One of the most topical issues continuing to be debated in the SMSF sector would be the proposed three-yearly SMSF audit cycle.
To address the proposed changes we undertook an extensive survey of participants in the industry covering the perspectives of auditors, accountants, administrators and trustees. We also received a great response to our call for collaboration among our auditor peers. Together, this has assisted us in formulating a submission to the government.
Using feedback from surveys combined with industry observations the report addresses the following questions:
- How are audit costs and fees expected to change for SMSF trustees that move to three-yearly audit cycles?
- Do you consider an alternative definition of ‘clear audit reports’ should be adopted? Why?
- What is the most appropriate definition of timely submission of a SAR? Why?
- What should be considered a key event for a SMSF that would trigger the need for an audit report in that year? Which events present the most significant compliance risks?
- Should arrangements be put in place to manage transition to three-yearly audits for some SMSFs? If so, what metric should be used to stagger the introduction of the measure?
- Are there any other issues that should be considered in policy development?
To view the Evolv submission, please click here>>