Morningstar D grade no surprise but tax call harsh
A Morningstar report that gave the local managed funds industry a D- grade is no surprise but the analysis was too harsh on taxation standards, the Investment Savings and Insurance Association (ISI) says.
ISI chief executive Vance Arkinstall says tax incentives for long-term savings have been slow coming because the industry has endured “neglect” from policymakers.
“The industry can’t do anything to change that.”
But the new PIE regime with a top tax rate of 30% was a big step forward and has been popular.
Morningstar’s rating is understood to reflect the large number of managed fund still on pre-PIE tax systems, the ISI says. But many of these funds are small and closing or merging them would be costly compared to the tax gains.
In other areas, the ISI is working on better voluntary standards so that fees and investment performance are disclosed consistently across the industry. "The Morningstar report adds further weight to a reform agenda," Mr Arkinstall says.
First up will be fee disclosure standards, setting out definitions and consistent formatting for fund managers to follow. Standards on fund performance will take longer to develop, Mr Arkinstall says.
KiwiSaver has played an important role in pushing the industry to become more responsive, he says.
Morningstar also criticised a lack of disclosure of portfolio holdings in the local industry.
The ISI says this is “only a position at a single point” but should not be too difficult to disclose if it is considered important.
ISI itself is also looking to become more “responsive” by appointing an independent member to its board.
Share
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Scoopit















Comments and questions1
I beg to differ on the grading, it should have been F-
Carmel Fisher speaking on 1ZB last night tried to defend their less than transperent reporting of portfolios, to loosely quote. "we can't let people see what we are doing, they will know our secrets, and could mimick our fund"
Well on the performance of the Fisher Fund, who in their right mind would want to mimick that loss of value.
The reason they don't want to show what they are investing in is because 1) the number of investments is small, 2) the companies aren't performing well and they don't want any more selling pressure, and 3) the portfoilio is not diversified. The fund managers are in the business for their own benefit (fees) and care little about the investor.
Good investment trusts will show their 10 to 20 largest holdings, so that an investor can make an informed decision about the risks and opportunities that they are being exposed to. For example MLC have a Global Platinum Fund, their disclosure is wide ranging with the 20 largest holdings shown (with %gs) and these total approx 45% of the fund. An investor is informed and has a much better understanding of what they are investing in.
Many investment trusts in the UK (Templeton Emg Mkt, JP Morgan Emg Mkt to name a couple) also name their top 10 with %ges all available on line. And don;t get me wrong these funds suffered in the last 6m like many others, but at least investors knew what they were involved with.
The NZ fund management business is an absolute disgrace.
Post new comment or question
To share this article, click on a service below