Comment of the Week goes to....

by |

Thanks to some opinionated contributors Wealth Professional had a lot of comments to choose from this week.

However, the winning comment came in on Thursday’s article about ASIC’s concerns over ASPs SMSF advice.

“Stephen” raised some good questions and used the context of the article to start a discussion about a wider issue:

“Interesting article. I wonder how many complaints were taken for ASIC to make them look at ASPs procedures, etc. Considering that ASIC is understaffed and has such a wide regulatory jurisdiction, was it pure coincidence that they found ASP out? Which ever method was used, it is very pleasing to see that ASP now has its clientele's best interests in mind.

What concerns me is the mention of the low balance of the SMSFs that were being created. Is there an industry standard that sets the proper amount as a minimum? Sometime ago, $200k was a suggested minimum but administration costs has come down because of competition which is open to dispute. Would a couple with $50k between them be considered suitable for an SMSF especially if both has significantly different views on risk?”

Share your thoughts on whether ASIC is understaffed, or if there should be a minimum investment amount for SMSFs.