Wealth management
Insight
A Self-Managed Super Fund (SMSF) is a superannuation structure that allows individuals to take direct control of their retirement savings. While SMSFs have existed for decades, they are increasingly used for property investment. With at least 60% of Australian households eligible for an SMSF (superannuation balances over $200,000), this option is more accessible than ever.
The report The Evolution of SMSF Property Investing by Investorkit and Agile Market Intelligence gives us insight into this investment pathway. The purpose of this research is to educate and inform those who are looking to invest in residential property about the possibilities of doing so via an SMSF.
An SMSF allows you to manage your superannuation and invest it strategically—most commonly in residential property. Unlike traditional super funds, where investment decisions are managed for you, SMSFs provide autonomy to build a retirement strategy tailored to your goals.
Why SMSFs and property investment?
- Wealth Creation: Residential property ownership remains a top wealth-building strategy, with 82% of investors prioritising it.
- Tax Advantages: SMSFs can offer significant tax benefits, particularly during the pension phase.
- Retirement Security: Property investments via SMSFs help diversify superannuation portfolios, ensuring long-term returns.
However, SMSFs require a clear strategy and careful planning. A common misconception is that SMSFs are complex to set up, with 39% of eligible Australians citing a lack of understanding as a barrier. Access to expert advice simplifies this process and ensures compliance.
For property investors looking to secure financial freedom, an SMSF can lead to more control, better returns, and a comfortable retirement.
The Evolution of SMSF Property Investing was produced by conducting a survey and analysing the data. The survey was conducted between 19 August and 6 September 2024, with property investors and general consumers across Australia encouraged to complete the questionnaire. The survey received a total usable sample of 423 responses, therefore, the margin of error for the results enclosed ranges between +/-4.76%. This is an excellent level of accuracy for a study of this nature.
