lawyers weekly logo
Advertisement
Markets
07 November 2025 by Adrian Suljanovic

Macquarie profit rises amid stronger asset management results

Macquarie Group has posted a modest profit rise for the first half, supported by stronger earnings across its asset management and banking divisions
icon

ESG investing proves resilient amid global uncertainty

Despite global ESG adoption dipping slightly from record highs, Asia Pacific investors remain deeply committed to ...

icon

Cboe licence attractive to potential buyers: ASIC

Cboe’s recent success in acquiring a market operation license will make the exchange more attractive to incoming buyers, ...

icon

NAB profit steady as margins tighten and costs rise

The major bank has posted a stable full-year profit as margin pressures and remediation costs offset strong lending and ...

icon

LGT heralds Aussie fixed income 'renaissance'

Despite the RBA’s cash rate hold, the domestic bond market is in good shape compared to its international counterparts, ...

icon

Stonepeak to launch ASX infrastructure debt note

Global alternative investment firm Stonepeak is breaking into Australia with the launch of an ASX-listed infrastructure ...

VIEW ALL

Industry groups defy Cooper's choice model

  •  
By Christine St Anne
  •  
4 minute read

Major industry bodies including ASFA, IFSA and the AIST have called for the Cooper review to dump its proposed choice architecture model.

Four key industry bodies have taken an unprecedented step by joining together to call for the Cooper review to take another look at its recommendations.

The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia, the Investment and Financial Services Association, the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees and the Corporate Superannuation Association do not want Cooper's proposed architectural model to be implemented.

In December 2009, Cooper recommended a choice architecture model as part of phase one of its review into superannuation.

"We believe the proposed model does not focus on the key issues of making the system more efficient, but seeks to fundamentally alter an existing structure that has served members well," a joint statement said.

 
 

The choice architecture model proposed universal and choice investment options for people depending on their level of engagement with superannuation.

The new model would have to establish separate fund structures to cater for the members categorised as either universal or choice, the four groups said.

"This would inevitably increase the administrative burden on the total fund, which would translate into higher, not lower costs per member," the group statement said.

"Requiring the separate trust structures, we believe, will erode the economies of scale that currently exist."

The model also fails to recognise that level of engagement is also a factor of age and stage of life, the groups said.

The groups also have "serious industry misgivings" about the lifecycle investment strategy proposed by the Cooper review.

"We believe that the existing system allows for trustees to focus not simply on costs, but also on returns for default options," the group statement said.