Hot Issues
spacer
How is your super going, ready for retirement?
spacer
Our 'hardest' SMSF tasks
spacer
Lack of literacy promotes unrealistic goals
spacer
Young investors: Time is on your side
spacer
Is your SMSF retirement-ready?
spacer
Key Economic Indicators, 2017 - updated
spacer
Investors acting their age
spacer
ATO locks in details, addresses panic on real-time reporting
spacer
Government ‘undermines’ tax system in new moves on property expenses
spacer
Multiple super accounts in a 'gig' society
spacer
Why Australian retirees aren't happy and what we can do about it
spacer
Doing a budget is a good idea but ....
spacer
Technical expert flags estate planning strategies for 2017-18
spacer
Government to shut down salary sacrifice loophole
spacer
Items that heat up your depreciation deductions
spacer
‘Tens of thousands’ of SMSFs at risk with ECPI
spacer
Do’s and don’ts of estate planning
spacer
LISTO to help boost women’s super
spacer
Smart ways to stretch retirement money
spacer
Low economic growth likely for years
spacer
Recorded Crime - Offenders, 2015-16
spacer
Adequacy of savings still a concern among Australians
spacer
‘Bank-like heists’ make way for new wave of cyber crime
spacer
Give your children a saving and investing edge - for life
Article archive
spacer
Quarter 2 April - June 2017
spacer
Quarter 1 January - March 2017
spacer
Quarter 4 October - December 2016
spacer
Quarter 3 July - September 2016
spacer
Quarter 2 April - June 2016
spacer
Quarter 1 January - March 2016
‘Tens of thousands’ of SMSFs at risk with ECPI

The Actuaries Institute has addressed the ATO with significant concerns about a recent interpretation related to exempt current pension income (ECPI), fearing many SMSFs will make incorrect claims as a result.

 

 

In a letter to the tax office, copying in minister for revenue and financial services Kelly O’Dwyer, the institute referred to the ATO’s recently confirmed view that if an SMSF was fully in pension phase for any part of a tax year, it cannot use the unsegregated method for all of its assets for the whole of that tax year.

Rather than having a choice over whether to segregate certain assets to support pension liabilities, this interpretation assumes assets are ‘deemed’ to be segregated at a point in time if the fund’s only superannuation liabilities are in respect of account based type pensions, the letter said.

“This will force many funds to use two different methods, the segregated and unsegregated methods, to claim ECPI in the same income year, adding administrative complexity. The Actuaries Institute is concerned that this interpretation is at odds with long standing industry practice, potentially putting tens of thousands of funds at risk of claiming ECPI incorrectly,” the letter said.

“We also believe that the ATO’s interpretation does not reflect the policy intent and will add significantly to the compliance costs of funds claiming ECPI with no clear gain to tax revenues.”

The institute has recommended the ATO re-considers its position to allow long standing administrative practices to continue.

“If the ATO believes there is no alternative interpretation than their current view we request clarification be sought from Treasury and that, if necessary, the legislation be amended to match established practice,” the institute said.

“Given the uncertainty this is causing in the industry, we also recommend that the ATO clarifies that it will not be requiring funds to comply with this new interpretation for the 2017 and 2018 income years.”

Speaking to SMSF Adviser, general manager of Accurium, Doug McBirnie, said he hopes this latest lobbying effort will pave the wave for a quick resolution.

“We are very pleased to see the Actuaries Institute address this issue with the ATO on behalf of the SMSF industry. The ATO’s recent guidance on this has put actuarial certificate providers in a difficult position and created uncertainty for SMSF practitioners and their clients,” he said.

 

KATARINA TAURIAN
13 Jul 2017
www.smsfadviser.com