Meg’s Musings – March 2026

It was great to see some of you at the SMSFA National Conference in February. I know I’m biased but this really is my favourite conference of the year. It always strikes me as interesting that some of the best superannuation education for advisers and accountants occurs at an SMSF conference. So many of the sessions (including mine) talked about superannuation developments or strategies that would relate to any super fund not just SMSFs. Of course, we often have an SMSF “lean” but I wonder if this is because many of the best super strategies often start in SMSFs, eventually become mainstream and are implemented in APRA funds as well.

Thanks to all of you who dropped by our stand to catch up with colleagues and friends at Heffron. 

This month is a big one in super circles in that the Division 296 tax legislation is due to be debated when Parliament returns this week. In fact, by the time this newsletter is released it may have happened already. We’ll be watching closely to see if amendments are made, the legislation gets blocked or it’s passed unchanged. If the Government is serious about introducing the tax from 1 July 2026, surely it’s got to get through Parliament in the next few weeks? Some people will want to act before the end of the year and the longer it’s delayed the harder that becomes.

I realise many of our wealthier clients would rather this tax just went away entirely. But to be honest that’s not my view. The Government clearly intends to wind back super tax concessions for large balances and will do it somehow. This measure seems far better than the first attempt (Division 296 tax v 1.0 that was released in 2023) and potentially better than any alternative which might come along later. The best outcome in my opinion would be that “something” is implemented now, providing certainty. Given where we are, that “something” might as well be the Bill currently before Parliament. In fact, if delays indicate the Government is having to negotiate too much, we may end up with something worse.

The debate about super switching has really caught my eye in the last few weeks. There is clearly a lot of concern about members moving funds – both within the APRA sector and from APRA funds to SMSFs. There are lots of good reasons for concern – are members making sensible choices – particularly those opting to go it alone in an SMSF? Are they conscious of the impact switching has on their wealth (realising capital gains)? Are they doing all the things necessary to set up again in their new fund (re-directing their contributions, re-arranging their insurance etc)? 

But you could also argue this is exactly where you’d expect us to be. Progressive legislative changes have made moving funds far simpler – and of course they have, they were designed to remove friction so members could really exercise choice. Even the ATO encourages members to think about (and therefore possibly switch) super funds these days – they’ve included a league table in myGov. So perhaps we should be surprised that this is surprising?

It’s interesting that in the SMSF sector, we don’t use the same term “switching” to describe the movement of money from the SMSF sector to the APRA sector – we call it “winding up”. I wonder if that somehow captures the difference between how we view the whole exercise. Winding up an SMSF implies : it’s had its day and come to the end of its useful life. Now it’s being terminated and the money will either go back into the APRA sector or leave super entirely. 

We almost see it as a natural part of the life cycle.

In an APRA sector that’s all about competition for members’ savings, it’s taken personally and seen as a bad thing.

Now there are moves afoot to re-introduce some friction to slow down / reduce switching. I’ll watch that with interest.

Register now for our Division 296 Tax Masterclass where we'll cover practical insights on what needs action before 30 June 2026 vs 30 June 2027, and the longer-term strategic implications.