NOTICE OF DISQUALIFICATION
Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993
To:
Adam Pearse
Terrigal NSW 2230
I, Lisa Henderson, a delegate of the Commissioner of Taxation, give you notice as required by subsection 126A(6) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA), that I have disqualified you under subsection 126A(2) of the SISA.
I have disqualified you as I am satisfied that the corporate trustee of one or more superannuation entities has contravened the SISA on one or more occasions, and at the time of the contraventions you were a responsible officer of the corporate trustee and the number and seriousness of the contraventions provides grounds for disqualifying you.
The disqualification takes effect on the day on which it is made.
Dated: 20 June 2019
James O’Halloran
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation
Per Lisa Henderson
Note 1:
Under subsection 126A(7) of the SISA, details of this disqualification notice will be published in the Commonwealth Government Notices Gazette.
Note 2:
Under section 126K of the SISA, it is an offence for a disqualified person, who knows that he or she is a disqualified person, to be, or act as a:
› trustee, investment manager or custodian of a superannuation entity
› responsible officer or a body corporate that is a trustee, investment manager or custodian, of a superannuation entity
The maximum penalty for committing this offence is two years jail.
Note 3:
Under subsection 126A(5) of the SISA, we may revoke this disqualification on our own initiative or on your written application.
Note 4:
Under section 344 of the SISA, if you are affected by this decision and are not satisfied with it, you can ask the Commissioner to reconsider the decision. This request must be made in writing within 21 days of receiving notice of this decision and must give the reasons you think the decision is wrong.
Overview
The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) was enacted to regulate the superannuation industry in Australia, addressing the need for a robust framework to ensure the integrity and proper management of superannuation funds. The Act was introduced by the Parliament of Australia to protect the interests of superannuation fund members by imposing obligations on trustees, investment managers, and custodians, and by providing mechanisms for the supervision and enforcement of these obligations. The policy objective of the Act is to safeguard the financial wellbeing of superannuation fund members by ensuring that those who manage these funds act with integrity and competence. In this context, the Act provides the Commissioner of Taxation with the authority to disqualify individuals from acting in responsible roles within the superannuation industry if they are found to have contravened the Act’s provisions in a manner that warrants such action.
Scope and Application
The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) applies to individuals and entities involved in the management and operation of superannuation funds within Australia. Specifically, the Act regulates the conduct of trustees, investment managers, and custodians of superannuation entities, ensuring compliance with prescribed standards to protect the interests of superannuation fund members. The Act extends its jurisdiction to the entire Commonwealth of Australia, thereby affecting both state and territory levels. Individuals found to be responsible officers of corporate trustees who engage in repeated or serious breaches of the Act can be disqualified from managing superannuation funds. The disqualification is immediate upon issuance and can be revoked by the Commissioner of Taxation either on their own initiative or upon application by the disqualified person. The Act also mandates that details of such disqualifications be published in the Commonwealth Government Notices Gazette, ensuring transparency and accountability. Furthermore, the Act imposes criminal penalties, including up to two years imprisonment, for disqualified individuals who continue to act in their disqualified capacity.
Key Provisions
The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) contains various provisions that govern the supervision of superannuation entities, including disqualification mechanisms for responsible officers. Under subsection 126A(6) of the SISA, a delegate of the Commissioner of Taxation, such as Lisa Henderson, is authorised to issue a notice of disqualification to individuals like Adam Pearse when they are deemed unfit to manage superannuation entities due to serious contraventions by the corporate trustee they were associated with. The disqualification notice informs the individual that they have been disqualified from acting in any capacity related to superannuation entities because the corporate trustee they were responsible for has contravened the SISA on multiple occasions, and the severity of these contraventions justifies the disqualification.
The Act imposes specific obligations on the disqualified individual, prohibiting them from being or acting as a trustee, investment manager, or custodian of a superannuation entity, or from being a responsible officer or a body corporate that manages these entities. This restriction is clearly outlined in section 126K of the SISA, and failing to comply with this prohibition is an offence. The legal consequences for such an offence are severe, with a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment as stipulated in the same section.
Furthermore, the disqualification can be subject to revocation under subsection 126A(5) of the SISA, either at the initiative of the delegate or upon a written application by the disqualified individual. This offers a potential pathway for reinstatement if the grounds for disqualification no longer apply. Additionally, the Act provides recourse for individuals who feel that their disqualification is unjust. Under section 344 of the SISA, Adam Pearse, or any similarly affected individual, can request the Commissioner to reconsider the disqualification decision. This request must be made in writing within 21 days of receiving the notice of disqualification and should include the reasons why the decision is believed to be incorrect.