Brycki has raised concerns about the wide-reaching effects of this policy beyond what the Treasury has suggested, particularly focusing on the potential unanticipated consequences of taxing unrealised gains and the lack of indexing for the $3 million threshold. According to Brycki, these aspects may unexpectedly impact a larger portion of Australians, including those in their 30s and 40s, over time.
He further remarked that members from large funds regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority might also face challenges as a result of the new rules, due to the pooled unit pricing model commonly used by these funds. The tax implications could potentially lead to increased costs for smaller members if funds are required to sell assets or incur higher tax burdens, affecting unit prices across the board.
This has already influenced strategic changes among self-managed superannuation funds (SMSF) trustees, many of whom are opting for ETFs due to their transparency, lower costs, and ease of adaptation under the new regulatory framework. Brycki affirms that ETFs stand out as a favourable choice for super investments, highlighting their low cost and daily pricing advantages.
Adding to the critical discourse, Richard Webb from CPA Australia warns about the broader implications of taxing unrealised capital gains. He cautions against setting a precedent that might extend capital gains taxes to other asset classes, urging consideration of the economic impact of pushing individuals to divest to avoid taxes on hypothetical profits.
This ongoing development reflects a significant evolution in investment strategies within Australia's superannuation landscape, driven by regulatory changes and market adaptation.
