Research released earlier in the year has redefined the minimum asset balance that renders an SMSF competitive with public offer fund performance.

This year’s budget had no new changes to superannuation but lacked any details about changes to legacy pensions, residency rules and how the government will address the over-reach of the non-arm’s-length expenditure provisions.

Compliance and performance problems in large superannuation funds may go to prove SMSFs are the right choice for those who run their own fund.

The opposition has flagged its big picture view of how it will treat superannuation if it wins government at the next election and, at this stage, appears compatible with the direction and purpose of SMSFs.

Australians are far more sensible when it comes to using their superannuation than they have been given credit for and more trust should be placed in the fact that most use their retirement savings wisely.

Personal investment philosophies cannot be put in front of an SMSF trustee’s obligation to ensure their fund is meeting the sole purpose test of providing retirement benefits for fund members.

The speed at which changes to superannuation announced in the budget have been introduced into parliament is welcome but of far greater import is the time and cost savings they will give SMSF trustees.

The imposition of a retirement income covenant on SMSFs was an unnecessary burden given they are set-up and run for that exact outcome by the fund member’s themselves.

The tabling of a bill making changes to exempt current pension income (ECPI) rules had changes that were recommended by industry but is this proof the government is starting to listen to those in the know?