This article is more than 24 months old and is now archived. This article has not been updated to reflect any changes to the law.
In releasing its response to the Murray Inquiry on 20 October 2015, the Government accepted all but one of the Inquiry's 44 recommendations (it disagreed with the LRBA restriction recommendation). The Government also included 6 additional measures that it says "are consistent with the Inquiry's underlying philosophy".
The final report of the Murray Inquiry, released in December 2014, included a recommendation to restore the general prohibition on direct borrowings by superannuation funds by removing the current exception for LRBAs in s 67A of the SIS Act on a prospective basis. In its response to the Murray Inquiry, the Government said that it did not agree with this recommendation. While the Government noted that there are "anecdotal concerns" about LRBAs, it said that the data is not sufficient to justify a significant policy intervention at this time.
However, the Government will commission the Council of Financial Regulators and the Tax Office to monitor leverage and risk in the superannuation system and report back to Government after 3 years. According to the Government, this timing will allow recent improvements in ATO data collection to wash through the system. The agencies' analysis will be used to inform any consideration of whether changes to the borrowing rules might be appropriate at a future date.
Despite the Government's "green light" for LRBAs, a decision to establish an SMSF and invest in property using an LRBA is not one to be taken lightly. A borrowing arrangement is only permitted where it complies with the strict rules under the SIS Act. This means that each step in the process of establishing an SMSF and putting in place an LRBA (and the property investment itself) must strictly comply with the full range of superannuation rules.
Given the complexity involved, retail investors considering property investments via an SMSF should obtain independent advice in terms of their personal obligations as SMSF trustees. Before committing to purchase a property it is vital to plan ahead to avoid any adverse SIS compliance issues or tax consequences down the track. Severe penalties (and criminal sanctions) can result for breaching the SIS Act, not to mention the transaction costs to unwind a non-compliant structure. Therefore, an SMSF trustee should seek assistance from a professional adviser in relation to the borrowing agreement and the establishment of a holding trust (also known as a custody trust). Such planning will help to ensure that the arrangement complies with all relevant laws and receives the intended tax treatment in the years ahead.
Before committing to purchase a property via an SMSF, consideration should be given to the following LRBA issues:
In conclusion, the complexity involved with LRBAs means that SMSF trustees will need to employ a methodical approach (generally with the assistance of a professional adviser) to ensure compliance with the superannuation borrowing rules.
For more information, contact Maddocks on (03) 9288 0555 and ask to speak to a member of the superannuation team.
You can read earlier ClearLaw articles on a range of matters.
Qualifications: LLB, Deakin University, BA (Political Science), Monash University
Paul is a Special Counsel in Maddocks Government and Not-for-Profit Commercial team. He specialises in:
Paul is Maddocks' main authority in relation to the Personal Property Securities Act 2009.
He has an in-depth understanding of the government sector, as his experience prior to Maddocks includes 13 years with the Victorian Department of Justice.
The legal information and commentary on this site is general only. Documents ordered through Cleardocs affect the user's legal rights and liabilities. To assess their suitability for the user, legal accounting and financial advice must be obtained.