www.financialstandard.com.au
06
09
22
AMP, Aware Super
Shannon Bernasconi WealthO2
NGS Super, FASEA
Feature:
Profile:
News:
07
Product showcase: Fidelity International
Government shifts gears on retirement Kanika Sood
hen the government kicked off its quest W for better retirement income products for Australians, its wishlist of features was ambitious. Now, a new position paper has scaled back the criteria – but not entirely to the benefit of super funds. In 2018, the government wanted superannuation funds to come up with Comprehensive Income Products for Retirement (CIPRs) that did three main things: provided income to retirees at levels greater than inflation, ensured this income lasted until the members died, and provided some flexibility on drawdowns. CIPRs were met with backlash from industry participants who said the trio was unachievable. Nearly three years later, on July 19 the government released a position paper on the Retirement Income Covenant which softens what it’s asking of super funds. Super funds must still have retirement income products for all members by July 2022. But many of the government’s previous asks, such as longevity and flexibility, have been demoted to something to “consider”. Frontier principal consultant David Carruthers says the new framework is much more workable for the industry. “The new framework is much, much more focused on income and it is good that the government has moved away from the CIPRs framework which took a more prescriptive and product-based approach to a more memberfocused approach,” Carruthers says. He says, in a way, the government has almost suggested a hierarchy where maximising ‘income’ is more important, ahead of longevity and flexibility. “There is a lot more talk about ‘guidance’ and how do you actually help members choose better for retirement income [outside of] advice and soft defaults,” he says. However, it’s not all smooth sailing for funds, with the position paper also floating the idea that super funds look at members’ Age Pension entitlements to consider ways of maximising retirement income. It also wants funds to consider other income support payments such as the Disability Support Pension, Carer Payment, JobSeeker Payment and the Service Pension depending on its membership – either by collecting member data
or by drawing assumptions for member cohorts from sources such as Services Australia and the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This is not data that many funds collect – and may be why funds have been slow to launch retirement income products. “Age Pension is a critical element and number one consideration for most members. It does really impact retirement income outcomes, and is probably the reason why super funds haven’t spent enough time [so far] on developing solutions,” says SuperEd chair Jeremy Duffield, who previously called for the Age Pension to be included in the Covenant. Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) director, policy Fiona Galbraith also highlighted the problem in considering member’s Age Pension statuses. “ASFA has formed a working group to analyse and assess the position paper. One area of focus for the working group will be the expectation that trustees take into consideration members’ Age Pension eligibility, given a number of the factors that affect this largely are unknown to trustees, or at best are averages,” Galbraith says. Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) chief executive Eva Scheerlinck also welcomed the move away from mandating annuities or CIPRs but said the Covenant needs to be considered alongside other regulation underway. “AIST also calls for the development of retirement income strategies to be progressed in tandem with the forthcoming review into meeting financial advice needs, and for the government to progress a legislated definition of the objective of superannuation and the objective of the retirement income system,” Scheerlinck said. Come June 2022, Carruthers and Duffield think funds might find account-based pensions are still useful but will have incentive to go beyond the traditional products. “Super funds may find that account-based pensions may suit a lot of people, but at the minimum they will need to consider their drawdown strategies and provide some guidance or framework around it,” Carruthers says. Referring to products like annuities that can have beneficial Age Pension treatment, he adds: “If you’ve got members that are on part Age Pension, the fund’s strategy has to look carefully at new products to maximise retirement income.” fs
26 July 2021 | Volume 19 Number 14 www.financialstandard.com.au 20 January 2020 | Volume 18 Number 01
Opinion:
News:
14
32
Value investing
Allison Dummett ClearView, Matrix
MySuper fund performance soars Annabelle Dickson
Fiona Galbraith
director, policy Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia
MySuper options have delivered the best annual financial returns in over three decades, new research shows. The latest data from Rainmaker Information’s Default MySuper Index recorded 2020/21 financial year returns of an average of 18%, after all fees and taxes. According to Rainmaker, the last time the index recorded such high performance was in the 198687 financial year at 19%. The returns were driven by listed property (33%), Australian and international shares (28%) and global infrastructure (20%). However, on the other end unlisted direct property only secured returns of 3.6% followed by 0.2% from international bonds, 0% from cash and 0.8% from Australian bonds. “These returns mean Australia’s 13.5 million super fund members earned $520 billion in investment earnings in the past 12 months, or almost $39,000 each,” Rainmaker Information Continued on page 4
Adviser checking prep underway Karren Vergara
ASIC released more information on what financial advisers can expect from the new reference checking laws, which take effect on October 1. New protocols administered by ASIC require a licensee recruiting a prospective financial adviser to request a reference about the candidate from the referee licensee. ASIC said it expects recruiting licensees to undertake appropriate background checks beyond reference checking before authorising new representatives. “Licensees are subject to general conduct obligations which include taking steps to ensure that their representatives comply with financial services laws or credit legislation,” the regulator said. A civil penalty applies for non-compliance. ASIC can also take administrative action if parties do not comply with the new protocol, which could include suspending or cancelling a licence or imposing licence conditions. Continued on page 4