Big banks' super fees rip-off exposed

Australia's four big banks plus AMP are ripping off the country's workers with huge fees charged on their superannuation investments, a recent study has revealed.

New research carried out by Rainmaker for Industry Super Australia, a mainly union-backed body, shows that the retail super funds, largely operated by the big banks, absorb about half of all fees charged in the superannuation system, despite holding only 29% of retirement savings.

The Big Four banks, ANZ, Commonwealth, NAB and Westpac, alone charged 28% of all fees, totalling $8.7 billion. Overall, the survey found that last year workers paid $31 billion in fees on superannuation worth $2.2 trillion.

That amount of fees is about the same as the cost to the public purse of superannuation tax concessions — mainly benefitting the higher-income brackets — and about half the $45 billion spent on income support for the elderly.

That is because while the not-for-profit sector, including industry, public sector and corporate funds, charged a total of $12.7 billion in fees, $9.9 billion of that went to private sector wealth managers to provide insurance and fund management services. The not-for-profit sector kept only $2.8 billion.

A further breakdown of super costs shows how retail funds gain more in fees: retail super funds, with 29% of funds and about 45% of members, received 50% or $15 billion of all fees. Not-for-profit funds accounted for 42% of funds, 45% of members and collected 42% or $13 billion of fees.

Self Managed Super Funds, which are effectively available only to the wealthy, with millions of dollars to invest in super, had 30% of funds and 10% of members, but received 7% of all fees.

CEO of Industry Super Australia David Whiteley said: "The banks have been getting significant funds from superannuation, yet they have been underperforming the not-for-profit funds.

“The government should be evaluating whether they think it's appropriate for the banks to be generating nearly $9 billion a year from fees on super.

"The government and regulator need to find out if the bank-owned super funds are eroding workers' super savings by generating profits for the parent bank.

"The bank-owned super funds delivered returns of 2% less per annum when compared to industry super funds over 10 years. For an average income earner, this under-performance, if continued, could cost $200,000 in retirement savings over their lifetime.”

In a commentary piece in the Australian Financial Review, responding to federal government and retail super industry proposals to replace unions representatives on super fund boards with so-called "independent" directors, Whiteley wrote: "Superannuation is clearly a workplace entitlement, with the Superannuation Guarantee based on wages.

"However, when superannuation is treated as a financial product, the conduct and motivations of the finance sector come to the fore. Instead of directing all profits to members, bank-owned super funds have a conflict of interest, between providing profit to shareholders and delivering profits to members, with these conflicts supposedly managed by so-called 'independent directors' (who are generally drawn from the finance sector).

"Could it be the major banks just want to remove the competition in superannuation and obtain the same 80% market share they enjoy in banking?"

Like the article? Subscribe to Green Left now! You can also like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Reading Green Left online is free but producing it isn't ...

Green Left aims to make all content available online, without paywalls, but we depend on your support to survive.