The bank announced yesterday that it has partnered with Heffron SMSF Solutions to launch a cost-efficient, direct SMSF set up service that will “make it easier for investors to set up and administer their own fund”.
The new service includes ATO registration, an ABN, tax file number, and cash and trading accounts, as well as ongoing administration, through one online form, NAB said.
Speaking to ifa on the concern that the new service is bypassing the need for financial advice, NAB head of SMSF solutions Gemma Dale said, “The removal of the accountants’ exemption on 1 July 2016, certainly changed things for us and our customers.”
“We have some customers who know they want an SMSF, but they are not seeking comprehensive advice. This has made it easier for them because they now don’t have to go through the whole advice process.”
Heffron co-founder and head of customer Meg Heffron told ifa, “I wouldn’t describe this service as something that removes the need for advice or disrupts advice services.”
“Traditionally, our business has been all about working with advisers on their client’s SMSFs rather than direct with trustees so we’ve got a pretty good handle on the value advisers can add, but there’s always been a cohort of people who don’t particularly want advice or don’t want it right now,” she said.
“This service is an enabler for people at the ‘I-don’t-want-advice-yet’ stage. I guess where this service is different is that it’s a partnership between NAB, who has all the expertise in the banking product and the broking product side of things, and Heffron, who has all the SMSF expertise.
“Whilst we have no interest in replacing an adviser, we do have a lot of experience with the sorts of questions that trustees ask.”
I really do not believe that Meg Heffron understands that in order to event contemplate setting up an SMSF the client has to be informed regarding their trustee responsibilities, amounts to have available and what they can and cannot do with that money. Also the mine trap of purchasing property within this entity regarding the rules around this.
This is clearly again, a bank being irresponsible, looking for the LRB side of life (more than likely with personal guarantees, (which we advise against)) and not the BID for the client.
The idea behind the changes to licensing is that SMSF is a product and in setting up that product clients need to get advice.So once again you have a bank making a decision to bypass the advice system so as to get clients to fit there purpose.So if the bank is doing lending to that SMSF ,which may or not be in the clients best interest,they once again are trying to avoid future liability for lending to that fund.
So is ASIC going to look into banks behaving badly??or do we need to wait for another collapse in the property market for this to show another failure in compliance.