What to take from the latest ATO SMSF statistics


Last week saw the release the ATO’s SMSF quarterly statistics (September 2012) which again showed strong growth in fund establishments.  A further 8,183 new funds were setup in the first quarter of 2012-13 financial year, taking the number of SMSFs to 488,576.  Total assets grew to more than $458 billion, which now shows the average SMSF assets at $938,341.

Whilst the continued growth in numbers and dollars of SMSFs continues to be the main story, there were a couple of things I found in my analysis that I thought were interesting and worth highlighting:

Member numbers per fund

Average members per SMSF

Commonly referred to as “Mum and Dad” funds, we know that SMSFs typically operate with an average of just under two members (two member funds represent about 70% of all SMSFs).  With less than 4% of all SMSFs having three or four members, it is interesting to note that there were 2.27 members per fund established for the September 2012 quarter, well above the industry average (1.91 member per fund).  This higher than average number for September does not appear to be a ‘one-off’, as you can see from the above chart – on four occasions since 2008, the September quarter has had establishments where (on average) more than 2 members per fund exist.

Why is it the case?  Good question!!  What do you think?

Are SMSF trustees really switching to property?

Asset allocation percentages

There’s been a lot of talk about the growing interest in property within SMSFs… enough to raise the eyebrows of both ASIC and the ATO, ensuring that trustees are considering all the risks of property investment and the broader issues of the fund’s investment strategy.

The September 2012 quarterly statistics showed growth in property with:

  • Business Real Property (commercial) growing to more than $53 billion (9.45% increase over last 12 months); and
  • Residential property growing to $16.25 billion (9.45%  increase also over last 12 months)

Whilst showing signs of growth, these statistics do not appear to be showing any dramatic shift of trustees moving heavily into property.  In contrast the last 12 months has seen the total assets in listed shares grow by 19.6%, and is again the largest asset held within SMSFs by asset allocation ($141.5 billion).

The acquisition of property using limited recourse borrowing arrangements (LRBAs) also remains quite low statistically as the ‘derivatives and instalment warrants’ label represent only 0.34% of September 2012.  This would also include other forms of derivatives including options, warrants and similar instruments (NB.  ATO requires SMSF trustees to report LRBAs under the ‘derivatives’ label, now LRBA label for reporting purposes within the SMSF Annual Return).  Whether the reporting is done correctly or not, it must be questioned whether much of the property talk in SMSFs is just that… talk!

I’d be interested to hear your views about the latest SMSF statistics – where numbers are heading, what about asset allocations?

You can find out more about the ATO’s SMSF quarterly statistics here.

 

COMPLIMENTARY WEBINAR – REGISTER NOW

Comments

  1. Brett Griffiths says:

    There is definately an increased shift to property in the asset allocation of my client’s funds.
    I wonder how much of the increase of 9.45% over 12 months referred to above was masked by a decrease in market value of already held property that was revalued?

  2. Aaron
    Going by number of documents which http://www.trustdeed.com.au is selling for LRB by SMSF’s and our estimated market share on this product – I estimate about $50 Million is being invested in this space per week since July 2012.

    ATO’s data could be a bit inaccurate since these funds have not reported yet,

    Manoj Abichandani

  3. I agree that there is definitely a growing trend to property, however I must admit I was somewhat surprised that the statistics have not yet seen a more dramatic shift. Tracking this going forward will be quite interesting as I agree with Manoj that the timing of reporting and investing might not yet accurately reflect the marketplace. Take for example, off-the-plan developments that are still several months or years away from completion.

    I still believe ATO and ASIC were right in publicly launching information about their concerns before ‘spruikers’ ruin it for everybody.

    Cheers,
    Aaron

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

(C) The SMSF Academy 2012
%d bloggers like this: