Highlights

  • On 19 August 2026, Financial Services Minister Daniel Mulino announced a package of reforms that included changes affecting SMSFs.
  • CSLR compensation will be limited to actual Investment losses for AFCA applications made after 30 June 2027.
  • They wanted any levy to be temporary, and argued the government should share the cost.
  • For most funds, a $20 levy is small compared with audit, administration and ATO costs.

The Compensation Scheme of Last Resort was set up to pay eligible consumers who have won a determination from the Australian Financial Complaints Authority but cannot be paid by the firm responsible.

For trustees, it is a useful moment to understand what has been announced, what remains uncertain and why the issue matters beyond a modest dollar amount.

What the government has announced

  • SMSFs will be required to contribute to CSLR special levies in years when one is needed;
  • the government has indicated individual SMSFs are likely to contribute no more than $20 per leviable period;
  • the overall SMSF sector contribution will be scaled by the Assets of the SMSF sector relative to the APRA-regulated sector; and

The SMSF Association has described the expected cost as no more than $20 per fund for 2027–28, while Heffron's summary says SMSFs will contribute in years where a special levy is required, including 2026–27.

Separately, the same package included an increase in the ATO's SMSF supervisory levy from $259 to $295, which would be aligned with fund establishment.

What the roundtable participants said

One participant, who said they had opposed an SMSF levy from the start, acknowledged that victims of misconduct, including SMSF investors, remained uncompensated.

Another participant said the levy itself was modest but the concern was that it could become open-ended, and called for the funding base to be widened to include product issuers and platform operators.

Why the debate matters to trustees

The underlying concerns are about precedent and fairness:

  • whether a levy introduced as temporary could become permanent or grow;
  • whether SMSF members who invest without advice would be protected in the same way as those who pay; and
  • whether the funding model creates incentives to prevent misconduct, rather than simply compensate after the event.

The collapses of the Shield and First Guardian schemes, which affected some SMSF investors, have been central to these discussions.

Practical considerations for trustees

  • watching for legislation and consultation papers on the CSLR funding changes;
  • expecting any special levy to appear as an additional cost in future years, alongside the supervisory levy;
  • remembering that the best protection against product failure is careful Due Diligence before investing; and
  • treating any investment promoted through cold calls or lead generators with particular caution.

The takeaway

SMSFs are set to contribute to CSLR special levies, with the government indicating a cost of no more than $20 per fund when a levy applies.