Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo
Advertisement
Markets
09 July 2025 by Maja Garaca Djurdjevic

SEC clarity sets stage for Australia’s next crypto ETF push

Australia’s cryptocurrency ETF market could be poised for its next wave of development as US regulators open the door to a broader suite of digital ...
icon

Defence and precious metals top ETF charts in first half of 2025

Defence and precious metals have emerged as the strongest-performing ETF sectors over the past six months, fuelled by ...

icon

‘This is a new RBA’: Economists caught off guard by surprise decision

Economists have been left scrambling to recalibrate after the Reserve Bank wrong-footed markets on Tuesday, holding the ...

icon

Diversified strategies power double-digit super returns over volatile year

Brighter Super and Mercer Super have reported double-digit returns, crediting diversified strategies and long-term focus ...

icon

Institutional investors ‘aggressively’ buying into risk

Institutional investors have increased their risk exposure over June amid tempered levels of market volatility

icon

GQG warns of flow headwinds as funds lag benchmarks

Inflows for the first half of 2025 for GQG Partners stand at US$8 billion, but the firm has flagged fund ...

VIEW ALL

SMSF auditors must go to the source

  •  
By Karin Derkley
  •  
2 minute read

The standard reports provided by platforms may not be sufficient for the audit process of SMSFs.

Auditors of self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs) cannot rely purely on the normal reporting of platforms and must obtain more reliable independent evidence with which to produce their auditor's report, according to the principal of a chartered accounting firm.

Intermediaries such as advisers often access reports from the wrap account and brand it, with the information then used by the accountant to produce financial statements for the fund.

But auditors need to obtain independent evidence, preferably directly from the source, Sharyn Long Chartered Accountants principal Sharyn Long said.

"My concern is that auditors don't understand their obligations and responsibility when an intermediary is involved," she said. "Any report needs to come directly from the wrap provider, rather than from information provided by the adviser."

Advisers and accountants may become frustrated by auditors requesting original reports from wrap providers, Long said.

"Accountants who have already obtained reports to produce a financial statement might wonder why the auditor still wants access to the original reports. But our job is to acquire evidence from as independent a source as possible."

Auditors who rely purely on evidence provided by an intermediary may not be fulfilling the requirements of Australian Auditing Standards ASA500, 505 and 402 that require them to "obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence, request external confirmation and consider the activities of a service organisation (such as a wrap account)", Long pointed out.

While wrap providers adhere to robust systems and controls and are required to have these audited it only provides "a certain level of comfort", Long said, and auditors still need to conduct additional tests and procedures on that evidence to ensure that any anomalies or inconsistencies can be identified.

The adviser could play a role in this process by helping to facilitate the efficient delivery of reports directly from the wrap provider to the auditor, Long said.

"The more efficient and simpler the process of obtaining that information the more economical the audit will be for the SMSF," she said.