NOTICE OF DISQUALIFICATION
Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993
To:
Mr Steven Phillips
DROUIN VIC 3818
I, Ivan Parrett, a delegate of the Commissioner of Taxation, give you notice as required by subsection 126A(6) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act), that I have made a decision to disqualify you from being a trustee or a responsible officer of a body corporate that is a trustee, investment manager or custodian, of a superannuation entity.
I have disqualified you under subsection 126A(3) of the SIS Act as I am satisfied that you are not a fit and proper person to be a trustee, investment manager, custodian or a responsible officer of a body corporate that is a trustee, investment manager or custodian of a superannuation entity for the purposes of the SIS Act.
The disqualification order takes effect on the day on which this notice is made.
Dated: 27 November 2013
Ivan Parrett
Assistant Commissioner of Taxation
Per Bernard Morrison
Note 1:
In accordance with subsection 126A(7) of the SIS Act, particulars of this disqualification notice will be published in the Gazette.
Note 2:
In accordance with subsection 126A(5) of the SIS Act, we may revoke this disqualification order on our own initiative or on written application made by you.
Note 3:
In accordance with section 344 of the SIS Act, if you are a person who is affected by this decision and you are dissatisfied with it, you may ask the Commissioner to reconsider this decision. Such a request must be made in writing within 21 days of the day on which you received notice of the decision and must also give the reasons for making the request.
Overview
The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act) was enacted by the Australian Parliament to address the need for effective supervision and regulation of the superannuation industry, ensuring that superannuation funds are managed efficiently, economically, and in the best interests of members. The SIS Act established the framework for the regulation of superannuation funds, trustees, and other entities involved in the management of superannuation. It aimed to protect the interests of superannuation members by ensuring the proper administration and management of their funds. This legislation was introduced to fill the gap in the regulation of the superannuation industry, which was seen as necessary to maintain public confidence in the system and to prevent misconduct and mismanagement within the sector. The SIS Act has since been amended several times to enhance its effectiveness and to respond to emerging issues in the superannuation industry.
Scope and Application
The Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act) applies to trustees, investment managers, custodians, and responsible officers of body corporates that are involved with superannuation entities. The Act’s jurisdiction extends nationally across Australia, regulating the conduct and operations of entities and individuals involved in the management of superannuation funds. This disqualification notice issued to Mr Steven Phillips under subsection 126A(6) of the SIS Act signifies that Mr Phillips has been deemed not fit and proper to hold any role within a body corporate managing superannuation entities. The notice, effective from the date of issuance, bars Mr Phillips from serving as a trustee, investment manager, custodian, or responsible officer of any such body corporate. The decision to disqualify is made by a delegate of the Commissioner of Taxation, in this instance, Ivan Parrett. The disqualification order is subject to potential revocation by the Commissioner, either on their own initiative or upon a written application by Mr Phillips, and the decision can also be subject to reconsideration by the Commissioner if requested by Mr Phillips within 21 days of receiving the notice.
Key Provisions
The key provisions of this notice, issued under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act), involve the disqualification of Mr Steven Phillips from certain roles related to superannuation entities. Specifically, the notice, provided by Ivan Parrett, a delegate of the Commissioner of Taxation, informs Mr Phillips that he has been disqualified from being a trustee, a responsible officer, or associated with a body corporate that acts as a trustee, investment manager, or custodian of a superannuation entity (sections 126A(3) and 126A(6)). This decision was made because Mr Parrett is satisfied that Mr Phillips is not a fit and proper person to hold such roles (section 126A(3)).
Under the SIS Act, Mr Phillips and any associated entities now face certain obligations and requirements. Firstly, Mr Phillips must cease any involvement in the roles mentioned in the disqualification notice immediately. Any body corporate he was associated with must also ensure that he does not participate in the management or decision-making processes related to superannuation entities. These obligations are designed to protect the interests of superannuation fund members by ensuring that only fit and proper persons manage their funds.
Breach of the disqualification order can result in significant legal consequences. If Mr Phillips continues to act in any capacity that is prohibited by the notice, he could face both civil and criminal penalties. The SIS Act does not specify exact penalties in the provided text, but generally, breaches of such disqualifications can lead to fines and imprisonment, depending on the severity and intent of the breach. Additionally, the disqualification order can be revoked either by the issuing authority or upon written application by Mr Phillips, provided he meets the criteria set forth in the Act.
The notice also informs Mr Phillips of his right to appeal the decision. If dissatisfied with the disqualification, he has 21 days from the receipt of the notice to request a reconsideration in writing, outlining the reasons for his request (section 344). This reconsideration process is intended to provide a formal mechanism for Mr Phillips to contest the disqualification and potentially have the order lifted if he can demonstrate sufficient grounds for appeal.