I came across an article by Mike Taylor on the website Money Management. It talks about a very interesting discussion in the SMSF sector today. Financial advisers are being criticised for recommending SMSFs to those clients who have in deficit of $200,000 as their fund’s opening balance.
ASIC cautions financial advisers
The advisers are being cautioned by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). It is not that the financial advisers have to follow the ASIC directive to a tee but if they still ask clients to get into SMSF with fund balances lower than $200,000, the ASIC will at least like to know why.
Reverse analysis- a pretty interesting one
In an interesting take to the discussion, Michael Hallinan, a Townsends lawyer, questions the “reverse rationale” behind not recommending SMSF to those clients who have funds higher than $500,000. There are many financial advisers who have kept clients with inordinately high funds restricted to retail funds or industry funds. This might not be the best way to go forward either, contests Hallinan.
You can read the original article here.
The investors will decide for themselves. They have turned out to be an educated lot. This is the commonest rebuttal we can give. But are they educated enough? Well, they can be all giants in their respective fields but the SMSF rope still needs a little bit of learning….even for them.
Everyone is an SMSF expert…..ah!
Does the public need SMSF to get exposed to listed investments? They can utilise public funds, a lot cheaper than the SMSF, to do so. And who says, the public funds do not offer control? (I know I earn my living as an SMSF expert but it is the duty of professionals to review a debate in an unbiased way).
This does not stop me from being a fan of SMSF though.
I reiterate, SMSF is not for everyone but if you follow its fortunes keenly, you will only agree that it is lately becoming a choice weapon for more and more investors.
