This webinar will explore the factors and circumstances in which the benefits of SMSFs may be outweighed by regulatory burdens and the general costs of maintaining one.

1. Are SMSF’s close to
their ‘use by date’?
Presented by
Nigel Smith
Technical Services Consultant
Netwealth
18 June 2019

2. | netwealth2
1 CPD point available
• CPD details will be
included in the post-
webinar email
This webinar is being
recorded
• Slides will be sent to you
after the webinar via email
Enter your questions in the
chat
• We’ll get to them at the
end of the webinar
Posting to social?
• Make sure to use
#netwealthinvest or tweet
@netwealthInvest
Housekeeping

3. | netwealth3
This webinar and information has been prepared and issued by Netwealth Investments Limited (Netwealth),ABN 85 090 569 109,
AFSL 230975. It contains factual information and general financial product advice only and has been prepared without taking into
account the objectives, financial situation or needs of any individual.The information provided is not intended to be a substitute for
professional financial product advice and you should determine its appropriateness having regard to you or your client’s particular
circumstances.The relevant disclosure document should be obtained from Netwealth and considered before deciding whether to
acquire, dispose of, or to continue to hold, an investment in any Netwealth product.
While all care has been taken in the preparation of this document (using sources believed to be reliable and accurate), no person,
including Netwealth, or any other member of the Netwealth group of companies, accepts responsibility for any loss suffered by any
person arising from reliance on this information.
Disclaimer
Webinar Series

4. | netwealth
We are an ASX-listed company who provide a range of investment
and superannuation solutions via our online platform.
4
See wealth differently
A little bit about Netwealth
Extensive range of investment options
Access ASX securities, International
securities, 300+ managed funds and more
Easy-to-use online research tools
Better research, manage and understand
your investments with our range of resources
Best-in-class technology
Manage your super and investments
using market-leading portfolio and
transaction tools

5. | netwealth
As a specialist platform provider, Netwealth provides
financial advisers with a wide range of financial
products & services to help manage their clients’
investments and superannuation.
• Ranked #1 for overall functionality
• Ranked #1 for overall satisfaction
• Awarded best reporting
• Awarded best client portal
• Awarded best transaction tools
*Investment Trends Platform Competitive Analysis & Benchmarking Report (Dec
17)
5
See wealth differently
A little bit about Netwealth

6. | netwealth
Key features of our platform
Portfolio management tools Performance reports
• Buy sell and track super and non-super
investments in one place
• Manage your savings, deposits and/or
super contributions
• Set up an income and/or pension plan
• Powerful reports and charts
• Cash transaction listing
• Set investment goal, notifications and
tasks
Investment research tools
• Managed funds research
• ASX live research
• US securities research from Tipranks
• Daily finance and economic newsletter

7. | netwealth Webinar Series7
Nigel Smith
Technical Services Consultant
Netwealth
Meet today’s speaker

8. SMSF’s
close to its
‘use by date’?
Nigel Smith – Netwealth Technical
18 June 2019

9. | netwealth
Post election – where are we?
The SMSF Lifecycle
SMSF Tips and Traps
Retail Platform versus SMSF
Estate planning disasters to avoid
Are you close to the 'use by date'?
Agenda

10. | netwealth
• SMSFs still have an important role to play in the right
circumstances
• SMSFs can have a ‘use by date’ – a point beyond which the
‘cost’ outweighs the benefits
• While there are circumstances where an SMSF may be the
only viable option, those circumstances are becoming fewer
• Through advances in technology, competitive costs structures,
the modern retail super platform is a realistic alternative to
many SMSFs
• Trustees should be aware of these traps for the unwary
• A comparison of retail super platforms and SMSFs
• Estate planning disasters – SMSFs at heightened risk
• Understanding when you are getting close to the ‘use by date’
Key takeaways …

11. | netwealth
Safe at last
• Franking credits will remain refundable
– SMSFs and other low tax paying people and entities
are all happy again;
• SMSF LRBA arrangements remain a viable strategy
• FHSSS remains available ongoing
• CGT discount to remain unchanged at 50%
• Negative gearing availability remains unchanged – not
limited to only new properties
Or are we? Remember the GST
• 1970’s – Gorton (LNP) considers GST – lapses
• 1980 – Howard (LNP) proposed GST - lapses
• 1985 – Keating (ALP) revives GST – Hawkes kills it
• 1991 – Hewson (LNP) revives GST – policy proposed
• 1993 – Hewson (LNP) takes GST to election – loses
• 1995 – Howard pledges ‘never ever’ a GST – it’s dead
• 1998 – Howard resurrects GST to election – just wins
• 2000 – Howard Govt introduces GST – miraculously it
rises from the dead
ScoMo's miracle win means we can all breathe easy
ScoMo believes in miracles

12. | netwealth
ALPs proposals seemed to be almost the last straw
Lead up to election saw evidence of:
• SMSF trustees re-evaluating the true value of SMSFs
• Looking at retail super platforms as an alternative
• Realisation that retail platforms have changed
dramatically in recent years to be a realistic alternative
• Retail platforms cost structures were no longer always
a deal breaker as an alternative to SMSFs
Is this still the case?
• Probably not the same immediate call to action
Is the threat still likely?
• Not immediate but government’s are always seeking
new revenue
• Is the 'genie out of the bottle'?
Are SMSFs still suitable to certain clients?
• Absolutely
What’s changed?

13. | netwealth
SMSF life cycle
Life stage Action / Strategy Super vehicle
19- late 20's - just getting starting, establishing
career & family
Simple savings into accumulation – probable lower contributions
& balances
Retail Super Platform
30 - 40 with mortgage, children, school fees &
one salary
Survival mode! – get round to super later (lower balance but
growing)
Retail Super Platform
40 - 60 & now time to think about driving wealth
creation strategies
Cash flow surplus etc – salary sacrifice & active investing, LRBA
and BRP strategies
SMSF – reasonable balance to start & need for
sophisticated strategies
60 - 70ish early to mid retirement years
Transition to retirement or retired & living off super. Lower risk
stable income need. Middle aged children?
SMSF still Ok but…. Responsibility & admin v
advantages. Kids might join?? Retail super platform
looking better.
70+ late retirement. Spending patterns lower &
possible health issues
Long term hold income type strategy. Estate planning issues.
SMSF very little value v Retail Super Platform – no admin
or trustee issues. Plenty of investment choice.
Death - surviving spouse to take over but, do
they have the wish, skills & knowledge?
Estate planning – maximise balance to beneficiaries & adult
children
Retail Super Wrap – No admin or trustee issues, ease of
management, clear estate planning outcomes

14. | netwealth
SMSFs good for specialised investments
• Real property & Business Real Property (BRP)
• Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangements (LRBA)
• Collectibles
• Illiquid investments
• QROPS
For most other situations a Retail Super Platform is as
good or better
• No effective disadvantage for many people
• Far less regulatory, admin & trustee responsibilities
• Clearer more certain estate planning outcomes
With specialisation comes limitations
• Real property – Illiquid, high value, lumpy
• LRBA – restrictions = far less wiggle room
• BRP – commercial props & tight definitions - exclusively
• Collectibles – tight restrictions on type and use
• Illiquid investments – timing important can’t acquire from
member
• QROPS – Reporting and investment restrictions
General proposition
SMSFs “good” at certain life stages

15. | netwealth
• People often seem to start an SMSF because of poor
performance of existing fund
• Super is a tax construct
• It’s how effectively you use the benefits of super
• Same investments = same performance
• Key to performance is management decisions/costs
– Need current, comprehensive and timely information
to make effective decisions
– Retail super platforms tend to be very transparent
– SMSF can have many associated costs that get
forgotten
a. Auditing
b. Research and reporting packages
c. Accounting time for writing of minutes and specialised
strategies – e.g. segregation, LRBA, TTR
• Availability of managed models, ETFs, specialty fund
managers has greatly closed the investment gap
Investment performance
Understanding what super actually is

16. | netwealth
For the living
• Big enough – young enough - fair enough
• Single asset fund problems:
– Enough income to meet fund running costs?
– Enough income to meet minimum pension
payments?
– Divorce or business break up forces premature sale
• Lumpy asset problems
– Lack of diversification and performance impact
– Timing – long-holding horizons vs short-term needs
For the dead
• Can leave complex problems for survivors
• Getting older = higher pension % = cashflow shortage
• Reduces death choices
– May limit to pension only
– May force sale at wrong point of the cycle
• BRP with business partners
– Difficult/impossible to pay out without sale
– May leave deceased’s partner in business
– Deceased’s partner may force sale to get benefit
cashed
– Cross insurance no longer possible
– Only real solution may be to pay deceased’s partner
a pension (if they are agreeable)
Real property traps

17. | netwealth
Remember the good old days?
• Related party loans
• 0% interest rate
• Very high LVR allowed
• No maximum term to loan
• Interest only repayments allowed
• No total super balance issues
Current rules much more controlling
• Specific loan conditions (for property)
– Related party loans must be benchmarked
– Min interest rate = RBA indicator lending rate = 5.8%
– Max fixed term interest rate = 5 years then variable
– Max loan term = 15 years in total
– Max LVR = 70%
– Must have an executed loan agreement and registered mortgage
– Monthly P&I repayments only
– (Equities have even stricter conditions)
• Likely members TSB will be increased by proportion of outstanding loan where:
– Arrangement started on or after 1 July 2018
– Nil cashing restriction met
– Loan from associated party
17
LRBA – flexibility (wiggle room) reduced

18. | netwealth
• Since 1 July 2017 – once a death benefit
always a death benefit
• Spouse death benefit can be rolled over but
ONLY to start a death benefit income stream
• Death benefits cannot be mixed with surviving
member benefits
• An untaxed element arises where there is a
death benefit lump sum & it contains an
insurance payment & tax deduction is claimed
on premium – calculated on ATO formula
• A death benefit rollover from one fund to
another creates a lump sum payment
• Up to the untaxed cap ($1.515m) the receiving
fund must deduct 15% tax – convert untaxed
to taxed
What does this mean?
• Spouse has (say) a $1 million term life policy structured through
their super fund – case study next slide
• The super fund claims a tax deduction on the premium
• Spouse dies and insurance pays death benefit to deceased
member account
Options for surviving spouse
• Takes death lump sum
• Takes death income stream from same fund
• Rolls over to a new fund to start a death income stream
Danger point if:
• Surviving spouse doesn’t want or can’t manage SMSF, or
• Adviser recommends rolling over to better fund
The new danger for both SMSF trustees and advisors
Death tax trap for spouse

19. | netwealth
Untaxed element – tax implications
• Adrian died aged 45 on 30 Aug 2018 with $50k ($10k tax free component) in super and $1m life cover
• Eligible service date is 1 Jan 2013
• How much untaxed element is created and what are tax implications for the spouse if paid out or rolled over?
Components $ Amount
Tax - spouse
Lump sum exit
Tax – spouse
begins pension
same fund
Spouse rolls over
to begin pension
Tax-free $10,000 0% 0% 0%
Taxable taxed element $158,636* 0% 0% 0%
Taxable untaxed element
(Balance of taxable component)
$881,364* 0% 0% 15%
($132,205)
* These are calculated values based on the ATO tax formula
Medicare applies

20. | netwealth
• Flexibility brings complexity
• Reporting is getting more complex
• Larger SMSF’s need to move to real time reporting
• Real time reporting needs up to date processing
– Platforms do this automatically
– SMSF rarely do this
• SMSF trustees rely on acct/administrators to meet these
responsibilities
• SMSF trustees can’t give away the responsibility for meeting
responsibilities
– Easier in simple accumulation
– Harder with higher balances & complex strategy structures
– Harder with aging members
Event based reporting (TBAR)
• Certain pre-existing income streams being received on
30/06/17
• New retirement phase and death benefit income streams
• Details of certain LRBA payments
• Compliance with a commutation notice issued by ATO
• Commutations of retirement phase income streams on or after
1 July 2017
SMSF Transfer Bal A/C reporting deadlines
• Where a member has a TSB of $1m+ @ 30/6 of previous year
of the 1st member commencing their 1st retirement phase
income stream – 28 days after the end of the quarter the event
occurred
• All members balance < $1m, report with annual return
• If a member exceeds their TBC, certain events must be
reported with 10 business of the end of the month &
commutations with 60 days of ATO authority issue date
New regulatory reporting responsibilities

21. | netwealth
Wrap v SMSF - performance
Key to performance - investment choice, flexibility and accurate + timely reporting
Factor Super Wrap SMSF
Investment choice
Access to nearly all assets classes & types of
vehicles – shares, domestic & international,
property funds, ETFs, managed funds,
managed models etc. Not real property.
Very few investment restrictions but many legislative
restrictions – related party & in-house assets etc.
Can be many conditions – LRBA and collectibles
Investments strategy
flexibility
Accurate & timely
reporting
• Majority of options – Pensions, TTR,
FHSSS, geared products, small business
CGT - except strategies using real property
• Comprehensive reporting & research
• Available 24/7
• Very flexible & able to incorporate BRP strategies, LRBA &
property development scenarios. Better integrate holistic
planning strategies incorporating business & personal plans
• Annual (accounting) report – regulatory and financial only
• If you want more, apply for external service (cost)
Immediate tax effect
benefits
Yes - with immediate availability of:
Franking credit (actual $$ deposited)
$ benefit of expense deductibility
$ benefit of realised losses
No – wait for tax return to claim franking / expenses / losses
Yes – May be able to defer paying contribution tax until
lodgement of tax return

22. | netwealth
Wrap v SMSF – costs
Factor Super Wrap SMSF
Legal costs – once off – such as:
• Trust Deed
• Corporate trustee
No
Yes
• 32% more expensive to set up & run than expected*
• 9% less expensive to set up & run than expected*
ASIC, SMSFs: Improving the quality of advice and member experiences, June 2018
Expectation $1,000*
Actual estimated $916 - $2,035*
Joining/initial/establishment fees
No – generally most Wrap providers do not charge
an establishment fee to direct clients (Advisors
have a choice)
No – but if you use an accountant, they may charge for the
time in establishing the fund, applying for TFN, paperwork,
minutes, consulting for more complex strategies etc
Adviser Fees
Yes - If you use an adviser then may include a fee
for investment advice as well as a time factor for
completing paperwork – see below
Yes - If you use an adviser then may include a fee for
advice including investment advice as well as a time factor
for completing paperwork – See below
Ongoing super admin fee to complete annual
returns & audit & other compliance costs
Yes – Wrap normally has an annual administration
fee - % age based & tiered fee that covers all
compliance, reporting & returns, record keeping
Yes – varies by provider & service required.
Expectation $680 pa*
Actual estimated $3,595 to $4,174 with investment exp*
Supervisory Levy No Yes
Ongoing administrative & investment fees
No – if you DIY totally
Yes – if an adviser used, they will charge for
strategic & investment advice
No – if you DIY totally
Yes – if an adviser used, they will charge for advice & may
also be a non-super Wrap fee - % & tiered

23. | netwealth
Wrap v SMSF – where the responsibility rests
Factor Super Wrap SMSF
Regulatory & administration responsibility
Personally responsible
Personally Liable for errors
No – product provider
No – product provider
Yes - as trustee
Yes – as trustee
Onerous administrative burden None – product provider responsibility Yes – very time hungry to ensure compliance
Specific penalty regime aimed at trustees
Failure to prepare fin statements
Failure to keep minutes etc for 10yrs
Lending to members
Prohibition on borrowings
No
• No
• No
• No
• No
Yes (@11/06/19)
• Yes - $2,100 /trustee
• Yes - $2,100 /trustee
• Yes - $12,600 /trustee
• Yes - $12,600 /trustee
ATO, Interest and penalties, July 2018
Compulsory education directives No Yes + cost + $penalty
Compulsory rectification directions No Yes + cost + $penalty
Issues for moving/working overseas
Can you contribute as a non tax resident?
Can you manage investments?
Is there a penalty for breaching?
Yes
Yes
No - as no breach
No – Active member test
No – Central Mgt & Control test
Yes – Possibly non complying with assets
taxed at top MTR (49%)
Complaints & resolution processes
Yes – must provide an approved process
• Access to Australian Financial Complaints
Authority (AFCA)
• Usually has defined processes in place
No – no need to provide a process
• No AFCA – use legal system which can be
very expensive
• Deed open to interpretation and often
challenge

24. | netwealth
Wrap v SMSF – dealing with the trifecta of aging, dementia & death
Factor Super Wrap SMSF
Aging
Do you want all the mgt/admin responsibility & liability?
Can you hand it over to someone else?
Don’t have it – no issue.
Simple EPoA will allow attorney to make
investment decisions for you but product provider
remain trustee
Doubtful – possible changing priorities or
mental capability diminishing with age
Possible but not simple – EpoA must become
trustee so you give all control & full discretion to
3rd party
Dealing with dementia (& similar mental decline)
Affected by 'fit & proper' person rule?
Can you remain a trustee?
If trustee EPoA not appointed in advance
• How do you resign?
• How can a new trustee be appointed?
• If nothing done?
Deed critical & complex
No – not trustee
No issue – not trustee
No issue – don’t have to
No issue – don’t have to
No issue
No issue
Yes – trustees must be able to perform duties
No - trustees must be able to perform duties
Depends on fund rules
Depends on fund rules
If no legal capacity how do you appoint EpoA?
Depending on fund rules you may be unable to
act resulting in costly legal solutions
Death & Pensions
Full pension/ death / spouse options?
Full BDBN & Reversionary options?
Full degree of trustee discretion?
Yes
Yes
Yes –technically but depends on provider rules.
Usually more limited than SMSF options.
Yes
Yes
Yes – provides ability for full exercise of
discretion = greater flexibility = greater
complexity = more room for errors and
contesting of decisions.

25. | netwealth
Wrap v SMSF – the final moves
Factor Super Wrap SMSF
Divorce
Able to be split to non member spouse?
Able to transfer to a/c within existing fund?
Tax consequences?
• Personal?
• Fund?
Yes
Yes
No
Yes – CGT event on transfer of assets
Yes
Yes – rarely practical due to conflict
No
No – CGT relief on in-specie transfer of assets
Estate Planning
Full BDBD & Reversionary options?
Child Pensions allowable?
Full range of death / pension options
Yes
Yes – but check product rules
Yes
Yes
Yes Who is trustee if parent/s dead?
Yes May need additional documentation (cost?)
Likelihood of challenge • Less likely due to separation of trustee & potential
beneficiary roles < conflict
• If challenged, external trustee has responsibility
to resolve (no additional cost)
• Trustee discretion usually replaced by rules
• Party have access to Australian Financial
Complaints Authority (AFCA)
• Greater possibility with lack of separation
between parties – blended families at risk
• If challenged often 'family vs family' & very
expensive
• Allows trustee discretion but this can create
confusion & opaque decisions
• Court system only - expensive
Winding Up
When last members/client exit?
Costly and complex?
No
No – simply withdraw full benefit
Yes – cannot have no members
Yes – final accounts to be prepared, tax & timing
issues. Cost paid by SMSF reducing member
benefits

26. | netwealth
• Super and death often leads to complex situations
• Traditionally, all trustees have discretion as to how the
deceased members benefits are dealt with
• Super law has created additional law to allow members
to bind trustees – BDBNs and similar
– To be valid, very specific conditions & documentation
requirements must be met
• Retail super platforms:
– A separation between trustee responsibility and
beneficiary wishes
– Have specific tailored documents & processes in place
to minimise risk of invalidity
– Replaced visible discretion with black and white rules
• SMSFs often have:
– A lack of separation between trustee and beneficiaries
decisions
– Deeds and documents that are often out of date
– Specific tailored documents are often lost resulting in
ad-hoc replacement documents
• As a result, SMSFs are often at greater risk of legal
challenge to trustee decisions
Estate planning disasters to avoid

27. | netwealth
Facts
• Francesca & Augusto (second marriage) were the only
members & individual trustees of an SMSF. Mrs Conti
passed away in 2010, her BDBN having lapsed in 2009. In
the absence of a valid BDBN, the fund’s Trust Deed
provided the trustee with discretion to pay death benefits to
the deceased Mrs Conti’s dependants. As sole trustee, Mr
Conti determined to pay the benefit to himself, as a
superannuation pension from the fund.
• Mrs Conti’s son & daughter (from a previous marriage), as
LPRs, challenged the legality of the trustee’s decision.
• Firstly, that the Trust Deed required the appointment of one
of the deceased’s LPRs as a trustee. The son & daughter
requested the Court appoint one of them as trustee.
• Secondly, that Mr Conti’s decision to pay the benefit to
himself was in bad faith, preferring his own interests to those
of the deceased’s children.
Result
• The Court rejected both claims.
• This case affirms the position that the SIS Act does not
cause the executor of the deceased estate to automatically
become a trustee (or director of the body corporate) of an
SMSF upon the death of the member, nor are the remaining
trustee(s) obliged to appoint the executor as a trustee (or
director of the body corporate).
– Note: a specific SMSF deed may require such actions,
but this wasn’t the situation in this case & there is no
compulsion under the law to do so.
• Secondly, if trustee discretion does apply to the payment of
death benefits, the burden of proof that the exercise of that
discretion by the trustee lacked bona fides (or was made ‘in
bad faith’) rests with the party asserting that issue. In
Loppolo v Conti the Court found no evidence that Mr Conti
had not acted with bona fides and in good faith.
Loppolo v Conti (WA 2015)
SMSF - he who controls the purse …

28. | netwealth
Facts
• Max Morris & his second wife, Patricia, were
the only members and trustees of an SMSF.
Max passed away in Feb 2010, having made
a BDBN in March 2008 100% in favour of his
two daughters from his first marriage.
• Legal advice said that the BDBN was
ineffective. The SMSF trustee (now a
corporate trustee with Patricia as the sole
director) used discretion to pay all of the
deceased’s benefits to herself.
• The daughters objected, saying that the
BDBN was valid and binding on the trustee.
• Case went for over 3 years before a decision
on 1 Nov 2013.
• Patricia died in Sept 2013.
Result
• The Court found that the BDBN was valid & binding, ordered
finalisation of benefit payments to the daughters, & costs to be
paid by the SMSF trustee and Patricia personally.
• A substantial shortfall $324,000 existed – mainly large accounting
and legal advice fees paid from the fund after his death to meet
Patricia’s expenses as trustee.
• Unclear how much of the deceased’s balance was ultimately paid
to the daughters. An account balance of approx. $924,000 was
shown in accounts @ 30 June 2010, there was approx. $75,000 in
the account as at 1 November 2013.
• The Court ordered the SMSF trustee, and Patricia personally, pay
the balance of approx. $324,000, plus interest, plus the costs and
incidentals to the proceedings. However, Patricia died before the
judgement, leaving her estate bankrupt, so it’s unlikely that any of
the shortfall was recovered from Patricia or her estate.
Wooster v Morris (Vic 2010)
SMSF - he who controls the purse…

29. | netwealth
Facts
• The deceased (son) was survived by his parents (separated)
• The son had no partner or children, lived with his mother –
there was an interdependent relationship
• Did not have a close relationship with his father
• Died without intestate, and left $80,000 personal estate, &
around $450,000 in super from insurance policies.
• Non-binding death benefit nominations in favour of mother.
• The mother applied to be the administrator of his estate
• After her appointment separately claimed the super benefits
directly (bypassing the estate) on the basis of having an
interdependency relationship, and was successful
• Father sued, claiming mother was in breach of duty as
administrator to call in the assets of the estate. She argued
the deceased’s assets did not include the super benefits.
Result
• Court found that the mother was in breach of her fiduciary
duty LPR & had a clear conflict of interest.
• The Court referred to the fact that while the trustee of each
super fund holds the discretion to determine how the death
benefits are distributed, it’s the duty of the LPR to call on the
trustee to exercise their discretion in favour of the estate
• Could have been avoided if the son had:
– Made a BDBN in favour of his mother, given their
financially dependent relationship, would have achieved
the outcome he seemingly desired.
– Alternatively, if the mother had not applied for the role of
administrator, she may have avoided the conflict &
proceeded in making her application for the death
benefits to be paid to her directly under interdependency.
McIntosh v McIntosh
Order, timing, documentation…

30. | netwealth
Facts
• Mr Munro, a solicitor, had an SMSF with his second wife
• Mr Munro died in August 2011 - the executors being his two
daughters from a previous marriage & Mrs Munro (the 2nd)
• After Mr Munro’s death, Mrs Munro’s 2nd wife appointed as
her daughter a trustee
• Mr Munro made a BDBN that the super was to go to his
Estate to be dealt with by the Will, to be split between his
natural daughters and 2nd Mrs Munro.
• The nominated beneficiary was the trustee of (the) deceased
estate
• 2nd Mrs Munro argued that the BDBN was invalid & she
decided to pay super to herself as dependent.
• Mr. Munro’s natural daughters argued the BDBN was valid &
should be paid to the executors to be dealt with under the Will
(so they would get their rightful share)
Result
• The judge noted that while the terms executor
(LPR) & trustee may be used interchangeably,
the terms are distinct
• As a result, the nomination of ‘Trustee of
Deceased Estate’ was insufficient to direct the
trustee to pay the benefits to Mr Munro’s LPR’
being his executors
• Therefore, the nomination was not binding
• Natural daughters missed out, deceased wishes
not carried out & 2nd wife got everything
Munro v Munro
Order, timing, documentation …

31. | netwealth
• Using sophisticated investment strategies ?
• Use specific specialised investments?
• In business and need to integrate business real property?
• Running primarily buy and hold strategy – any age?
• Aggressively trading and need accurate & timely reporting and research – any age?
• Moving into retirement and looking at buy and hold and income generation?
• No longer want the responsibility of recording keeping and administration?
• Your partner is not interested in super and won’t be able to effectively manage the SMSF?
• Blended family situation making estate planning complex and (may be) contentious?
• Read all this and realising that perhaps the SMSF pros no longer outweigh the cons?
When is enough - enough?
Strong need vs. less need for SMSF
Strong need for a SMSF
Less need for a SMSF

32. | netwealth
There are some definite trends
• Regulation is increasing
• ATO is pushing police function to auditors
• ATO record keeping and data matching improving
• SMSF 'wiggle room' is reducing
• Penalty regimes casting a wider net
• ATO reporting tending towards daily processing
• Increasing technology, developing AI, increasing access
to sophisticated investment products & structures
demand accurate and timely reporting
There will always be a place for SMSF – they do offer
the ultimate in flexibility
Flexibility = complexity + increased responsibility
Retail super platforms
• Have become more cost competitive against SMSFs
• Other than a very few specialised cases, can match
SMSFs for investment strategy & investment options
• Take away the onerous trustee & administration
responsibilities
• Offer excellent reporting options – timely + accurate
• These two strengths allow members to concentrate on
investment decisions
• Have strong processes delivering definite outcomes
Conclusions
There are no right or wrong answers

33. Questions and answers

34. | netwealth34
1 CPD point available
• CPD details will be included in the
webinar resources email
Webinar recording and slides
• These will be included in the
webinar resources email
Thank you

35. | netwealth
Winding up your SMSF Guide
• Available on our website in the Insights section
• We’ll also include a link in the follow-up email
Portfolio construction podcast series
• Discover investment opportunities from wealth
management professionals
35
Links will be in the follow-up email
You may be interested in

36. | netwealth
Banqer
• Supporting financial literacy in schools
• Refer a teacher today
36
Links will be in the follow-up email
You may be interested in

37. | netwealth37
This webinar and information has been prepared and issued by Netwealth Investments Limited (Netwealth),ABN 85 090 569 109,
AFSL 230975. It contains factual information and general financial product advice only and has been prepared without taking into
account the objectives, financial situation or needs of any individual.The information provided is not intended to be a substitute for
professional financial product advice and you should determine its appropriateness having regard to you or your client’s particular
circumstances.The relevant disclosure document should be obtained from Netwealth and considered before deciding whether to
acquire, dispose of, or to continue to hold, an investment in any Netwealth product.
While all care has been taken in the preparation of this document (using sources believed to be reliable and accurate), no person,
including Netwealth, or any other member of the Netwealth group of companies, accepts responsibility for any loss suffered by any
person arising from reliance on this information.
Disclaimer
Thank you
Webinar Series