Free group Q&A – 12:30pm Wed 2 Dec
Register here or click here to join

Missed an event? Watch here. 

Recent commentary about small balance rollovers into self-managed super funds (SMSFs) has prompted concerns that Australians with lower super balances may be making risky financial decisions.

However, the SMSF Association says those conclusions are based on incomplete data and fail to consider what is actually happening after the rollover occurs.

Looking Beyond the Initial Rollover

Speaking at the SMSF Association’s Technical Summit in Sydney this week, CEO Peter Burgess said some recent reporting relied on data from five large profit-to-member super funds showing that many rollovers into SMSFs involved balances below $100,000.

According to Burgess, the assumption being made is that someone transferring $100,000 into an SMSF has only $100,000 in super within that fund. He said this does not reflect the full picture.

He noted that while research has shown an SMSF may not be cost-effective for someone with only a relatively small super balance, a rollover amount alone does not reveal the total value already held within the receiving SMSF.

Additional Data Suggests Many Rollovers Are Part of Larger Strategies

The SMSF Association referred to data provided by SMSF administration software provider BGL for March 2026.

According to Burgess:

Burgess said this suggests many smaller rollovers are being made into already established SMSFs rather than representing people establishing SMSFs with only modest retirement savings.

He said the Association has provided this additional data to Treasury and the Minister’s office, arguing that small balance rollovers should not be assessed in isolation when considering future policy.

There Are Many Reasons for Small Rollovers

According to the SMSF Association, there are a number of legitimate reasons why relatively small amounts may be transferred into an SMSF.

These can include:

The Association says these types of transactions are often part of broader retirement planning strategies and should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of risky behaviour.

Focus Should Be on Harmful Conduct

The SMSF Association acknowledged concerns about cases where disproportionate advice fees have been charged in relation to small balance rollovers.

However, Burgess said regulatory efforts should focus on addressing inappropriate conduct rather than introducing minimum SMSF balance requirements or other broad restrictions affecting all SMSFs.

He pointed to the Financial Planners and Advisers Code of Ethics, which requires advisers to ensure fees are fair, reasonable and represent value for money, and argued that existing obligations should be enforced where misconduct occurs.

What This Means for SMSF Members

The comments from the SMSF Association highlight the importance of considering superannuation data in its full context.

A single rollover amount does not necessarily indicate the total balance held within an SMSF, nor does it explain the reasons for the transfer. According to the Association, understanding the broader circumstances is essential before drawing conclusions about consumer outcomes.

Importantly, the Association’s comments should not be interpreted as suggesting that SMSFs are suitable for everyone. Establishing and operating an SMSF involves legal responsibilities, ongoing compliance obligations and costs. Whether an SMSF is appropriate depends on an individual’s personal circumstances, retirement objectives and overall financial position.

General information only: This article summarises comments made by the SMSF Association and related industry reporting. It is provided for general information only and does not constitute financial product advice, taxation advice or a recommendation to establish or roll over to an SMSF. Whether an SMSF is appropriate depends on your individual circumstances, objectives and needs. Consider obtaining advice from an appropriately licensed financial adviser before making decisions about your superannuation.