NOTICE OF DISQUALIFICATION
Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993
To:
Eric Gatehau
WERRINGTON NSW 2747
I, James O’Halloran, 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(1) of the SISA.
I have disqualified you as I am satisfied that you have contravened the SISA on one or more occasions and the seriousness of the contravention provides grounds for disqualifying you.
The disqualification takes effect on the day on which it is made.
Dated: 21 August 2019
James O’Halloran
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation
Per Mark Webberley
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 was enacted to address the need for effective supervision and regulation of the superannuation industry in Australia, ensuring the protection of superannuation funds and the interests of members. This Act was introduced by the Commonwealth Parliament and its policy objective is to maintain the integrity and stability of the superannuation system by imposing regulatory requirements and penalties for non-compliance. In this context, the Act empowers the Commissioner of Taxation to disqualify individuals who have contravened the provisions of the Act, ensuring that those who engage in serious misconduct are prevented from participating in the management of superannuation entities. This legislative framework is designed to safeguard the financial well-being of superannuation fund members and maintain public confidence in the superannuation system.
Scope and Application
The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) applies to individuals and entities involved in the management and administration of superannuation funds in Australia. Specifically, the Act governs trustees, investment managers, custodians, and responsible officers of superannuation entities. The disqualification provisions under subsection 126A(1) and subsequent sections of the Act are designed to exclude individuals who have breached the Act from participating in the superannuation industry in a fiduciary capacity. The geographic reach of the Act is national, as it is a Commonwealth Act. The disqualification extends to any person who knowingly acts in a prohibited capacity after being disqualified, with the maximum penalty being two years imprisonment as outlined in section 126K. The Act allows for the disqualification to be revoked either by the Commissioner of Taxation or upon application by the disqualified individual, as noted in subsection 126A(5). Additionally, section 344 provides a mechanism for reconsideration of the disqualification decision by the Commissioner if the affected individual believes the decision is incorrect.
Key Provisions
The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) outlines various provisions concerning the regulation of superannuation entities. Section 126A(1) provides the authority to disqualify individuals from participating in the management or administration of superannuation funds if there are grounds to believe they have contravened the Act. Section 126A(6) mandates that the Commissioner of Taxation must give notice to the affected individual, detailing the disqualification and the reasons behind it. In Eric Gatehau's case, he has been formally disqualified by James O’Halloran, a delegate of the Commissioner of Taxation, as substantiated by the evidence of contraventions under subsection 126A(1) and the severity of the breaches.
The disqualification imposes strict obligations on Eric Gatehau, prohibiting him from acting as a trustee, investment manager, or custodian of a superannuation entity, or serving as a responsible officer or body corporate in such roles (section 126K). This restriction is designed to protect the integrity of the superannuation industry and ensure that only qualified individuals manage superannuation funds. The obligations extend to refraining from any activities that would allow him to influence or control the administration of superannuation entities in any capacity.
Failure to comply with these restrictions constitutes an offence under the Act. Section 126K explicitly states that it is illegal for a disqualified person to engage in the prohibited activities, with the potential consequence of a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment. This underscores the seriousness of the Act's provisions and the importance of adhering to the imposed disqualification. Additionally, the Act allows for the possibility of revocation of the disqualification under subsection 126A(5), either at the initiative of the Commissioner or upon a written application by the disqualified individual.
For those who are aggrieved by the decision, section 344 provides a recourse mechanism. Any individual affected by the disqualification notice can request the Commissioner to reconsider the decision in writing within 21 days of receiving the notice. This request must include the reasons why the individual believes the decision is unjust. This provision ensures that there is a formal process for challenging the decision, offering a level of procedural fairness to those subject to the Act's provisions.