Policy and advocacy

We have made numerous submissions to the Treasury consultation on the proposed Design and Distribution Obligations (DDO) and Product Intervention Powers.

These measures would provide a one-off 12-month amnesty to encourage employers to self-correct historical superannuation guarantee non-compliance. It will also enable certain employees with multiple employers to apply for an employer shortfall exemption certificate to prevent their employer from having a superannuation guarantee shortfall if they do not make contributions for a period. Our submission sought a specific exemption to make it clear that shortfall exemption certificates will not be issued to an employer obliged to fund an employee's defined benefit. It was also argued there should be a further exemption where an employer is subject to another contractual obligation to contribute at a rate higher than the SG (for example, an industrial agreement).

The Government released 2 draft proposals for public consultation where the aim is to provide victims of crime with access to a perpetrator’s superannuation in certain circumstances. The first is for a new claw-back mechanism for 'out of character' superannuation contributions made by criminals to shield their assets from use in compensating victims of their crimes. The second is to allow victims of serious, violent crimes to be able to access a perpetrator's superannuation as compensation, where other assets have been exhausted, subject to appropriate limits and thresholds.

Our submission focussed on defining the main objective of superannuation and the role of super funds in providing retirement income to their members. The submission also highlighted the key role of replacement rates.

Announced in the 2018 Budget, this Bill was designed to give effect to the Government’s Protecting Your Super Package. Our submission to Treasury supported the package but raised a small number of technical issues relating to defined benefit schemes.

The Government consulted the industry about the social security means test rules that would apply to lifetime retirement income products, seeking to ensure they’re appropriate for the innovative types of retirement income products expected to be developed. Our submission raised a number of issues about neutrality across product types and the potential effect these changes could have on the development of new products.

An issues paper was released for public consultation, examining the key issues related to the early release of superannuation benefits under compassionate grounds and severe financial hardship grounds. The paper also examined the circumstances in which an offender’s super assets could be available to pay victims of crime compensation.

The Government proposed new rules for financial products to ensure that products are targeted to the right people. The proposal also included a measure to give ASIC a temporary product intervention power for situations where there is a risk of significant consumer detriment. We made a short submission arguing that as MySuper products would be exempted from the design and distribution obligations, defined benefit products should also be exempted.

This Bill would see superannuation fund boards be required to have at least one-third independent directors including an independent Chair, among other measures. Our submission focussed on the technical definition of independent of ‘independent’ that potentially give rise to outcomes whereby an (otherwise) independent director could unnecessarily lose their independence.

Our submission on the draft Code highlighted the following: higher levels of employer support led to different insurance offerings; insurance design is a trade-off between protecting against account erosion and protecting members in the event of death or disability; diverse communication strategies and customer service offerings need to be recognised rather than codified; enforceability of the Code.

Our submission focussed on technical issues about the definition of ‘independent’ proposed in the Bill.

Our submission focussed on extending Choice of Fund and the effect this could have on UniSuper’s open defined benefit scheme. We also highlighted some issues with transition to the new rules, which we were concerned could lead to complications and confusion for employers, employees, members, and super funds.

Our submission focussed on technical issues with the proposed definition of eligible contributions, and highlighted some inconsistent treatment for defined benefit schemes.

Our submission argued for a framework rather than specific and codified product rules. The submission also highlighted some concerns about the uncertain demand for these products and the lack of social security incentive for members.

Our submission focussed on our personalised claims service, which we believe is best practice. This approach is contrasted with the proposed policy of having an industry-funded claims assistance service, which we were concerned lacks expertise and personal care.

Our submission commented on the four alternative models proposed for allocating default superannuation members to products. We found each of the alternatives to be a departure from established practices, and none of them adequately addressed the specific challenges faced by defined benefit schemes.

Our submission supported standardisation in some areas (for example, definitions of key terms), provided it’s matched with sufficient flexibility for trustees to respond to the needs of their own membership. Our submission also challenged the proposed maximum premium levels for automatic insurance and cessation of cover rules.

Our submission gave in-principle support for a new set of design rules for lifetime superannuation income streams. We particularly supported the proposal for collective defined contribution (CDC) schemes, which we suggested could be offered as a category of default fund similar to MySuper.

Our submission focussed on technical issues with deducting personal contributions to superannuation.

Our submission focussed on defining the main objective of superannuation and the role of funds in providing retirement income to their members. The submission also highlighted the key role of replacement rates.

Our submission highlighted issues with the proposed non-concessional contributions cap.

There were a number of defined benefit issues in this tranche which formed the basis of the submission. In particular, we suggested an alternative special valuation rule for defined benefit pensions based on commutation factors rather than an across-the-board multiple of 16 times pension. We also made comments on the proposed reduction of the concessional contributions cap and on grandfathering arrangements.

Our submission highlighted some technical issues with claiming personal tax deductions to defined benefit schemes.

Our submission supported an objective "To encourage Australians to take retirement benefits predominantly in the form of income streams, with those income streams targeting a percentage of pre-retirement income which varies depending on the level of their pre-retirement income".

Our submission to Treasury on exposure draft legislation that would extend superannuation choice to those covered by enterprise agreements and workplace determinations.