Super for Lazy People - how to grow it if you don't want to SMSF

For my ING Living Super I've had zero effort on compliance. Limited to ASX 300 and a collection of LICs / ETFs but will wear that limitation for the simplicity each year.

 

ING Living Super have high fees now, why do you stay with them in spite of simplicity?

 

Your balance will only charge marginally due to value changes in the day or two between you making the request and them processing it - they do have an exit fee of $35 but that's trivial.

For CGT, the impact is already included in the daily unit pricing (for the pre-mixed options) and within member direct they have a separate line item for the 'unrealised CGT asset/liability' which you/they move to 'realised' when you sell.

Your balance will always take into account the tax effect of every transaction - they do tax-effect accounting!

 

Thanks qak, that's good to know.

 

I am with Aus Super and through my work I can do salary sacrifice(SS). My question is how does it effect on the income on relation to getting a loan:-

Example: Mr. ABC is getting $50000 pa gross and if he starts doing SS let's say $10K pa then for the purpose of getting loan to buy property his annual income will be calculated as $50K or $40K?

 

@Nodrog, does your SMSF provider give and investment advice?

 

Stays as $50k as you can stop the salary sacrifice at any time.

 

Thx @Scott No Mates much appreciated.

 

Quick update money moved from Australian Super to Host Plus.

It is currently sitting in a 100% Index Balance Fund which charges 0.06% per annum!

I can only move 80% onto other investments like Vanguard ETFs and LICs (AFI, ARG, MLT)

 

What's the annual return on the fund net fees?

 

7-10%....so far.....

 

Hi @sash , is there any particular reason to go with Hostplus eventhough Aus Super is on the top of the table and overall performance is "around" the Hostplus performance.

 

Great stuff. Is this index balanced fund under their ChoicePlus option? (thinking about the OP of using superfunds to emulate SMSF), or is it one of their managed funds?

I am looking into the ChoicePlus but was looking at the administration fees (p18 of link). I read it that the admin fees are $258/yr in accumulation phase and $648/yr in pension phase. Am I reading this correctly?
If so, I'm calculating that I need about $13,000 of shares returning 5% yield to pay for the pension phase admin fees before getting an income. I'm balancing this with how much I would have in ChoicePlus compared to if I bought shares through Commsec under my own name (not requiring admin fees) and paying tax on the income at MTRs. Make sense?

 

I posted before because I did not want to sell down to move into a Pension stream..they also have more choices in terms of LICs and ETFs.

They also have quite a few private funds and Index funds to choose from

 

They have 2 choices for Index funds and a few managed funds.

 

Yeah, I'm not looking for too many income streams when I'm off enjoying retirement. Working through numbers to determine whether I buy shares through my name only, or transfer these into an Industry super scheme for a pension income. Will have other streams plodding along as well (which I will consolidate over time).

 

He tries to (his wife is a financial planner in same practice) but absolutely not in my case. Does my past history suggest I need it? In fact I’ve had to tell my previous and current accountants / SMSF Advisor what I need to do!

Not trying to suggest I’m a know it all. But I’m like a laser beam when researching strategies for ourselves. The accountant / SMSF advisor is trying to be across every possible scenario. Hence they often end up being a jack of all trades but master of none.

Not that I think much of Anthony Robbins but that was one thing I learnt. If you’re prepared to put in the effort nobody knows your circumstances better than you! Laser beam focus on what effects you!!

 

Whatever fund you choose make sure when in pension mode there’s sufficient liquidity when bad times arise. The last thing you want to be doing is drawing down “UNITS” in the Super Fund during such times.

 

True.

Yeah but I think the case for a lot of people though is they may not be aware or consider it too difficult to select asset allocations and so stick to the default option as a result. Rather unfortunate in some ways as if/when the market tanks so does their super which results in many losing confidence in superannuation, i.e. the share markets. Seen that result a few times over the years.

I don't know how to resolve it but it kind of annoys me we have a vehicle designed to support retirement but the income stream (account-based pension) is largely dependent on investments which not only fluctuate in prices year-to-year, which determines the minimum pension, but also by the minute. Bloody hard one in my opinion.

 

He he. I found it amusing initially as I was searching for a planner who was on our wavelength. Mostly it seemed to be a case of ticking the boxes. Not surprising really since a lot of the tasks on the background of clients regarding assets, liabilities, etc have probably been developed based on a standard pro-forma basis.

A number of them seen stymied when it came to including our residence as an asset and looked very perplexed when told we didn't consider it an asset as it produced no income and cost money to keep. But, but, but ....they spluttered. Whatever. Finally found one dude who got it and understood but to keep the peace with his industry simply put a notional amount down and has never bothered to update it since. Only contact the firm when I seek technical advice on various matters and is paied on a case by case. Still, each year he still has to send a "review" which is just a three or four page snap shot of holdings and valuations. Poor bugger.