This was posted 8 years 11 months 3 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Online Superfund: $0 Setup, $0 First Year Then $790 Per Year after That

115
Online Superfund: $0 Setup, $0 First Year Then $790 Per Year after That
Go to Deal
BluBoy on 19/01/2016 - 17:19 onlinesuperfund.com.au (242 clicks)
Last edited 25/01/2016 - 07:25 by 2 other users
FY16SO

Standard disclaimer: This is not financial advice, I am not an accountant/financial advisor/lawyer/inventor of bitcoin/jedi knight/master of the universe… Do your own research! This is just here to give you a kick start!

I got in touch with Jarred from Online Superfund to see if he could provide a deal for us. Although I couldn't get one for myself, he did offer the following for new and transferring SMSF, which are valid until April 15:

New Online Superfund SMSF Customers

$0 SMSF Setup (Current offer on the website)
$10 Annual discount of the administration fees if you watch a SMSF presentation (Current offer on the website)
$0 2016 Administration fee (Usually $790!)
Code: FY16SO

Existing SMSF Customers with another provider

$0 SMSF Transfer
$10 annual discount of the admin fees if you watch a SMSF presentation (Current offer on the website)
$0 2015 Administration fee (Usually $790!)
You'll need to contact them directly and mention FY16SO to get this offer

If you came here just for the deal. That's it above, go get it tiger!
From last time, I know there are some comments and questions about SMSF and super in general (which is awesome!) - So I have also provided more details below!

Why I did/do this

It is that time of year again, where I make a bunch of new year resolutions I barely keep (although, the Ozbargainer in me usually concentrates to 'get my finances in order' so I can buy more eneloops and xiaomi headphones).
Three years ago, I decided to switch to managing my own super and posted my research here, which was pretty popular at the time (1111+ clickthroughs and 62 upvotes). This year I decided to do a check up to see if I was still getting a good deal from Online Superfund (spoiler alert: I am) and post my research results here again.

Not much has really changed to be honest. The same 'best-bang-for-buck' three are all still around, which is a great sign. Once again Online Superfund comes out ahead in fees.

Simple SMSF fees:

Name Upfront Fee First Year Fee Ongoing Annual Fee ATO Superlevy surcharge Total Fees after two years
Online Superfund $0 $200 $0 $790 $790 $780 $259 $1,298
eSuperfund $0 $799 $0 $799 $799 $259 $1,317
Superannuation Warehouse $0 $948 $948 $259 $2,414

Just to be clear here, that is the cost for the (required) auditing of your SMSF. You may have other fees charged by whatever investment method you choose to use!
For a small super balance of say $50k, it works out to be an annualised fee of about 1% for the first two years for full administration and audit including fees and levies

Of course, there are other charges which may apply for more complex arrangements, but the fees are all similar across the board to setup and administer a corporate trustee SMSF.
You'll need to do research to see if a individual or corporate trustee configuration is best for you anyway!

At the very least I hope this thread gets you thinking about your superannuation!

1) <MOD: Financial advice removed>
Here is the form to roll your super into another Superannuation account.
Here is the form to roll tour super into a SMSF account.

2) If you don't know how much super you have, or how it is performing, log into your account and look!
You'll need to go to your super funds website and log into the members area there. It's ok, they will have a 'forgotten password' section for you!
No really, that is it. Just log in and have a look. Here is a link you can have, to open in a new tab and make a start right now!

3) I can't tell you how much super you should have at the moment, or will need when you retire… But you should at least have an idea if you are on track. Here are three calculators to assist you!
https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/tools-and-resources/calculator…
https://www.industrysuper.com/understand-super/retirement/re…
https://www.amp.com.au/super/supersimulator/

Financial Superannuation

Related Stores

onlinesuperfund.com.au
onlinesuperfund.com.au

closed Comments

    • BluBoy on 19/01/2016 - 17:24
      +5

      Really? Look at my post history?

      This response is a little annoying considering the feedback form the last time (3 years ago!) and the effort that went into it.
      I s'pose we all can't be one word posters like you JV.

      • jv on 19/01/2016 - 17:25
        -4

        Really?

        I didn't post it, my cron job did…

        By the time I logged in to read your post, you responded and now I can't edit it…

        jv on 19/01/2016 - 17:25 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
        • BluBoy on 19/01/2016 - 17:28
          +2

          Is this you?

          https://github.com/NARKOZ/hacker-scripts

        • jv on 19/01/2016 - 17:29
          +9

          @BluBoy:

          My script uses a complex (and proprietary) algorithm. Your post came up with an 87% SPAM score.

        • wfdTamar on 19/01/2016 - 19:12
          +4

          @jv:
          Doesn't a post that is automatically posted become spam itself? I would suggest dumping the script and do it manually, or at least have the script notify you of possible spam, then manually assess it before posting.

        • jv on 19/01/2016 - 19:18

          @wfdTamar:

          That wouldn't be efficient.

        • wfdTamar on 19/01/2016 - 19:21
          +8

          @jv:
          Yes, but it might prevent your spam about spam (which may not actually be spam) :-)

        • jv on 19/01/2016 - 19:29

          @wfdTamar:

          Yes, but it might prevent your spam about spam

          My algorithm isn't recursive.

        • terrys on 19/01/2016 - 20:30
          -1

          @jv: <Ahem> Spoken like a Dalek:-p

        • PVA on 19/01/2016 - 21:22

          if that's actually true you should be banned from OzB.

  • payton on 19/01/2016 - 17:21
    +11

    How much was the kickback ? :p

    • diddy50 on 19/01/2016 - 19:42

      wink wink

  • PorkHunt on 19/01/2016 - 17:23
    +10

    Not sure what this is, but would it use Eneloops by any chance?

  • easternculture on 19/01/2016 - 17:23
    +3

    Lol no bargain here. Got mine setup for $500 with no ongoing fee's.

    And my accountant charges with $550 per year for the Tax return / compliance required annually by ATO

    • heal on 19/01/2016 - 17:29

      I have seen a local accountant that does SMSF accounting & his fees were massive. I have looked into esuperfund and this does seem better on the surface. So comparatively to those type of funds it appears to be a bargain.

      • easternculture on 19/01/2016 - 17:30

        Can send you the contact of my accountant if you want

        • heal on 19/01/2016 - 17:32

          That would be great :)
          As long as you accountant is happy to do things via post as I live in a small country town.

        • jv on 19/01/2016 - 17:34
          +2

          @heal:

          As long as you accountant is happy to do things via post as I live in a small country town.

          I've never met an accountant that would say 'no' to more clients…

        • easternculture on 19/01/2016 - 17:36

          @heal:

          yep. cant see why he wouldn't agree to that

      • [Deactivated] on 19/01/2016 - 22:45
        +1

        as is often the case in life, you get what you pay for.
        good accountants value their time at rates that make $500 simply impossible to do an smsf for.
        it is a highly specialised field. this 'bargain' is comparable to finding a 'bargain' doctor - it's something you just dont want to risk by cheaping out on it

        • CandyMan on 20/01/2016 - 18:12

          In that case the large superfunds charge the heftiest fees and often deliver modest outcomes.

    • davicta on 19/01/2016 - 17:30

      Which one do you use for $500 a year?

    • F1Maniac on 19/01/2016 - 17:39

      Care to share with fellow ozbargainers pls?

      • easternculture on 19/01/2016 - 17:43
        +1

        Well i would have to see if my accountant would be happy for me to share his info here.

        However , im happy to pass on his details via pm.

        • F1Maniac on 19/01/2016 - 20:13

          pls do pm me, thanks.

        • zapartos on 21/01/2016 - 22:36

          Please PM me too, thanks!

    • CandyMan on 19/01/2016 - 17:52
      +1

      I have to agree with EC
      Those fees are too much to pay
      +1 for the detailed description and accurate information about super

  • spackbace on 19/01/2016 - 17:24
    +2

    TL;DR

  • RSV1000 on 19/01/2016 - 17:33
    +7

    My teacher at school once told me
    If there is too much to read which has been written by a lawyer then you can bet your bottom dollar its only going to benefit the lawyer.

  • Lancerx on 19/01/2016 - 17:38
    +1

    if you don't have at least $100k in your super, I can't see any good reason to go SMSF..can't do much anyway

    • jv on 19/01/2016 - 17:42
      +1

      can't do much anyway

      That depends on many things…

      SMSFs are allowed to borrow money to invest…

      • kudoz on 19/01/2016 - 18:01

        Have to be VERY careful with what you do with the money borrowed, so that though to make sure you don't violate any of the "arm's length" rules

        • jv on 19/01/2016 - 18:42
          +1

          as long as you don't directly or even indirectly use the assets, you should be fine…

        • abh_gup on 19/01/2016 - 22:05

          the rule is a 5% threshold, amongst others. So that may make things impractical.
          Say you wish to live in your house worth $400,000, your SMSF should be over $8,000,000 (after adjusting for liabilities) to comply.

    • CandyMan on 19/01/2016 - 17:55

      Depends on how you manage your money and investments
      I think that 100k thing is to deter people from switching from large super funds

      • [Deactivated] on 19/01/2016 - 22:40

        under 100k smsf's should be borderline illegal, it would almost never be in your interests to have an smsf with balance like that

      • CandyMan on 20/01/2016 - 18:08
        +2

        You can neg my comment as you like, it's like saying if you don't have 100k you shouldn't invest your money. Its even more attractive to invest SMSF money (if you now what you're doing) because the tax rate is lower. Other ways of increasing total value of SMSF is setting up a family SMSF or friends. A lot of older people are investing in brick and mortar and people shouldn't be discouraged to invest they money just because they don't have (and probably wont have) 200k in their super.

        Anyway I hope this post gets younger people seriously think about their super and how to start managing their retirement money.

    • [Deactivated] on 19/01/2016 - 22:35
      +1

      500k at a minimum is the general rule of thumb amongst good financial planners, even this amount would be debatable as to whether its worthwhile (generally speaking). the amount of people who are wasting money by having a smsf is astounding. there is a significant amount of responsibility in being a trustee for an smsf, many people just think its as simple as filling out some forms. using a robo-adviser like stockspot would almost certainly yield more if your balance is relatively small.

      • Bazzier on 24/01/2016 - 21:19

        We work hard to earn income, thus I believe extreme cautions must be employed when investing your money.

        When I first heard Stockspot, I went to their website to do more research about them. They look good until I saw who their Chief of Marketing Officer was, someone that had a very negative reputation in the finance sector. This made me realised I cannot entrust my money (or anyone else) to this company.

        I personally will only invest to people that I can trust (ask feedback from your friends or family in the sector, you could be surprised how much you could discover).

        Anyway just my 2cent. Stay safe with your investment.

  • wizedz on 19/01/2016 - 17:43
    +1

    I hear Esuper hires a bunch of accounting graduates with no experience to do majority of work for them and treat them badly, anyone can confirm?

    • jv on 19/01/2016 - 17:44
      +9

      how's that different to what most consultancies do ?

      • abh_gup on 19/01/2016 - 22:08

        yeah, maybe that's why one asks for qualifications and experiences first.
        though, what you don't see… may actually be carried out offshore
        (like at my previous work places… and the public just never knew what those corporates were up to)

  • Sidor on 19/01/2016 - 17:46
    +1

    thanks for efforts typing that much information.
    I got my super in term deposit CBA account giving me nearly 0% after all fees are taken.

    My need to take time and read through.

  • [Deactivated] on 19/01/2016 - 17:55
    +1

    Changes in the legislation soon will mean your accountant will not be allowed to advise you about super funds unless they are suitably licensed. Essentially it means you will need to see a financial planner to get advice. I haven't been particularly impressed with them generally.

  • lgacb08 on 19/01/2016 - 18:01

    Regardless of fund that you choose, you'll be lucky to make any profit for this year considering the current market, a deposit would be the only viable option.

  • check on 19/01/2016 - 18:02

    So you get a year to try it out for free. Seems reasonable :)

    • [Deactivated] on 20/01/2016 - 11:44

      Not free, =$200 to wind it up next year (or you just keeeeeeep on paying for it?)

  • SBOB on 19/01/2016 - 18:10
    +1

    The fund I chose had a fee of less than 2% PA and has been returning over 25% PA in that time

    thats a hell of a risk profile :)

  • Rutger on 19/01/2016 - 18:38
    +1

    This crosses the line on financial advice. Saying it's not financial advice doesn't mean anything.

    OP if you can't tell what is and isn't, don't post as not only can Ozbargain be fined for this you can as well.

    (And yes, I used to be qualified to know what I can't say).

    • jv on 19/01/2016 - 18:43

      agreed, especially when they start posting comparisons too…

      • BluBoy on 19/01/2016 - 18:52
        +1

        I don't agree, but happy to modify it if need be.

        Would it be better if I stopped it after at the table?

        • jv on 19/01/2016 - 18:54
          +1

          I don't agree

          We're all entitled to our opinions here… :)

        • Maverick-au on 20/01/2016 - 00:28

          @jv:

          We're all entitled to our opinions here… :)

          Except that some are worthwhile and others are pointless utterly pointless. I thank the OP as it's very interesting, a good comparison and may start people down the path of self managed super.

        • jv on 20/01/2016 - 00:30

          @Maverick-au:

          Except that some are worthwhile and others are pointless utterly pointless.

          which is subjective…

          it's very interesting, a good comparison

          It only looks at the costs, and not the returns…

          may start people down the path of self managed super.

          They'd be much better off in nearly all cases by seeking professional advise.

    • bemybubble on 19/01/2016 - 19:23
      +3

      As long as you are only stipulating what the product offers and not advising on whether it is right for people then it is not financial advice. He isn't telling people what product is right for them or if it's not, he has clearly stipulated he isn't qualified to advise whether people should or shouldn't setup their own fund so I don't see the problem here.

      This is no different to how industry funds advertise on TV only with a bit more further detail as far as I am concerned. However i'm not convinced this is a 'bargain' and only a lure for ongoing services and for that reason I feel it should be in the forums. Purely subjective on that point anyway.

      FYI coming from a qualified Accountant & Financial Planner and not google :)

      • wfdTamar on 19/01/2016 - 19:31

        Yes, it's just like the many credit card or bank account deals we see posted.

      • Rutger on 19/01/2016 - 19:37
        +2

        He's since edited it and removed, among others, comments like this.

        dealman: I'd personally recommend leaving a small amount of cash in your regular market super fund account and buying your life , tpd and other insurance cover through there.

        I was FSR (or whatever it was) qualified so I do know the difference.

        One thing I'm not sure of is full disclosure of benefits. I believe it's now a requirement because Financial Planners were such a dishonest bunch as a whole (lol) but I'm not sure. If OP is getting anything at all, such as reduced fees, doesn't he have to disclose that?

        • bemybubble on 19/01/2016 - 21:11
          +1

          If the OP is getting something out of it then as per the ozbargain rules he would need to disclose. However if the financial planner is giving him benefit he doesn't need to disclose as he isn't the one taking your money

        • Rutger on 19/01/2016 - 21:24

          @bemybubble: Thanks for the info.

          I retracted my negative vote as OP changed the post.

      • mrtin on 19/01/2016 - 21:46
        -1

        This is probably "general advice" and he should have one of those long disclaimers

        • bemybubble on 20/01/2016 - 07:06

          No it is not. Unless you are qualified to state otherwise?

        • mrtin on 20/01/2016 - 08:50
          +2

          @bemybubble:

          "If you know you have multiple superannuation accounts, fix it! Roll it all into one account"

          Will this person pay the client's bills and mortgage repayments when they lose income protection insurance from the super they roll out from? Or will they pay the funeral bill when their death cover in the closed super ceases?

        • bemybubble on 20/01/2016 - 08:55
          +1

          @mrtin:

          See my post below mrtin, it's for that reason why i'm negging

      • bemybubble on 20/01/2016 - 08:44
        +1

        Couldn't edit my original post:

        1) If you know you have multiple superannuation accounts, fix it! Roll it all into one account.

        ^^^^

        Might want to remove that OP

        • Rutger on 20/01/2016 - 20:13

          Yep that's clearly financial advice which I missed.

          You can't tell people what to do regarding financial matters and you can't hint at it either.

          I could post what I think may be an acceptable phrase but I don't want to walk the minefield, which it most certainly is. You don't want to be in it when the regulator sets one off.

          The accreditation, the word I couldn't think of yesterday, is only valid for a year to ensure people never forget it. In my role I never gave financial advice nor came anywhere near giving it. I was on the very edge of the system but was still required to pass the "exams" and needed to know what I had to make sure I never said.

    • harkoliar on 19/01/2016 - 19:29
      +3

      He did mention and encouraged to do your research. At least OP has pointed to several links which we may find useful even if we don't take up OPs offer.

  • thefreelunch on 19/01/2016 - 20:49

    Unless you have a lot of money in super and are going to do something very specific with your investments you can't do in a large fund (like borrowing to buy an investment or business property etc) then it's crazy to even think about an SMSF.

  • [Deactivated] on 19/01/2016 - 21:11
    +1

    You're posting this as a deal then literally putting a disclaimer saying to do our own research as this may not be a deal? K..

  • CandyMan on 19/01/2016 - 21:11

    Then $790 Per Year after That

    It was $670 3 years ago so not quite constant

  • mrtin on 19/01/2016 - 21:45
    +1

    I find it quite frustrating that the majority of smsf trustees i meet do not know what their role and responsibilities are (even though they have signed an ato declaration saying they understand).
    Some common problems:
    Not knowing what an investment strategy is
    Not diversifying
    Not knowing general smsf rules eg arms length transaction, related party transactions etc.
    Also as mentioned in a previous post, accountants are generally not legally able to provide financial advice on smsf unless they have an afsl licence from 1 july 2016.

  • abh_gup on 19/01/2016 - 21:59
    +1

    haha , one does not just set up an SMSF just because its low cost, etc. Other things that matter more are:

    Purpose of SMSF
    Investments to be had in the SMSF
    Servicing advisor, if any, for the SMSF, and aligned services
    The value $$ of the investments
    The horizon/term of investments to be held.
    Support for the financial strategies to be implemented within the SMSF, now and over the longer term.
    Customization of deed, documents and flexibility.

    Hence, I guess this bargain is a long shot… or not quite one :(

    This may also be construed as misleading other naive people without your proper knowledge / professional certification on the subject.
    A general disclaimer doesn't justify general ethics.

    • CacheHunter on 19/01/2016 - 22:37

      Or maybe it is a deal for some of us but not others. For me, my low cost fund with the orange logo is right for me at the moment, but I'm hoping to move to a SMSF in the next 2-3 years and this might be a reasonable option then. Thanks for posting OP.

      This discussion does leave me wondering why this deal has attracted all of the comments about disclaimers etc. I've never seen a disclaimer in any of the eneloop posts that they're useless if you only own mains powered devices.

      • Russ on 19/01/2016 - 22:58
        +1

        For many fields (Financial advice, legal advice, medical advice, others…) there is a legal requirement that you hold a particular qualification if you give that type of advice. If you do not have that qualification, and somebody takes your advice thinking that you do have the necessary qualification, then you can be sued for any losses. For financial advice (and for the other fields as well), the losses can be VERY big. Hence the disclaimers.

  • unifex on 19/01/2016 - 23:01
    +4

    Yeah im going to transfer my entire superfund to a random website.

    • argonbay on 20/01/2016 - 01:15
      +2

      Bitcoin?

  • argonbay on 20/01/2016 - 02:37
    +4

    I looked at SMSF a while back and decided that $200,000 was a reasonable amount to start one. At that time I had a few small amounts in super funds from various jobs.

    My path was to setup an online account with one of the major super fund managers and invest mainly in Australian Shares. I did not go through an accountant or advisor to setup an account as they would be paid a commission every time a contribution was made as well as an annual trailing percentage. I looked closely at the fees to see what was being paid out and chose a large fund with reliable historic returns and low contribution and trailing fees. I rolled over all bits and pieces into this single super fund.

    While I was building the amount in super I began investing in shares on a small scale to get a feel for what goes on in the share market. I already had an investment in real-estate (the house I live in) so was aware of that side of things. I decided that shares were the preferred way to go for me but also realised that I did not have the experience to make the best investment decisions and manage risk or time to do the required research. Fortunately some of the shares I had invested in were with an LIC (Listed Investment Company). There are many of these around including AFI, ALF, ARG, FGX, WAM and WAX to name a few (I do not hold shares in all of these). These companies invest in shares on the ASX. They had experienced managers that would do the investment work for me. Fees are either small (AFI, ARG) or based on returns (ALF, WAM, WAX). FGX is an interesting one, there are many managers who charge no fees and 1% of the FUM are donated to various charities each year. I like the incentive approach, I was a bit tired of seeing funds take a % of your investment even if they had lost some of your money over the year. I looked at the dividend and price history of various LIC's to get an idea of which had provided reliable management and returns. Diversification was also achieved as money is invested in many companies. Management, Capital Preservation, Diversification, Good Dividend Returns, that's what I wanted!

    When I had reached my target amount in Super I setup a SMSF and rolled all my super into that. So I had $200k in cash in the fund and had to start investing it. I decided I would not pile it into shares all at once and put 50% into shares and then slowly invested the remainder over 18 months (mostly in LIC's). I did this because I had seen people put large amount of cash into shares in one go only for some large correction to come along soon afterwards and wipe out half the value. Apart from LIC's I have invested in a few Blue Chip shares (Banks, Utilities, Insurance and Retail).

    After the initial research into LIC's and setting up the initial investments I did not have to put a lot of effort onto managing the money in my SMSF just keep an eye on things. There is however reasonable effort involved in paperwork and administration of the fund.

    This was the way I decided to go, real estate may be the preferred option for others. As the bare foot investor says "tread your own path".

    • ReadOnly on 20/01/2016 - 10:11
      +1

      Good essay.

    • hawkers8905 on 20/01/2016 - 13:57
      +1

      Your comment (essay) is the only worthwhile comment on this discussion. and it just goes to show you that SMSFs are not for everybody and as per the OP you did your own research before diving right in.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join