Also very interesting, my Accountant colleague mentioned that many of his clients looking after their own SMSFs did so because after many years of working life they enjoyed running their fund like a small business, writing the cheques and paying themselves a pension each month. In terms of remaining independent and self sufficient that is great, but it made me wonder what these SMSFs were investing in. It reminded me that for some, maximizing investment returns or even just meeting financial objectives was not as important as administrative duties.

My first point of clarification – As the trustee of a SMSF the individual, whether they seek advice or not, always remains in control of their fund. A Financial Adviser’s role is to assist the trustee by providing expert strategic and investment advice which the individual can decide whether to implement or otherwise. An Adviser should not be looking to strip the individual of their independence or responsibilities as trustee. 

According to the Financial Services Council (FSC), people who receive financial advice are almost $100,000 better off at retirement than those who do not receive advice. 

A 30-year-old would save an additional $91,000, a 45-year-old would save an additional $80,000 and a 60-year-old would save $29,000 compared to those without a financial adviser, according to the independent research commissioned by the FSC and conducted by KPMG Econtech.
Some trustees will have an issue paying a fee to a Financial Adviser, however, if the fee charged equates to around 1%p.a, on a balance of $1m that is $10,000p.a. I would argue that it is money well spent if the Adviser is adding value in excess of $29,000 per annum, as the research uncovered.