We recently
had a number of young Australians visiting us and discussion focused on life,
family but we did talk about the differences between the Canadian retirement
planning model and the Australian model.
For those interested here is a quick review of the Australian model showing some of the concerns. The concerns were highlighted in The Financial System Inquiry, which was established to develop a direction for the future of Australia's financial system.
Superannuation is primarily a long-term savings vehicle to fund retirement. Australia’s superannuation sector has grown rapidly in the period since the Wallis Inquiry and is an important source of funding for long-term capital formation, which is important for productivity growth. Although the superannuation system has considerable strengths, the efficiency of the system is a significant issue. Superannuation in Australia is part of a three prong approach to retirement savings.
For those interested here is a quick review of the Australian model showing some of the concerns. The concerns were highlighted in The Financial System Inquiry, which was established to develop a direction for the future of Australia's financial system.
Superannuation is primarily a long-term savings vehicle to fund retirement. Australia’s superannuation sector has grown rapidly in the period since the Wallis Inquiry and is an important source of funding for long-term capital formation, which is important for productivity growth. Although the superannuation system has considerable strengths, the efficiency of the system is a significant issue. Superannuation in Australia is part of a three prong approach to retirement savings.
The Inquiry
has examined the superannuation issues most relevant to the financial system
and the economy. In general, it is difficult to separate these issues from
Government policy settings because the size and growth of the superannuation
system are largely a creation of Government policy.
There
is little evidence of strong fee-based competition in the superannuation
sector, and operating costs and fees appear high by international standards.
This indicates there is scope for greater efficiency in the superannuation
system.
Notwithstanding
the difficulties in comparing fees and costs across funds, Australia’s
superannuation sector has some of the highest operating costs among
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. The decline
in fees over the past decade is modest, given the economies of scale that the
sector has achieved. That said, high allocations to growth and alternative
assets contribute to these costs, but they can also deliver higher after-fee
returns to members.
In
general, competition has led to feature-rich, but more costly, superannuation
products, in part reflecting that many consumers are not fee sensitive. High
demand for liquidity from superannuation funds may be reducing after-fee
returns to members. The mandatory inter-fund portability timeframe of three
days is contributing to higher allocations to liquid assets than the system
requires.
It
remains unclear whether funds are chasing short-term returns and, if so,
whether this is contributing to lower after-fee returns, as well as to what extent
more individual tailoring of asset allocations would produce net benefits to
members.
Superannuation
funds compete to attract and retain members. Competition between funds for
members has largely been conducted on a non-fee basis, which has led to
feature-rich and more costly superannuation products.
The Super
System Review found “the model of member‐driven competition through
‘choice of fund’ … has struggled to deliver a competitive market that reduces costs for members
Superannuation
funds also attract members by being the default fund for mandatory employer
contributions.
The
costs of superannuation funds, and the features they offer to members, are
affected by the degree of competition among those providing services to the
funds. This includes fund managers competing for superannuation fund clients,
fund managers competing for access to platforms, and platforms competing to
attract advisers. A trend in the wealth management sector is towards more
vertical integration. Although this can provide some benefits to members of
superannuation funds, the degree of cross-selling of services may reduce
competitive pressures and contribute to higher costs in the sector but to date
it has not reduced fees.
Why hasn't competition delivered optimal outcomes already?
Failure
to exercise choice: Often a member does not choose the
fund to which they belong. New employees typically become a member of their
employer’s default fund.
Lack
of price awareness: Compulsory contributions do not come
directly out of members’ pockets, nor do the fees and other costs charged by
the fund — at least not until they retire. This makes people much less price
aware and much less likely to make a decision based on price or cost.
Lack
of interest: Members are often not engaged with
their superannuation until closer to retirement, so will not be sufficiently
interested to respond to competitive behaviour on the part of funds until that
time — if at all.
Agency
and structural issues: There are limited opportunities for
member vigilance or incentives for agency vigilance to reduce prices.
Complexity: Superannuation is inherently complex,
and many consumers do not feel confident making decisions about it.
Lack
of comparability: Even if members are engaged,
contestability is weak at consumer level. This is because of product complexity
and the lack of information and transparency about fees and performance.
Frictions: Even if members are interested in
switching funds, often the paperwork and other ‘frictions’ in changing funds
become too big a disincentive and they give up.
No comments:
Post a Comment