On 19 August 2026, Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services Daniel Mulino announced a broad reform package covering superannuation, financial advice, managed investment schemes and self-managed super funds.
Last week, Super Informed covered the SMSF-specific measures in the Mulino package: the proposed supervisory levy increase, CSLR special levy treatment, ATO rollover powers, trustee education, bank account rules and setup transparency changes.
This article looks at the other side of the same announcement. The package also proposes a New Class of Adviser regime for APRA-regulated superannuation funds and life insurance entities. Read alongside the SMSF measures, the policy direction is hard to miss: large super funds may receive a new path to provide more personalised advice at scale, while SMSF trustees face new setup obligations, costs and consumer-protection controls.
That does not make industry super good or SMSFs bad. It does not mean trustees should move their money. It means the policy settings are becoming more different, and SMSF trustees should understand that difference before comparing structures, costs or advice access.
If your immediate question is whether your accountant can help with these decisions, the accountant service boundaries table below sets out the practical line between SMSF accounting work and personal financial advice.
Key Takeaways
- The Mulino reform package announced on 19 August 2026 includes a proposed New Class of Adviser regime for APRA-regulated super funds and life insurers.
- SMSFs are not included in that proposed advice pathway, so SMSF trustees still need a licensed financial adviser or appropriately licensed accountant for personal financial advice.
- The same package proposed SMSF-specific obligations and costs, including trustee education before registration, ATO rollover powers for new SMSFs under investigation, a supervisory levy increase and CSLR special levy treatment.
- The policy effect is asymmetrical: large super funds may gain a scalable advice channel, while SMSF trustees face tighter setup and consumer-protection controls.
- The structural concern is not that all fund-provided advice is poor; it is that an institution may advise members about products and options it also provides.
- None of the announced measures should be treated as current law until legislation is passed and commenced.
Contents
- The new class of adviser regime
- What changes for SMSF trustees
- The practical advice gap
- Why adviser supply matters
- Industry fund members versus SMSF trustees
- The vertical integration concern
- Can your accountant give personal SMSF advice?
- Relationship breakdowns and SMSF rollover traps
- What SMSF trustees should watch next
- Frequently Asked Questions
The new class of adviser regime
The New Class of Adviser is a proposed framework that would allow APRA-regulated superannuation funds and life insurance entities to provide certain personal financial advice to members under a lighter pathway than the existing fully qualified adviser model.
Treasury describes the reform objective as improving access to safe, secure advice and guidance so Australians can navigate retirement with more confidence. That objective matters. Professional advice has become expensive, adviser numbers are constrained, and many members receive little more than general information when they need help with contributions, insurance, investment options or retirement income.
The proposed regime starts with large regulated entities, not SMSFs. The government has said the new pathway will include safeguards, including restrictions on commissions, bonuses and volume-based payments. It has also said the regime will be reviewed after 3 years.
The policy trade-off is scope. To make advice cheaper and more scalable, the new class would not operate in exactly the same way as a fully qualified adviser giving comprehensive advice across the whole market. That is the point of the reform. It is also where the structural tension begins.
AustralianSuper, for example, has already said it is investing in expanded access to advice and guidance services and digital tools. Its July 2026 fee update says the fund manages more than $430 billion for more than 3.6 million members and is increasing the asset-based administration fee for accumulation accounts from 0.10% to 0.12% from 31 October 2026. That is not the same thing as saying the NCA regime is already operating. It shows why large funds have the scale and member base to use a new advice pathway if the law is enacted.
For the SMSF-specific side of the same package, see SMSF Reforms 2026: New Levy, CSLR, ATO Rollover Powers and Trustee Rules Explained.
What changes for SMSF trustees
The NCA proposal does not give SMSF trustees an equivalent new advice pathway.
An SMSF trustee seeking personal advice about contributions, pension timing, investment allocation, rollover strategy or whether the SMSF structure remains suitable must continue to use the existing financial advice framework. That usually means a fully licensed financial adviser, or an accountant or other professional who holds an Australian Financial Services Licence or is authorised under one.
At the same time, the reform package proposes several SMSF-specific controls:
- mandatory education before SMSF registration;
- a proposed ATO power to prevent rollovers to new SMSFs where concerns of fraud, financial abuse, misconduct or potential harm are being investigated;
- an SMSF supervisory levy increase from $259 to $295;
- inclusion of SMSFs as Tier 3 levy payers in future CSLR special levy years, if the waterfall reaches that tier;
- uniquely identifiable SMSF bank account requirements;
- more information collection about advisers and entities involved in SMSF setup; and
- more visibility over advice fees deducted from SMSFs.
Some of those measures may be sensible consumer protection. The Shield and First Guardian collapses, involving failed managed investment schemes and the advice and lead-generation chains that moved some members into them, exposed real harm across lead generation, advice, product governance and compensation arrangements. The issue is not whether consumer protection is needed. The issue is that the same package expands advice access for one part of the super system while increasing obligations for another.
For the existing trustee duty framework, see the SMSF Trustee Obligations Guide. For setup context, see the SMSF Setup Guide.
The practical advice gap
Consider 2 Australians, both aged 58, both with $1.2 million in super.
Member A is in a large APRA-regulated super fund. If the NCA regime is legislated as announced, the fund may be able to provide more personalised help on contributions, investment options inside the fund, insurance and retirement income settings through in-house staff or digital tools.
Member B runs a 2-member SMSF. To get personal advice on similar decisions, Member B generally needs to engage a licensed adviser and go through the existing advice process. The advice may be broader and more tailored, but it can also be slower and more expensive.
SMSF vs industry fund advice comparison table
| Issue | APRA-regulated fund member | SMSF trustee |
|---|---|---|
| Advice pathway under announced reforms | Proposed New Class of Adviser within APRA-regulated super and life insurance entities | Existing licensed advice framework only |
| Likely delivery model | In-house support, member portal tools or scaled advice processes | Licensed adviser, AFSL-authorised accountant or specialist advice team |
| Product universe | Likely focused on the fund, its options and related member decisions | Potentially broader advice, depending on the engagement and licence scope |
| Cost experience | May be low direct cost or supported through fund fees, depending on final design | Often a separate advice fee where personal advice is provided |
| Current legal status | Announced policy, not yet law | Existing law continues to apply |
This is not a recommendation to choose either structure. An SMSF can still be the right vehicle for trustees who want control, have appropriate scale, understand their obligations and need features that a large fund may not offer. An industry fund can be simpler, cheaper and better supported for members who do not want trustee responsibility.
The point is narrower: the advice environment may become materially different.
Why adviser supply matters
The advice gap matters because Australia does not have enough advisers to serve everyone who could benefit from personal financial advice.
ASIC’s Financial Advisers Register is the official public register for checking who is authorised to provide personal advice to retail clients on relevant financial products. Riskinfo reported on 3 July 2026 that adviser numbers had fallen below 15,000, down materially from the levels recorded before the post-royal-commission reshaping of the advice market.
That shortage affects SMSF trustees sharply because many trustees rely on accountants as their first professional contact. Accountants are central to SMSF administration, tax work, annual returns and compliance. But unless they hold or are authorised under an AFSL, they cannot give personal financial product advice.
The NCA regime is one policy response to the supply problem. It creates a potential second advice channel inside large super funds. For SMSF trustees, the announced package does not create a matching pathway. It instead proposes an education test before registration.
For trustees weighing whether an SMSF remains cost-effective, the SMSF Costs and Fees Guide and the SMSF minimum balance debate are useful companion reads.
Industry fund members versus SMSF trustees
The reform package is best understood as 2 connected policy moves: wider access to advice for members of large regulated entities, and tighter controls around SMSF establishment, rollovers and costs.
Industry fund and SMSF reform comparison table
| Reform area | APRA-regulated fund member | SMSF trustee |
|---|---|---|
| Advice access | Proposed New Class of Adviser pathway | No equivalent new pathway announced |
| Setup controls | Not applicable in the same way | Proposed trustee education before SMSF registration |
| Rollover controls | Existing fund-to-fund processes, plus broader consumer protections | Proposed ATO power to prevent rollovers to new SMSFs while serious concerns are investigated |
| Levy treatment | Existing APRA-regulated sector funding settings | Proposed SMSF supervisory levy increase and CSLR Tier 3 special levy treatment |
| Main policy direction | More accessible advice and guidance | More gatekeeping, visibility and cost recovery |
The government’s rationale is understandable. It is trying to protect consumers from poor conduct while making advice more accessible. But the structure of the package is still uneven. One group receives a new advice channel. Another receives new hurdles and costs without a comparable support mechanism.
That asymmetry is why SMSF trustees should watch the legislation, not just the headlines.
The vertical integration concern
The concern with fund-provided advice is not that it must be bad. It is that the adviser, the product provider and the account administrator may sit inside the same institution.
Australia has seen that model before. The 2019 Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry examined vertically integrated financial advice, where institutions advised clients while also manufacturing or distributing the products being recommended. Commissioner Kenneth Hayne’s final report led to major consequences across banking and wealth management, including the retreat of large banks from advice and wealth businesses.
The proposed NCA regime is not identical to the pre-royal-commission model. The government has flagged different safeguards, including bans on commissions, bonuses and volume-based payments. Large super funds are also structurally different from the bank-owned wealth models that dominated earlier misconduct findings.
But the core tension remains recognisable: a fund may advise a member about options within the fund while also managing the member’s money. If advice is scoped too narrowly, a member may receive guidance that is useful within the fund but does not test whether another structure, provider or strategy would be better.
That is exactly why the 3-year review matters. The first version of the NCA regime will need close scrutiny once the bill, rules and regulator guidance are visible.
Can your accountant give personal SMSF advice?
Many SMSF trustees assume their accountant can advise on every fund-related decision. In practice, the boundary is narrower.
An accountant can usually help with the SMSF’s annual financial statements, tax return, member balances, tax components and compliance reporting. But personal recommendations about contributions, investments, pensions, rollovers, insurance or whether to keep an SMSF can be personal financial advice.
Can accountants give SMSF advice table
| Service | Typically an accounting or compliance service | Personal advice may require AFSL authorisation |
|---|---|---|
| Annual financial statements and SMSF annual return | Yes | No |
| Tax calculations and member component reporting | Yes | No |
| Compliance reporting and audit preparation | Yes | No |
| Recommending how much a member should contribute | No | Yes |
| Recommending an investment allocation | No | Yes |
| Advising when to start, commute or change a pension | No | Yes |
| Advising whether to keep, close or roll out of an SMSF | No | Yes |
Some accounting firms are licensed or work with licensed advisers. Many are not. That is not a criticism of accountants; it is how the law separates tax and compliance work from financial product advice.
The practical trustee question is simple: before relying on guidance, ask what service is being provided and whether the person is authorised to give personal financial advice.
Relationship breakdowns and SMSF rollover traps
The consequences of the advice boundary are sharpest when an SMSF decision is legal, tax, administrative and financial all at once. Relationship breakdown is a common example because trustees often need family law orders, fund accounting, rollover mechanics and licensed advice to line up before assets move.
A superannuation split under the Family Law Act 1975 does not turn super into ordinary cash. If one spouse is to receive part of an SMSF interest, the amount generally needs to be transferred or rolled to another complying super fund in that person’s name, unless a condition of release allows payment.
Paying an amount directly to a personal bank account before a condition of release is met can create illegal early access consequences. That can expose trustees to tax, penalties and potential compliance action.
Illiquid assets can make the process harder. If a fund holds commercial property, unlisted assets or a lumpy investment portfolio, there may not be enough cash to satisfy a split. A sale, in-specie transfer or restructure may be needed, and the receiving fund type matters. A large APRA-regulated fund generally will not accept a direct transfer of an SMSF’s commercial property, while another SMSF may be able to receive certain assets if all superannuation, tax, stamp duty and deed requirements are properly managed.
Both spouses may remain trustees until membership and trustee changes are completed. During that period, the trustee obligations under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 still matter. A separation does not suspend the duty to act properly for the fund.
This is a lawyer, accountant and licensed adviser coordination issue. It should not be managed from a template or a verbal agreement. For trustee structure issues that often surface when a member exits, see Individual vs Corporate Trustee: How Your SMSF Structure Shapes Costs, Penalties and Succession.
Get the weekly SMSF update from Super Informed. Compliance changes, ATO focus areas, and one practical action per issue. Subscribe free
What SMSF trustees should watch next
None of this means SMSF trustees should close their fund or move to an industry fund. It also does not mean the New Class of Adviser will produce poor outcomes. Many Australians receive no advice at all, and better access to simple retirement guidance could help them.
The point is that the policy architecture is becoming more explicitly 2-tiered. SMSF trustees and large-fund members may face different advice access, different costs and different gatekeeping rules.
Three details matter most from here.
The final NCA scope. Watch what advice topics are allowed, how conflicts are managed, what disclosures are required and whether the advice can recommend only in-fund options or broader strategies.
The SMSF education test design. A well-designed test could improve trustee understanding. A poorly designed one could become a barrier that discourages capable trustees while doing little to stop misconduct.
The practical cost comparison. SMSFs have fixed administration, audit and compliance costs. Large funds can spread advice, administration and technology spending across millions of members. Trustees should compare actual fund costs and service needs, not rely on slogans from either side.
For current contribution settings, use the SMSF Contribution Caps Hub. For broader annual obligations, use the SMSF Compliance Calendar.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the New Class of Adviser?
The New Class of Adviser is a proposed regime announced on 19 August 2026 that would allow APRA-regulated superannuation funds and life insurance entities to provide certain personal financial advice to members through a lighter regulatory pathway than the existing fully qualified adviser framework. It had not been legislated as at 3 September 2026.
Are SMSFs included in the New Class of Adviser regime?
No. Treasury’s announced starting point is APRA-regulated superannuation funds and life insurers. SMSF trustees seeking personal financial advice still need a fully licensed financial adviser or an accountant or other professional authorised under an Australian Financial Services Licence.
Can an accountant give personal SMSF advice?
Only if the accountant holds an Australian Financial Services Licence or is authorised under one. Accountants can generally provide tax, accounting and compliance services, but personal advice about contributions, investments, pensions or retirement strategy generally requires the relevant financial advice authorisation.
Can the ATO block rollovers to SMSFs under the reform package?
The announced measure is narrower than a general power over existing SMSF investments. Treasury says the ATO would be able to prevent rollovers to new SMSFs where it is investigating concerns of fraud, financial abuse, misconduct or potential harm. The detail still needs legislation.
Does this mean SMSF trustees should move to an industry fund?
No. This article does not recommend any fund structure. It explains the policy difference between the proposed advice pathway for APRA-regulated funds and the proposed SMSF-specific controls. Whether an SMSF remains appropriate depends on the fund’s members, costs, assets, trustee capability, advice needs and alternatives.
Are the 2026 SMSF and advice reforms law yet?
No. As at 3 September 2026, the measures discussed in this article were announced policy. They should not be treated as current law until legislation is introduced, passed and commenced.
This article is general information for Australian SMSF trustees. It is not personal financial advice, tax advice, legal advice or audit advice. It does not take account of your objectives, financial situation, needs, fund deed, member balances, assets or family circumstances. Consider speaking with a licensed financial adviser, registered tax agent, lawyer or SMSF specialist before making decisions about your fund.