Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Register

29 October 2025

Home / 109

An SMSF journal entry is not enough

Some things in life are not easy and some things don’t make much sense. Unfortunately superannuation often falls into both categories.

Take the situation where a husband and wife have established an SMSF. After many years of managing their SMSF successfully and accumulating much wealth in their fund, the husband passes away.

Under the superannuation law, the death triggers a compulsory payment where the deceased member’s superannuation savings must be paid out as a lump sum death benefit either to a dependant or to his estate as soon as possible.

In this case, the wife does not need the lump sum death benefit payment as she has enough income without it. She would rather the money be retained in the SMSF. In fact if the lump sum payment is made to her, she would simply deposit the money back into her SMSF. So the wife, with the agreement of her accountant, records a journal entry in the SMSF’s financial accounts that reflects a lump sum death benefit was paid to her and then was deposited back into the SMSF.

Sounds fine, what’s the problem?

There was no problem in the wife being able to put the money back as she hasn’t exceeded her contribution caps and she also meets the work test in order to make contributions into her SMSF. So what is the problem?

Well, superannuation law requires the death benefit payment to be ‘cashed’. This means, it must be paid out of the SMSF. If assets need to be sold to fund the payment, that must be done. Once paid, it can then be contributed back into the SMSF if the recipient so wishes. You cannot simply make a journal entry without physically making the payment.

The ATO has recently issued two publications, ATOID 2015/2 and ATOID 2015/3 that address this issue. In these documents, the ATO explains that cashing involves an SMSF making a payment which reduces the member’s benefits in the fund. A journal entry to reduce the deceased’s member account would not amount to cashing, and therefore, would not satisfy the law.

Even if there are no tax implications, in order to comply with the superannuation law, a death benefit must be paid out. Otherwise you would have contravened the law. It’s a silly law and one that doesn’t make much sense to those who are already grieving the loss of a loved one.

 

Monica Rule is an SMSF Specialist and the author of The Self Managed Super Handbook – Superannuation Law for SMSFs in plain English – www.monicarule.com.au

 

  •   15 May 2015
  • 6
  •      
  •   
6 Comments
Ramani
May 14, 2015

Monica

A helpful guide to the need to pander to the silly nature of this requirement.

How would this work (or not) if the wife receiving a cheque endorses it (as she can under banking law, a cheque being a negotiable instrument) back to the Fund for making a contribution?

Monica Rule
May 15, 2015

Hi Ramani,

Regardless of whether the death benefit is paid by cash or cheque, what the ATO would be looking for is money leaving the SMSF’s bank account. The SMSF would need to show evidence of cash being available to pay out the death benefit and an entry in the SMSF’s bank account showing the money leaving the SMSF. The SMSF would also need to show evidence of the receipt of contributions from the wife with an entry in the SMSF’s bank account. If that can be achieved with a cheque endorsement, then I guess it is possible.

Bruce
May 14, 2015

Can you please advise me if the same requirement applies when a SMSF is in the pension phase and the beneficiary is a child under the age of 18?
What are the options when a fund is in the pension phase and the spouse is dependent on the income from the fund? If she is over 65 and not working she is limited as to what she can contribute back into the fund.
If the SMSF held its assets as equities/managed funds or property, would transferring these equities/managed funds/property to the wife on the death of the husband qualify as cashing out? Or is the only option a cash payment.

Monica Rule
May 15, 2015

Hi Bruce,

Yes, the same rule applies if the beneficiary is a child under the age of 18 and the deceased is in pension phase and a lump sum death benefit is required to be paid from the SMSF. However, if the requirement is for the child to continue to receive the pension, then pension payments would continue to be paid from the SMSF. There would be no need for a lump sum death benefit to be paid from the SMSF. The deceased’s superannuation savings will simply continue to be paid to the child.

Also, if the death benefit is to be paid to the surviving spouse as a continuation of the deceased’s pension, then the pension will continue to be paid to the dependent. This would not require a lump sum death benefit to be paid, and therefore, there is no need for money to be paid out from the SMSF and for the wife to be working to be able to contribute the money back.

A lump sum death benefit can be paid in-specie using assets of the SMSF. Therefore, cashing out includes payment of a lump sum benefit by transferring assets of the SMSF to dependents. The ATO would check for the legal ownership of assets transfer as evidence.

Ramani
May 14, 2015

Monica

Thanks for the response.

In regard to your answer about in specie payment of death benefits as a lump sum (probably supplemented with the anti-detriment clawback), I suppose nothing would preclude the same assets being contributed back to the SMSF (subject to contribution rules & governing rules allowing in-specie contributions or at least not prohibiting them, and the assets being stock-exchange listed)?

I accept that this is getting farcical, really, but compliance is sacrosanct compliance.

Monica Rule
May 19, 2015

Ramani, you are correct.

There is nothing stopping a contribution being made using assets as long as it complies with all the superannuation law requirements. That is, it needs to be an asset that the SMSF is able to acquire from a member/beneficiary (therefore you need to be careful if the asset is not a business real property); the contributor needs to be a member of the SMSF; the contributor must meet the part time work test if over the age of 65 or more etc.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Ensure death benefit nominations are upheld

Are death bed benefit super withdrawals effective?

The mechanics of the $3 million super tax must be fixed

Firstlinks is sponsored by:
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Retirement income expectations hit new highs

Younger Australians think they’ll need $100k a year in retirement - nearly double what current retirees spend. Expectations are rising fast, but are they realistic or just another case of lifestyle inflation?

Four best-ever charts for every adviser and investor

In any year since 1875, if you'd invested in the ASX, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods. It's just one of the must-have stats that all investors should know.

Why super returns may be heading lower

Five mega trends point to risks of a more inflation prone and lower growth environment. This, along with rich market valuations, should constrain medium term superannuation returns to around 5% per annum.

The hidden property empire of Australia’s politicians

With rising home prices and falling affordability, political leaders preach reform. But asset disclosures show many are heavily invested in property - raising doubts about whose interests housing policy really protects.

Preparing for aged care

Whether for yourself or a family member, it’s never too early to start thinking about aged care. This looks at the best ways to plan ahead, as well as the changes coming to aged care from November 1 this year.

Our experts on Jim Chalmers' super tax backdown

Labor has caved to pressure on key parts of the Division 296 tax, though also added some important nuances. Here are six experts’ views on the changes and what they mean for you.        

Latest Updates

A speech from the Prime Minister on fixing housing

“Fellow Australians, I want to address our most pressing national issue: housing. For too long, governments have tiptoed around problems from escalating prices, but for the sake of our younger generations, that stops today.”        

Taxation

Family trusts: Are they still worth it?

Family trusts remain a core structure for wealth management, but rising ATO scrutiny and complex compliance raise questions about their ongoing value. Are the benefits still worth the administrative burden?

Exchange traded products

Multiple ways to win

Both active and passive investing can work, but active investment doesn’t in the way it is practised by many fund managers and passive investing doesn’t work in the way most end investors practise it. Here’s a better way.

Economy

The Future Fund may become a 'bad bank' for problem home loans

The Future Fund says it will not be paying defined benefit pensions until at least 2033 - raising as many questions as answers. This points to an increasingly uncertain future for Australia's sovereign wealth fund.

Investment strategies

Managed accounts and the future of portfolio construction

With $233 billion under management, managed accounts are evolving into diversified, transparent, and liquid investment frameworks. The rise of ETFs and private markets marks a shift in portfolio design and discipline. 

Property

Commercial property prospects are looking up

Commercial property is seeing the same supply issues as the residential market. Given the chronic undersupply and a recent pickup in demand, it bodes well for an upturn in commercial real estate prices.

Infrastructure

Private toll roads need a shake-up

Privatised toll roads in Australia help governments avoid upfront costs but often push financial risks onto taxpayers while creating monopolies and unfair toll burdens for commuters and businesses.

Sponsors

Alliances

Site Map

About Firstlinks

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.