Looking into starting a SMSF to roll in existing superannuation.
I would be very grateful for tips, advice, suggestions, recommended providers, etc, from people in the know and people that have done it.
SMSF will have 2 members (husband and wife). Both retired. 1 still in Accumulation Phase (under preservation age). 1 in Pension Phase.
Simple investing requirements: cash, ETFs, shares. Property very unlikely.
Edit: About $700k combined.
Thank you.
Starting SMSF. Tips, Advice, Suggestions, Recommended Providers, etc
EveryLastCent on 10/07/2024 - 15:39
Last edited 10/07/2024 - 15:51
Last edited 10/07/2024 - 15:51
Comments
Around $700k combined
I doubt it's worth it then
Seriously, there are vehicles out there that can do what you want for a very comparable if not cheaper cost without all the stress and work.
Get proper advice to look at options instead of hoping to get free advice on ozbargain.Get proper advice to look at options instead of hoping to get free advice on ozbargain.
I though that was the all idea behind ozbargain. Give and take free advice/tips…
Otherwise there wouldn't be ozbargain!
Start a scheme … which usually will result in some form of pyramid.
I know of a couple of old schemes; Djoser & Khufu
I think the Goa'uld probably enlisted the most
slavesvalued team members overall
Find a decent accountant. Have them setup by way of execution only instruction. Will save you a heap on obtaining an SOA for establishment.
I was hoping to keep estabilishment cost down. Something like Stake or similar.
Also something that would do all the admin, reporting, etc.Look - youve got 700k worth of investment in a highly regulated vehicle.
I would suggest you spend the money and get a decent accountant who knows the ins and outs of SMSFs. If not then you might as well stick to an industry fund to be honest
So should share wealth with an accountant or a fund?
There are substantial savings to be made in moving from an industry fund and making the exact same investments for lower cost.
how much the fees with stake?
I thought they just had a setup special for about $700. Normally about $1k per year.
execution only is exactly that.
“I don’t want advice. I just need someone to establish it”
Accountant would have you sign off on something confirming you haven’t sought their advice and it’s purely to setup. Quite common
I just did something similar and used www.autosmsf.com.au.
Wife and I set up an SMSF and rolled over the funds to buy a commercial property for our business. Process was all smooth.
To be honest, for 700k and the assets you've suggested, I wouldn't waste my time with a SMSF.
AustralianSuper's Australian Shares or International shares match their equivalent ETFs pretty well. You'll probably only pay $500-700/year in fees.
An accountant will charge you 2k/year … maybe more just for the accounting. Maybe another $500/year in other fees. Esuperfund (one of the cheapest SMSF accountants) charges $1199 … still a lot more than Australian Super.
There's lots of benefits in an SMSF for other situations (even with lower balances), but if your situation I just see a world of fees and pain. Did you know, lots of people close down their SMSFs and go back to industry funds, when they retire?
Don't just take my word for it, post the question in whirlpool and r/AusFinance and see that they day there.
yep i always wondering what is the minimum reasonalble super balance to go to SMSF i mean now we have budget providers but i think there is a figure as a guide.
It's a really simple calc. Super balance divided by all the fees of the fund vs Super balance divided by cost of SMSF.
Almost everybody compares expensive options and conclude you need 100s of $100s to justify a SMSF, but it simply isn't true*.
*If you can really get an industry fund for 0.10% as stated above, then it's true. But if your superfund is charging you 1%, then it would be worth changing for an $80K (my SMSF costs $779 per year.)
Sure if fees are the only thing you are looking at. There's also trustee responsibility, and complexity that you either have to handle yourself or pay someone to do for you. Also most people don't have the investment knowledge to outperform the big super funds. The other factor is time. You'll need a lot more of it if you have an SMSF.
most people don't have the investment knowledge to outperform the big super funds
It's not that hard, read https://passiveinvestingaustralia.com/
Who is your SMSF with? What was the setup cost for a Corporate Fund and is $779 inclusive all costs & fees?
The SMSF Association looked into this a few years ago and found $250,000 was the mark at which an SMSF was on par with non-SMSFs for admin costs - https://www.smsfassociation.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/C…
They also did a follow up which found that performance was on par with non-SMSFs (all things considered) after about $200,000 - https://www.smsfassociation.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/U…
I think ASIC also had a figure like that as the minimum. I deal with AFCA quite a bit also and they definitely do not think its appropriate for less than maybe $300k or so. They would also expect anyone running an SMSF to have pretty good investment knowledge. I've seen too many cases where this is not the case and very bad decisions have been made.
so what are benefits in an SMSF for other situations (even with lower balances - assume lets say $400k) ?
In my mind, this is the biggest reason to start a SMSF in your 40s with 200k or more:
https://passiveinvestingaustralia.com/the-problem-with-poole…
The CGT drag on accumulation mode investments is huge.
I've made this mistake by investing in Vanguard manage funds instead of their ETFs. Been lazy / unsure whether to liquidate it all, pay the remaining CGT, and then buy a huge chunk of ETFs.
@Brianqpr: That's true.
I should clarify I'm talking about my own regular investments here, not super. But it's the same CGT drag issue.But it's the same CGT drag issue.
What's the CGT drag issue with regular investments? I didn't they need to provision for CGT within the fund.
@salmon123: Whenever the fund sells shares at a profit, you owe CGT even if you didn't sell any of your fund holdings. It appears on your tax summary from the fund each year.
Whereas with an ETF, you only need to pay CGT when you sell the ETF shares.
Whenever the fund sells shares at a profit, you owe CGT even if you didn't sell any of your fund holdings
That should be pretty minimal … buys/sell within the fund are netted out. Unless there's a mass sell off in the fund.
But yeah, I see what you're saying.
The CGT drag outside of super isn't as bad as with-in super.
@salmon123: What do you mean re netting? If the fund sells Google at a profit, later buys it all back, you're still on the hook for CGT.
In the page you linked https://passiveinvestingaustralia.com/the-problem-with-poole… under Examples, there are 2 long threads (whinges) about this issue on whirlpool and AusFinance .
What do you mean re netting?
Buy/Sell orders for a fund are netted against each other. In general, if a fund is growing they will continue to buy more stock.
The two cases where they will realise a capital gain (or loss) is:
- Removing a stock from the portfolio, eg General Electric leaves the S&P 500
- The fund is shirking and the redemptions out number the buys.
If the fund sells Google at a profit, later buys it all back
Your example is correct, but in general the buying/selling in minimal.
there are 2 long threads (whinges) about this issue on whirlpool and AusFinance
There's some other factors at play for the CGT drag outside of super too. A fund manager link Vanguard has ETFs and Managed Fund for the same underlying - the netting between the ETF and the Managed Fund sometimes ends up with a suboptimal tax outcome for people because the Managed Fund might finish up with more of the capital gains than the ETF (or vice versa).
- Removing a stock from the portfolio, eg General Electric leaves the S&P 500
- The fund is shirking and the redemptions out number the buys.
I'm thinking of the more regular adjustments to the index. Eg today Google comprises 3% of an index, tomorrow they are 2.7%. So the fund has to sell the excess and that's a CGT event.
Eg today Google comprises 3% of an index, tomorrow they are 2.7%. So the fund has to sell the excess and that's a CGT event.
Sure - that's the first case I mentioned above, but it's not a daily occurrence. The S&P 500 only rebalances every quarter. Other indexes are similar.
The 3 month rebalancing might coincide with a 50m inflow (eg superannuation payments), so the fund could get away with only selling 0.1% google instead of 0.3%.
You have to be wired into all things finance and investing. If you don't allocate sufficient time and expertise your SMSF won't make any money. Not unlike RPI where many people are not doing well while others achieve excellent returns.
nah ETFs allow you to make the same trades the passive funds make, but at reduced cost.
You don't need a lot of time or expertise nowadays, Most of the large funds are doing little more than investing in ETFs which you can do just as easily and far cheaper.
In 2018 I wanted to dump 95% of my super into bitcoin so I started a SMSF to do it.
Left the remaining 5% with a retail fund.I use Squirrel but wouldn't recommend them
I just had a quick look at Australian Super.
Admin and investment fees on a $500k balance are $3200. So for 1 account each, it makes $6400.
Their cash investment returned 3.82% per year. Say you had $500K in it, at 3.82% is $19,100. Same $500k in a SMSF in Macquaire Cash Management at 4.65% makes $23,250.(+$4,150)
So $6400 in fees plus $4,150=$10,550
Assuming $1,000 in SMSF fees, still $9,550 better off.
Am I missing something?Yeah.
Admin fee $6400 is an expense
Cash return is probably money market funds vs bank accounts and don't forget interest rates were lower start of last year as rates rose. It is an opportunity cost and nobody invests 100% in cash.
Is your stock picking abilities better than the stack of people they have in the super funds. Can you beat their balanced option (depending on your risk appetited).
Large super funds have access to private equity, venture capital, infrastructure funds that you might not have access to.
Am I missing something?
I was only speaking about admin fees. I'd be surprised in cash had a non-zero admin fee at AustralianSuper.
In your example, yes, you're better off getting the Macquarie cash rate, if you're only investing in cash.
I would assume that the investment fees for Australian Super Australian Shares and an ETF like VAS are more or less the same. Happy to admit I haven't checked this though.
The admin fees at Australian super should be a few hundred dollars less than what a SMSF will cost.
I just had a quick look at Australian Super.
Admin and investment fees on a $500k balance are $3200. So for 1 account each, it makes $6400.
Their cash investment returned 3.82% per year. Say you had $500K in it, at 3.82% is $19,100. Same $500k in a SMSF in Macquaire Cash Management at 4.65% makesFor cash holdings, Australian Super under their Members Direct option is currently paying 5.25% on its cash account.
$30pa fee for Members Direct if you just want cash holdings, $180pa if you want shares/etf optionstotal admin fees on that would be (if you just held 500k cash under members direct)
yearly admin fee, capped at $350
weekly admin fee, $1/week - $52
yearly members direct fee, $30total admin fees on that would be (if you just held 500k cash under members direct)
yearly admin fee, capped at $350
weekly admin fee, $1/week - $52
yearly members direct fee, $30I didn't notice the Members Direct.
So if for example ypu had the shares, etfs and lics option you would have a $180 yearly fee.
What are the other fees you mention? Are there on top of that?@EveryLastCent: Their standard member management fee and weekly fee, listed under administration fees
https://www.australiansuper.com/compare-us/fees-and-cost
For any shares you'd have the trading fee (like a normal exchange) and for etfs whatever inbuilt management/tracking fee is part of the ETF (which you would have holding it anywhere)(I'm currently an Australian super member, but in high growth, paying higher fees, considering options to move/switch wife and my super to alternative investment options, still a while from retirement)
You are looking at the wrong fund for comparison (look at the DIY mix)
Anyway, cheaper is Hostplus, look at their single sector indexed options - 0.07% international shares, 0.04% Australia and 0.02% cash plus admin fee of $78.00 p.a. plus 0.0165% ($82.50 pa on $500k balance). Of course performance looks lower because its not performance over a 12 month period (when rates are higher) - you cant compare 5 years of past performance against 1 year of future performance.
Or if you are still keen on a more SMSF approach, look at the Choiceplus options and you can invest direct and more or less its an SMSF (although there are some limitations if you want to buy spec stocks or put everything on red). It also allows for term deposits (pays 5.15% for a 1 yr term),.
Also I dont think a SMSF can invest in a Macquarie cash account (might be wrong); usually SMSF accounts are lower rates
(finally I hope you arent planning on sticking everything into a cash account)
I called to open a Macquarie cash account for my SMSF recently (does not say on their website) but they said no.
Our NAB Trade SMSF high interest account is 4.5% cash interest
I have a macquarie cash account with my smsf and shares there too
What DTC said. Hostplus does not charge a %asset under management admin fee so a great option for higher balances. I see no reason to use an SMSF for standard shares/cash investment when you can use Hostplus ChoicePlus option.
You may be comparing apples with oranges re investment returns
- Not sure where you have sourced a cash return of 3.82% for AustSuper but let's assume this is the right figure for whatever historical period you are looking at, you need to be sure whether it is BEFORE or AFTER deduction of the 15% earnings tax that applies in the accumulation phase.
The Macquarie cash management return of 4.65% which is a product that you can invest in both inside and outside super would not take a/c of tax - if you did invest in it via your SMSF, the return would be 4.65% in the pension phase and 3.9525% in the accumulation phase.The "Cash" DIY option in AustSuper is not actually cash as in bank account deposits but a complex mix ("Invests in short-term money market securities and some short-term bonds") - if you want to invest some or all of your money in cash bank deposits, you can do better at the moment by using AustSuper's Member Direct option and just putting it in Member Direct's cash holding account earning currently 5.25% before tax (better than Macquarie) or at slightly lower rates in term deposits
https://www.australiansuper.com/investments/your-investment-…Other big industry funds including Caresuper and Hostplus also offer direct investment arrangements - these typically offer most if not all of the advantages of smaller SMSFs, including in some cases being able to transfer investments from the accumulation phase to the pension phase without realising capital gains.
And at some point you will be too sick or decrepit to look after your SMSF and might prefer an industry fund to do almost the same thing on your behalf, allowing a pretty smooth transfer to your lucky inheritors when you fall off this mortal coil.
Thank you. I was thing what have I done, I should have gone to Australian Super instead of SMSF. $700pa was too good to be true!
You're right.
My wife was invested in exactly the same as VGS in her industry fund, but paying higher fees for it.You can have a SMSF make exactly the same investments, but at lower cost. You just have to either do a bit of bookkeeping, or pay for someone else to do it.
Australian Super has a term deposit option that pays more. Unless you are drawing funds out of super, you don't need access to the funds. Also how are you running am SMSF for only $1k? This does not seem realistic. Accounting alone would be more than that.
There's a piece in the April edition of Money Magazine about when to wind up your SMSF. “When people are working, they keep thinking they'll have time when they retire to pay more attention to it, but all of a sudden, in retirement, there's a whole lot of other things they want to do and time becomes a big issue as well.”
Are you saying $700K isn't enough to warrant the change? What fees do AustralianSuper charge? Any flat fees, or just 0.07% - 0.10%?
There are cheaper options than accountants and Esuperfund. (Esuperfund used to be a reasonable price at $599 but either they're greedy, or they're struggling to keep costs down.)
Those AustralianSuper fees you quote are very competitive, and I agree I wouldn't be changing from that.
I suspect most people are paying more than that, in which case I'd say go to AustralianSuper if you can get that rate, otherwise go a cheaper SMSF IF you can do own bookkeeping.Are you saying $700K isn't enough to warrant the change?
Sort of.
700k is plenty to start an SMSF but the thing you need to think about the end goal or what you're trying to achieve. The OP here wants to finish up with essentially the same as what they can do with AustralianSuper or HostPlus inside an SMSF. They'll end up paying a bit more in fees with the SMSF and a lot more admin. I don't see much benefit, especially in retirement phase (pension mode). At the same time, if they wanted to start an SMSF and buy a residential property/crypto/FAANGs then that would make sense (I'm not endorsing this though).
On the other hand, if they were still in accumulation mode a SMSF makes a lot of sense - see the article above from passive investing Australia.
Spot on Slick Mick. I do my own bookkeeping using specialised subscription software.
That’s $220, audit $330 - I know there is cheaper audit out there but the firm i use is a. thorough (useful for ATO scrutiny), and b .fast and reliable. (You don’t want to be chasing your auditor up when you’ve got thousands due from ATO franking credits.)What specialised subscription is that if you are willing to share?
In my case $3500 fees from Aust Super vs $1,400 with grow SMSF with a similar amount.
Probably not worth bothering just for the fee saving, but some of Aust Super's votes as shareholders were pissing me off so I wanted out.some of Aust Super's votes as shareholders were pissing me off so I wanted out.
Yes they seem more interested in pushing government policies than maximising members' returns.
I had the opposite problem, they were prioritising members financial returns over environmental benefits. Probably legally obliged to so I need to go to my own fund to avoid it.
Put everything on NVDIA
That's an idea!
I could end up driving around in a Ferrari. Or riding a pushbike!yeah good idea after it has already 20x'ed in the last 12 months.
Also looking at possibly adding another $300k savings as voluntary contributions, making the total close to $1m.
Would probably keep half in cash and half in ETFs.
The current super fund is gone downhill a lot. Increased fees, decreased returns and bad customer service.
Also the cash part only returns less than 4% when you can get 4.65% with Macquire Cash Management.
Overall I calculated that increasing the total to $1M with voluntary contributions, between my wife and I we would be paying about $11k in fees and reduced interest rates.
Assuming a cheap SMSF accountant would cost $1k (Stake?), we would be close to $10k better off.
Back of the envelope calculation. Happy to be corrected.Why are you paying 1% in fees when most ETFs are somewhere between 0.05% - 0.40%?
I would suggest getting a financial adviser or accountant onto it.
$10k better off might actually be like $5k after you spend time doing your own trades / rebalancing / having to submit compliance paperwork then having to deal with queries.
The 1% includes the reduced interest rates super funds give you on the amount invested in cash (3.9%) compared to the 4.65% available out there. Also assumes to have half in cash and half in ETFs.
Why you holding $500k in cash?
$1m in high dividend ETF would get you $40k a year in dividends or $80k if you sell part of the portfolio assuming consistent 8% pa return.
You might have 3 years of living expenses in cash to ride a market crash but not 50% of your portfolio.
I'm getting 5.5% on my SMSF cash but obviously I can't give advice due to not having AFSL.
@netjock: I think in the current financial environment and with the ASX close to all time high I rather be 50% cash. Ready to possibly switch if the time comes.
More perceived safety I suppose.
Where do you get 5.5% on SMSF cash?I think in the current financial environment and with the ASX close to all time high I rather be 50% cash. Ready to possibly switch if the time comes.
That was October 2023. My private equity investment is up 150%, IT sector is up like 100% (ETFs)
Where do you get 5.5% on SMSF cash?
I'm getting out of that (not government guaranteed) and into either bonds or ETFs because rates are coming down.
I loaded up some Aussie gov bonds at 4.8% yield in October 23 (they are still at 4.2%) when rates come down they are going to rocket up. At one point in Dec 23 my gov bonds were up 10% capital gains.
I was involved in a UK government Treasury bill auction last week and they were at 5.2% 30 days rolling.
Rate cuts coming in Nov this year or next year. Get out of cash.
General advice. My opinion. I am not responsible if people act on it and lose money.
The % difference is possibly the tax withheld in accumulation
wow you are wealthy family just dont fall into ozb mentality do the right thing. most ppl here doesnt even have $30k saving
Outcome of buy now think later on OzB
wow you are wealthy family
Well with both retired that's it. No more money coming in. Only going out. And living cost rising whilst acuumulated funds staying the same.
It is different when you are working, the money keeps coming in and you are getting pay rises to compensate for inflation or changing jobs for more money.i have definitely saved over 30k using oz bargains
thats what i said and say and will say to my mrs to justify the purchases… we all know it is NOT
For starters you should both switch to a better fund while assessing your next move.
I've got a feeling you might be better off just looking for a better performing fund.
You'll be making all the investment decisions. You can't be as diverse as a retail fund.
Rather than looking at the cost side, what about return/performance?
ETFs
I would highly recommend talking to an SMSF certified accountant to help with the setup of the fund. They will need to have a limited Financial Advice license or higher.
They will advise the correct way to set the fund up and also advise how to to purchase assets correctly and set up bank accounts correctly.
I have seen a lot of clients with SMSFs and most are highly involved and know pretty much everything that is happening.
The fund has to be audited every year, and this involves correlating EVERY piece of information to ensure that the fund is complying with the SIS act. So thing all your purchase and sale contracts, dividends, distributions bank statements etc. Having assets in an incorrect name can lead to contraventions if not rectified.
Audit Fees can be from as little as $500 but it depends on how the company you choose like to fee, ie from a fixed rate, or % of fund based fee.
Accounting fees are how long is a piece of string. For a fund that is set and forget, ie bank account, dividend income and very little purchases, sales and capital adjustments, it can be relatively low. Lowest I have seen is about $650 though.
Our firm uses BGLSF360 and there are other SMSF software out there such as Class, and you should organise with the accountant to have access to upload documents such as dividends etc to help minimise their involvement.
Accounting fees are how long is a piece of string. For a fund that is set and forget, ie bank account, dividend income and very little purchases, sales and capital adjustments, it can be relatively low. Lowest I have seen is about $650 though.
$650 is very cheap. No super fund can beat that as they charge you a percentage of the whole amount of your super.
Probably that's all I would need.
Where did you see that?That was our accounting firm.
However it was a super simple fund with essentially cash and a handful of shares.
The more work the accountant/bookkeeper has to do the more it will cost. Hence why i suggested getting access to the online software and doing as much data uploading and matching as possible to keep costs down.
Agree with Zeph101. One thing with the software, not all banks and brokers participate in the software data matching. Especially the highest paying banks, and cheapest brokers. Then you are doing some of it manually. I do, and don’t mind. Beats Sudoku, and not as hard. But mistakes won’t balance.
Zeph101 mentions BGLSF360. ($220 p.a) I’ve used it for years after taking over from a percentage based provider (16yrs ago). They dropped the ball on corporate share actions, were too slow, non responsive and sloppy. I’ve a fixed fee auditor $330 (google that), you’ll need an actuarial certificate $100 while there’s an accum acct. The ATO fee, and possibly insurance. Trust Deed from Cleardocs. Get advice on using a Corporate Trustee. Learning the software and double entry accounting was hard - you need to like that sort of thing, but unless you find a reliable provider it’s the only way you stay in real control. Lot’s of good advice on all the rules available on line for a fee. Good luck, get advice from different sources!
We've already outlined a cheaper industry super fund above: Hostplus. $78p.a plus .0165% fee ($115 on 700k) plus $168p.a. ChoicePlus fee. Index funds have <.05% fees. Much cheaper and easier than an SMSF for this type of investment allocation.
The primary question you need to ask and honestly answer is, "why do you want to set up an SMSF?"
If you only want to invest in cash, ETFs, and shares, why open an SMSF?
You can invest in these assets through many superannuation platforms that are out there. You will need to pay an ongoing administration fee of some sort, but this is likely be very close to the annual costs of compliance via your accountant, etc. It also avoids the compliance nightmare that can come about if you don't really know what you're doing in terms of keeping the fund clean, not to mention the upfront costs.
I've found most people who "want an SMSF" actually just want to take greater control of their investment choices. My advice is always to find the right superannuation product that allows you to do this … not just jump to an SMSF.
The answer is to save money. A SMSF is ideal for cash & ETFs - you can invest in exactly what these funds would, but at reduced cost.
I set up a SMSF because I was paying the same exhorbitant fees even when the market was falling. Now I only have a small overhead.
SlickMick, not just saving. Control has been a godsend. Starting and stopping pensions on a dime, not waiting days or weeks for someone to get back to you. And the bureaucratic humour: the enjoyment of writing letters to yourself saying do this, and immediately replying done (or not likely chum if you are so inclined). As per ATO requirements.
That said, most posters are clear, OP needs professional advice, but OP should avoid the rent seekers. They are sometimes hard to detect.Thats true. I've had a SMSF so long I forgot what the super funds were like to deal with.
I thought that a company like Stake would be sufficient for a good enough setup and also for the admin and yearly reporting costs.
So all the cost would be $1k per year plus brokerage costs for buying/selling ETFs or shares.
Certainly not worth if an accountant is required for one to one specific work instead of the mass produced Stake product.
Yes the idea is to have more control, but also to avoid paying fees up to $10k between the 2 super accounts.
And to access a better return for cash funds.
I am currently with ART. Used to be QSuper and it was good. Now since becoming ART it has gone downhill in returns and customer service. And fees have increased.
I am now looking at the Australian Super Member Direct. Very good interest on cash at 5.25%, but also higher fees than the basic Stake SMSF costs.but also higher fees than the basic Stake SMSF costs.
I don't think you're correctly comparing total fees of smsf (including yearly audit/reporting) and something like an industry fund with low cost options if you think the fees will be higher when just investing in cash and etfs
So all the cost would be $1k per year plus brokerage costs for buying/selling ETFs or shares.
20% in lowest fee diversified indexed and 80% in members direct would likeky be under 1k with none of the smsf effort (and probably more manageable retirement transition)
I just jumped on their website and cant find how your fees could be that high. They have an admin fee calculator here: https://qsuper.qld.gov.au/learn/fee-changes and they are capped at $500 for admin. Then if you want cash and shares those are 0.09% aussie shares and 0.07%for cash. Unless your brother is an accountant you’re not going to beat that. Check your statement again you are probably adding insurances plus the fees they pay from their reserves. You must have chosen one of their actively managed options as well the default you would have been in is 0.32%. All the big industry funds are hard to beat on their indexed options most are cheaper than vanguard. A few comments are on the money about apples and oranges. The returns on most super funds websites are after fees and taxes and in arrears, not a promise of the future. Good luck.
It's not only the fees. At the moment, being mostly in cash while we decide what to do, and with a view to retain about 50% in cash, their cash investment interest rate is very low. About 1% lower than it should be.
So that is not really considered a fee, but still adds up to the fees.A lot of those higher interest rates are for personal accounts and have temporary bonuses. You’ll need to check what rates they give to corporate/business which is what a smsf is. There are a lot of hidden costs on SMSF you don’t get warned about. If your plan is to get out of cash when the market drops it sounds like you won’t be in there for long.
@Shef3000: Yes the higher interest accounts are only available to individuals.
A SMSF cannot get those.
But the Macquire Cash Management is 4.65% and available to SMSFs.
That's another consideration. May be some funds should just be kept outside super and invested in high interest savings account. At least up to the tax free rate.
Yes the idea is wait to see what the market does. It is overdue for a correction, but timing is anyone's guess.
How much money are we talking here?