should be held by the super fund.
  • amending the fund’s investment strategy.

Once the insurance needs have been determined, the investment strategy must be updated. Given the personal nature of the assessment of insurance needs, this could be documented by way of a minute, relative to each member.

The notation in the investment strategy can be quite simple and concise, for example:

‘the trustees have considered the insurance needs of members of the fund and have determined that the insurances held by the members within the fund remain appropriate.’

or

‘the trustees have considered the insurance needs of members of the fund and have determined that it remains appropriate for the fund not to hold insurance policies for members.

However, the notation to amend the investment strategy should be supported by more detailed information on the insurance needs and an outline of the reasons the decision were made. This may take the form of a statement of advice (SOA) prepared by an adviser. Trustees need to ensure that the information they retain is sufficient to withstand future scrutiny. For example, the widow of a deceased member who was in an SMSF with his parents may have recourse against the parent trustees if they cannot demonstrate that they considered the insurance needs of all members.

Regular review of investment strategy

Trustees are now required to ensure that the investment strategy is reviewed regularly, to ensure that trustees do not simply ‘set and forget’ their investment goals and insurance needs. Whilst ‘regularly’ is not defined, it is generally considered that at least annually is prudent.

In addition, there are events that should prompt an SMSF trustee to consider a review of the insurance needs of members and the fund’s investment strategy, such as:

  • the admittance of a new member
  • changes in a member’s personal circumstance (for example, marriage or children)
  • a member commencing a pension
  • significant changes in financial market conditions.

Insurance and the $1.6 million transfer balance cap

The introduction of the $1.6 million transfer balance cap is likely to prompt a review of holding insurance in super for many SMSF trustees and members of retail superannuation funds.

This is because the transfer balance cap places a limit on the amount of super that can be used to commence a pension that receives tax-free investment returns. On the death of a member, their benefit must be ‘cashed’ and paid to their superannuation dependants (most commonly to a spouse or child). The benefit may be cashed by paying a lump sum benefit, by commencing one or more pensions or a combination of both.

If a death benefit pension is paid, the amount that can be used to start the pension is restricted to the transfer balance cap of $1.6 million. Any amount above the transfer balance cap must leave the superannuation system. Where there are multiple beneficiaries, each beneficiary receives a proportionate share of the transfer balance cap.

If a beneficiary has commenced a pension themselves, their own pension and the death benefit pension they receive counts towards the $1.6 million cap. A member’s own pension may be commuted back to accumulation phase, but a death benefit pension cannot be.

Case study - Margaret

Margaret is a single parent who has two children. She has an accumulation account which holds $400,000 and life insurance of $2 million. She has binding nominations to her two children in equal shares.

If Margaret dies her total superannuation death benefit will be paid 50% to each child ($1.2 million each). Before 1 July 2017, each child could receive $1.2 million as a death benefit pension. However, from 1 July, each child will be limited to a death benefit pension of $800,000 (half of the $1.6 million cap). The remaining $400,000 each must leave the super system as a lump sum payment.

Therefore, it is essential that people with large super balances review their estate plans to ensure any benefits that may be forced out of the super system are directed to structures that can be controlled, such as testamentary trusts established via a will.

The introduction of the super changes is likely to be a catalyst for SMSF trustees to review their insurance needs and for members of other funds to review their own arrangements.

 

Julie Steed is Senior Technical Services Manager at Australian Executor Trustees. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

3 Comments
Bruce
April 16, 2017

Hi Julie
Many thanks for your comment.

On this basis families will miss out if a superannuant dies after the new $1.6m cap comes into force in July. Dependents, including disabled and school age children, will no longer benefit from any tax concessions that will apply to funds in the 1 July 2017 accumulation account of the deceased.

To ensure that the funds in my accumulation account could be transferred into a Testamentary Trust to fund the education expenses of my school age children I will require a different death benefit nominations for my pension account and my newly created accumulation account .

In this age of blended families, not all retirees have adult children. And not all partners are of similar ages. However, the changes introduced by this Government ignore these changes to our society.

Bruce
April 03, 2017

Hi Julie

In the event that, in addition to a pension account, the deceased also has funds in an accumulation account, can these be transferred to an accumulation account in the name of their spouse/child if there is a binding nomination?

Or do the Trustees have to pay out any funds in an accumulation account as a lump sum to their spouse/child?

Or do the funds in an accumulation account form part of a person’s estate and are covered by the provisions of the deceased’s will (e.g. a testamentary trust).

Julie Steed
April 06, 2017

Hi Bruce,
If the fund rules allow, a death benefit paid from an accumulation account may be paid as a pension. Any such death benefit paid counts towards the recipient's transfer balance cap ($1.6 million). Generally only spouses and minor children are eligible to receive death benefits in the form of a pension.

A death benefit paid from an accumulation account cannot be paid as an accumulation account to a beneficiary, regardless of what type of nomination is in place.

If the death benefit cannot be paid as a death benefit pension it must leave the super system. It could be paid directly to a beneficiary or to the legal personal representative via the estate, depending on the fund rules and the type of death benefit nomination that the deceased had.
Regards
Julie

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Did retirees lose out when they accepted defined benefit schemes?

How to prevent excessive superannuation balances

Optimal ways to use the Transfer Balance Cap after a death

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

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.

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.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

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. 

Superannuation

Less than 1% of wealthy families will struggle to pay super tax: study

An ANU study has found that families with at least one super balance over $3 million have average wealth exceeding $19 million - suggesting most are well placed to absorb taxes on unrealised capital gains.   

Superannuation

Are SMSFs getting too much of a free ride?

SMSFs have managed to match, or even outperform, larger super funds despite adopting more conservative investment strategies. This looks at how they've done it - and the potential policy implications.  

Property

A developer's take on Australia's housing issues

Stockland’s development chief discusses supply constraints, government initiatives and the impact of Japanese-owned homebuilders on the industry. He also talks of green shoots in a troubled property market.

Economy

Lessons from 100 years of growing US debt

As the US debt ceiling looms, the usual warnings about a potential crash in bond and equity markets have started to appear. Investors can take confidence from history but should keep an eye on two main indicators.

Investment strategies

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

US mega-cap tech stocks have dominated recent returns - but is familiarity distorting judgement? Like the Monty Hall problem, investing success often comes from switching when it feels hardest to do so.

Latest from Morningstar

A winning investment strategy sitting right under your nose

How does a strategy built around systematically buying-and-holding a basket of the market's biggest losers perform? It turns out pretty well, so why don't more investors do it?

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.