The joint associations support the Government’s objective to prevent perpetrators of family and domestic violence from benefiting from victims’ superannuation death benefits. While acknowledging the importance of addressing financial abuse, the associations emphasise the complexity of achieving this within Australia’s superannuation and trust law framework.

The submission highlights that financial abuse is pervasive and can occur across multiple legal and economic systems, including superannuation. Addressing access to death benefits in isolation risks overlooking broader structural issues. The associations argue that a whole‑of‑government approach is required, supported by coordinated legal, regulatory and judicial safeguards.

A central concern is that the policy options outlined in Treasury’s consultation paper do not sufficiently address foundational legal constraints. Superannuation trustees are bound by strict common law fiduciary duties and statutory obligations under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993, including duties to act impartially, comply with trust deeds, and act in members’ best financial interests. These obligations significantly limit trustees’ ability to independently exclude beneficiaries, even where family or financial abuse is alleged.

The submission also raises practical issues relating to binding death benefit nominations, reversionary pensions and life insurance arrangements held within superannuation, noting that these are often contractual or legally binding mechanisms that trustees cannot disregard without court authority. In contrast to estate matters where the forfeiture rule is applied through established court processes there is no equivalent body of superannuation specific jurisprudence to guide trustee decision making.

The associations caution against reforms that bypass judicial oversight, given the highly fact dependent nature of these cases and the risk of unintended consequences for trustees and fund members. They conclude by calling for further consultation with Treasury to explore legally sound, court supported, long‑term solutions that balance justice for victims with trustee obligations and system integrity.

"We support the core objectives underlying the proposed reforms, but our concern is that the options presented by the Treasury do not appear to address the initial foundational issues that we believe must be addressed before potential solutions can be considered."