Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 206

Is it time to review your super pension?

The financial media is replete with advice on the new super laws. Advisers, accountants, SMSFs specialists (myself included) and product providers are flat out getting ready in time.

The $1.6 million transfer balance cap is receiving most attention as existing pension balances will be measured on 1 July 2017. If your pension balance is under $1.6 million, you may think you don’t need to worry about it, but what if you and your spouse have over $1.6 million between you?

Importance of dealing with transfer balance cap

In this circumstance, if one of you dies and the survivor wants to keep the assets in the advantageous superannuation environment, the transfer balance cap becomes very relevant.

Check how the pension is structured to be paid out after a death. Under the transfer balance cap rules, where the pension is not ‘reversionary’, but the surviving spouse elects to receive the benefit as a pension, the balance will count towards that spouse’s cap straight away, and that could tip his or her pension transfer balance over $1.6 million. This will need to be dealt with as soon as possible.

In the past, a surviving spouse was able to roll over a pension from a deceased spouse (known as a ‘death benefit pension’) after a specified time period (six months from date of death, or three months from grant of probate). This provision has been removed and it will always be a death benefit pension and unable to be rolled over.

So, if you receive a death benefit pension from your spouse which results in you exceeding your $1.6 million transfer balance cap, the only way to keep the money in the superannuation system is to roll your own pension back to accumulation.

A ‘reversionary’ pension, on the other hand, will not be assessed to the surviving spouse for 12 months from the date of death, buying a bit of time before having to deal with the excess. The same issues arise, but you have a year to figure out what to do.

Correct set-up makes a difference

Hence, setting up the pension correctly while you’re alive can make all the difference to your spouse on your death. Let me put that into a case study to illustrate.

On 1 July 2017, Brian, 76, has an account-based pension valued at $1,400,000, while his wife, Jenny’s, 72, is worth $900,000. Both pensions are ‘reversionary’ to each other.

On 25 July 2017, Brian passes away. His pension is valued at $1,380,000 and continues uninterrupted to Jenny. Technically, Jenny’s total pension balance is now over $1.6 million, however, the reversionary pension will not count towards Jenny’s cap until 25 July 2018, giving her time to consider her options.

Jenny cannot roll over any of Brian’s pension, she can elect to roll over some or all of her pension to accumulation. She decides to roll over enough to bring her transfer balance cap to $1.6 million.

Jenny’s Transfer Balance Cap

Had Brian’s pension not been reversionary, Jenny would have had to deal with this soon after his death, at a difficult time for her. Being reversionary also gives tax free income and capital gains for an extra year. Jenny has time to decide that the assets supporting her own pension should be sold before being transferred to accumulation.

If Brian’s balance was over $1.6 million, Jenny would have no choice but to commute the amount over $1.6 million to a lump sum payment, and transfer her whole balance back to accumulation.

If both partners are still in accumulation phase, what happens if one dies? This is similar to a non-reversionary pension. If a surviving spouse elects to take the benefits as a pension, the value of the pension account will count immediately towards his or her transfer balance cap.

Can anyone be nominated to receive a reversionary pension on my death?

A death benefit pension can only be paid to a:

  • Spouse, including de facto and same sex partner
  • Person who was financially dependent on the deceased
  • Person who had an interdependency relationship with the deceased person, and
  • Child, including adopted, step and ex-nuptial, who is under 18, over 18 with a disability, or 18 to 24 and financially dependent on the deceased.

Next time you’re in for an investment review, speak to your adviser about the structure of your pension. It may need some tweaking.

 

Alex Denham is a Senior Adviser with Dartnall Advisers. Prior to becoming an adviser, she spent 20 years in senior technical roles with several financial services companies. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any individual and is based on a current understanding of the rules.

 

  •   15 June 2017
  •      
  •   

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

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

Timing on transfer balance cap and CGT relief

2 billion reasons to fix retirement income

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?

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.

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.

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.

The investing rule that explains the next market crash

What if investment success depends less on picking the right assets and more on understanding the decisions of other investors? A principle borrowed from game theory offers a different perspective on markets.

Latest Updates

Fixed interest

Higher yields are creating opportunities in global bonds

Bond markets are adjusting to a new reality, but not in the ways investors expect. With markets repricing and capital competing for attention, investors may need to rethink where resilience and opportunity lie. 

Economy

Are we in a recession?

What if the warning signs are already everywhere? From supermarket aisles to company failures, investors are being bombarded with recession signals. But most face a different risk that can be just as dangerous for portfolios. 

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs - Division 296 actuarial certificates

The tax bill might be yours, but the event that caused it may not be. A key Division 296 calculation can sometimes attribute earnings in ways that many SMSF trustees won't instinctively expect or fully appreciate.

Property

The first impact of negative gearing reform is not the tax bill

Negative gearing changes formally begin in 2027, but the first consequences may already be here. A subtle shift is quietly influencing who can borrow, how much they can access and which property strategies still stack up.

Economy

The oil market is running out of easy answers

The biggest threat to markets may not be what investors are watching. The numbers have stopped adding up and supply is harder to measure, with forecasts becoming simple guesses. A more fragile reality is being masked.

Investment strategies

The state of investor knowledge in Australia

Australians are investing more than ever, yet a surprising divide is emerging between those building wealth effectively and those making costly mistakes. Surprisingly, the gap has little to do with income, age or starting capital.

Taxation

Complexity and capital gains

A case study shows that the ‘30% minimum CGT’ is a poorly conceived tax that adds significant complexity to an already over-complex system. A less complicated model would create a much fairer progressive tax scale.

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.