Notice of Disqualification – Joshua Lee Ingram - 16 June 2026

Overview

The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) was enacted to regulate the operations of superannuation funds, providing a framework designed to protect the interests of superannuation fund members. The Act addresses the need for oversight and regulation within the superannuation industry to ensure funds are managed responsibly and to safeguard the financial well-being of individuals relying on these funds for their retirement. The legislation is administered by the Parliament of Australia, with the aim of maintaining the integrity and stability of the superannuation system. The enactment of the SISA was driven by a policy objective to prevent mismanagement and abuse within the superannuation industry, ensuring that trustees, investment managers, and custodians act in the best interests of fund members.

Scope and Application

The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) applies to individuals and entities involved in the management and administration of superannuation funds, including trustees, investment managers, and custodians. The Act's jurisdiction extends throughout the Commonwealth of Australia, ensuring a uniform regulatory framework across all states and territories. Notably, the Act explicitly includes disqualification provisions that apply to any person found to have contravened its requirements, as exemplified by the disqualification notice issued to Joshua Lee Ingram. The Act's application is broad, encompassing any entity that performs designated roles within the superannuation industry, and it includes specific criminal penalties for disqualified persons who continue to act in prohibited capacities. Additionally, the Act allows for the publication of disqualification notices as Notifiable Instruments in the Federal Register of Legislation, enhancing transparency and accountability within the industry. While the Act broadly applies to all relevant persons and entities, it does not specify exclusions or exemptions, thereby ensuring comprehensive oversight. The Act also permits the revocation of disqualifications under certain conditions, providing a mechanism for rectification and recourse for those affected by the disqualification decision.

Key Provisions

The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SISA) provides the legislative framework under which the notice of disqualification issued to Joshua Lee Ingram operates. Section 126A(6) of the SISA mandates that a delegate of the Commissioner of Taxation must give a disqualified person written notice of their disqualification, as has been done in this case. This section ensures that the disqualified individual is formally informed of the decision and the reasons behind it. Section 126A(1) of the SISA allows for the disqualification of individuals who have contravened the Act, with the severity of the contraventions determining whether disqualification is warranted. Once the disqualification is issued, it becomes effective immediately, as stated in the notice. The obligations imposed by the SISA on Joshua Lee Ingram are significant. Under section 126K, Ingram is prohibited from acting as a trustee, investment manager, or custodian of a superannuation entity, or being a responsible officer or body corporate in a similar role for such entities. This is to ensure that individuals who have contravened the Act do not continue to have a role in managing superannuation funds, thereby protecting the interests of superannuation fund members. The seriousness of the contraventions leading to the disqualification suggests that Ingram’s actions significantly undermined the integrity or operation of the superannuation industry. Failure to comply with the disqualification imposed by the SISA can lead to severe consequences. Section 126K establishes that it is an offence for a disqualified person to act in the prohibited roles. The maximum penalty for such an offence, as outlined in the notice, is two years in jail. This underscores the importance of adhering to the disqualification and highlights the potential criminal repercussions for non-compliance. Additionally, the notice indicates that the disqualification can be revoked either on the initiative of the Commissioner or upon a written application from Ingram, as per subsection 126A(5) of the SISA. For those dissatisfied with the disqualification decision, section 344 of the SISA provides a mechanism for reconsideration by the Commissioner, which must be requested in writing within 21 days of receiving the notice.