Wednesday, 13 February 2008  
 
 
Australia’s three professional accounting bodies have strongly objected to suggestions that accountants’ are acting contrary to ethical standards and professionalism in a front page article in the Australian Financial Review of 13 February 2008 (“Super advisers under fire over changes”) 
 
The three bodies, CPA Australia Limited, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and the National Institute of Accountants, also took issue with the overall balance and accuracy of the article. 
 
In a joint statement the bodies said the article did not accurately represent the role accountants play in assisting their clients to establish a Self Managed Super Fund (SMSF) and they rejected suggestions that accounting professionals have acted in any manner other than for their clients’ benefit. 
 
It is important to note that the three professional bodies impose strict ethical requirements on their professionally recognised and accredited members at all times, including when facilitating the setting-up of an SMSF for the benefit of their client. 
 
The professional standards applicable to members provide the principle to which members must adhere, which includes the independence of the auditor conducting the SMSF audit. Simply, and according to the code of ethics for professional accountants there needs to be a separation between those who administer the fund and those who do the audit. 
 
The three accounting bodies also reject the inference that SMSFs have been disproportionately impacted by the recent market downturn. The article failed to recognise that the market downturn has impacted negatively on all super funds under management. Any super funds exposed to the share market have suffered losses – not just SMSFs.  
 
In addition, the newspaper claims to have convened “an expert round table”. By definition, a round table incorporates the broad range of viewpoints on a topic. As the accounting profession was not included in the forum, the discussion has not benefited from the appropriate balance of informed and expert opinion.