ATO reveals truth about SMSFs ...

[amaroo]

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

ATO reveals truth about SMSFs

SELF-managed superannuation funds have been attacked from all sides in recent times, coming under fire for supposedly being used as tax avoidance schemes for the rich and powerful.

But now, the Australian Taxation Office has taken the unprecedented step of coming out in support of the nation’s fastest growing super group. This dramatic event now makes it certain that the self-managed fund movement will become by far the dominant force in Australian superannuation.

When the sums were last calculated, self-managed super funds had one third of the $1.5 trillion superannuation pie (total $495bn). They were well ahead of retail and industry funds, and growing fast. Forsyth revealed that self-managed funds now control $557bn worth of assets, a rise of $62bn, or 12.5 per cent in a year.

No wonder the Industry funds are scared and spend a fortune of their members money on those ridiculous ads!

 

[JessicaTam]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

ATO reveals truth about SMSFs



No wonder the Industry funds are scared and spend a fortune of their members money on those ridiculous ads!

Are you saying the ads are ridiculous, or that it is ridiculous that they have ads?

If the former, well each to their own. If the latter, most businesses are entitled to advertise, so I would disagree.

 

[amaroo]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Are you saying the ads are ridiculous, or that it is ridiculous that they have ads?

If the former, well each to their own. If the latter, most businesses are entitled to advertise, so I would disagree.

Ind Funds run a hidden agenda and along with retail funds they overplay their hand in regards to bashing SMSF - as per the article. The ads are a distraction at best and not the best use of members funds IMO.

 

[Cossie]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Ind Funds run a hidden agenda and along with retail funds they overplay their hand in regards to bashing SMSF - as per the article. The ads are a distraction at best and not the best use of members funds IMO.

OK, I'll bite, what's this "hidden agenda", I'm curious?

Not everyone wants to spend their time and effort running their own funds, I know I have better things to do with my time. I'm not greedy, I'm quite happy with what my funds are providing and I don't want to be like a friend that was a weekend away from losing his house and everything in it, when the last gfc hit.

 

[amaroo]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Classic scare tactics coupled with bamboozling language SMSF audits, reviews, rules, tax » Industry Super enhanced with OTT ads that put the fear of god into the average punter. The ind/retail funds like to propel this fantasy that you need a minimum of $500k to even begin to think about starting a SMSF.

Should I start a self-managed super fund?

Should I start a self-managed super fund?

If you’re asking that question of your own volition, the answer is probably ‘yes’.

I say that because an interest in taking control of your super is half the battle.Industry and retail super funds promote the idea of a ‘minimum balance’ but you really don’t need as much as their marketing departments would like you to think.

Technology is rapidly eating away at administration costs – you can now run a SMSF for less than $1000 a year through an online provider – so if you’ve got $100,000 or thereabouts you’re in the game.

 

[medhead]

The totally off-topic thread

Ind Funds run a hidden agenda and along with retail funds they overplay their hand in regards to bashing SMSF - as per the article. The ads are a distraction at best and not the best use of members funds IMO.

Having experienced both industry and retail funds, the outperformance of industry funds versus the low fees justifies advertising. I'm yet to see an industry did advertisement that attacks smsf. The agenda of industry super funds is hardly hidden - achieve better performance over the longer term, with minimal work. You can bang on all you like about smsf, but the work involved has to be greater and I bet the well performing funds are few and far between. Against that I put my money in an industry find that has regularly been in the top ten funds by return and is consistently in the top 15 or 20. That's all the work I need to do, beside checking the increase in value.

Edit: oh just read your hidden agenda. Hahahaha. As little as $1000 a year. Pmsl. Want to hear about an industry fund that cost me $200 a year and return >10%.

As for scare tactics, gee that ironic claim the experts in the field have a hidden agenda to scare the public into submission. I thought we were suppose to just accept the word of the experts. :?:

 

[amaroo]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Having experienced both industry and retail funds,

So - no experience with SMSF then?

 

[medhead]

The totally off-topic thread

So - no experience with SMSF then?

Go ahead and read the rest of my post, I've already addressed your little question.

 

[amaroo]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Go ahead and read the rest of my post, I've already addressed your little question.

LOL why limit yourself to things you have actual knowledge about.

I've had real life experience in industry, retail & SMS funds - my SMSF sh$ts all over the other two by a massive margin.

 

[medhead]

The totally off-topic thread

LOL why limit yourself to things you have actual knowledge about.

I've had real life experience in industry, retail & SMS funds - my SMSF sh$ts all over the other two by a massive margin.

Like I said, I value my time vastly more than to stuff around with that cough. Guess what? I don't need to have experienced smsf to know that, I know me. Already getting 10-13% return and I'm not going to chase some Ponzi scheme. But if you read my post you'd know this already.

 

[amaroo]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Like I said, I value my time vastly more than to stuff around with that cough. Guess what? I don't need to have experienced smsf to know that, I know me. Already getting 10-13% return and I'm not going to chase some Ponzi scheme. But if you read my post you'd know this already.

Looks like the scare tactics and manipulative ads are working a treat.

I suppose SMSF really aren't for everyone!

 

[Bindibuys]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I suppose SMSF really aren't for everyone!

We would not have gone into a SMSF without my husband having an accounting background, and our best friend being a SMSF auditor.
If you know the lingo, and have always worked with money, then it is no bigger chore than managing our investment properties.
BUT each to their own, without hubby, I would have never gone down the SMSF path.

 

[Pushka]

The totally off-topic thread

Love our SMSF. But you really do need to be active with it and always follow the rules.

The Industry funds are excellent performers also.

 

[penegal]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

You lot completely miss the point. The objective of Super Funds is to maximise benefits for EMPLOYEES of the super fund... Oh wait, I've been spending too much time in bars on Collins St drinking your fund manager's tab?

 

[penegal]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

SMSF gives you a degree of control, which really lets you take ownership of your Super (literally). It certainly isn't for everyone, but if you have capital locked away in Super, and a small amount of time to devote to portfolio management, then it is probably a good idea.


I am highly cynical about regulatory risk, so I don't contribute to Super beyond mandatory contributions. Any tax advantage of additional voluntary contributions will likely be eaten up by cash-hungry governments in the future (as we have already seen in Australia in recent years).

If you have excess capital, I suggest you:
(a) Spend it - go on a vacation
(b) Invest it yourself - A well structured global investment strategy has higher returns, more flexibility and potentially lower tax, without the additional regulatory risk of Super.

 

[penegal]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Disclaimer - Anything I post on this forum post does not constitute financial advice

 

[Buzzard]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Disclaimer - Anything I post on this forum post does not constitute financial advice

Can I unlike my previous like then :?:

 

[medhead]

The totally off-topic thread

We would not have gone into a SMSF without my husband having an accounting background, and our best friend being a SMSF auditor.
If you know the lingo, and have always worked with money, then it is no bigger chore than managing our investment properties.
BUT each to their own, without hubby, I would have never gone down the SMSF path.

I can manage investment properties very well and would have no issues managing a SMSF. I just don't want to do the work.

It really isn't that hard to understand. Guess what, amaroo? scare tactics have nothing to do with me having better ways to waste my time.

 

[TomVexille]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

You lot completely miss the point. The objective of Super Funds is to maximise benefits for EMPLOYEES of the super fund... Oh wait, I've been spending too much time in bars on Collins St drinking your fund manager's tab?

So THAT's what you do for a job :mrgreen:

 

[medhead]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

You lot completely miss the point. The objective of Super Funds is to maximise benefits for EMPLOYEES of the super fund... Oh wait, I've been spending too much time in bars on Collins St drinking your fund manager's tab?

So THAT's what you do for a job :mrgreen:

He doesn't drink, so I know to take his post with a grain of salt.