The review will examine how stamp duty payments are disclosed under Regulatory Guide 97 (RG 97), which governs fee and cost disclosures in product disclosure statements.
Industry stakeholders have raised concerns that current disclosure requirements unfairly penalise direct property investments and discourage superannuation funds from investing in this asset class.
ASIC Chair Joe Longo said the agency is responding to feedback received during recent investor roundtables convened by the Treasurer.
“This is exactly the sort of actionable idea to address regulatory issues ASIC is open to testing,” Mr Longo said.
“If the review finds appropriate changes will deliver benefits without undermining disclosures, then ASIC will act.”
The review comes at a critical time when Australia faces significant housing supply challenges.
According to the Property Council of Australia, a simple adjustment to how stamp duty is reported could redirect nearly $10 billion toward new property development within a few years.
Property Council Chief Executive Mike Zorbas welcomed the announcement, highlighting the potential impact on housing supply.
“Currently, superannuation funds are being penalised for investing our money in Australian housing, offices, industrial parks and shopping malls – all vital to world-class, productive cities,” Mr Zorbas said.
The issue stems from how RG 97 requires superannuation funds to disclose transaction costs.
When funds invest directly in unlisted property, such as new apartment developments, they must report stamp duty as a transaction cost.
However, investments in listed property vehicles like real estate investment trusts have stamp duty rolled into investment fees disclosure.
This creates an uneven playing field that makes direct property investments appear more expensive than comparable alternatives, potentially steering superannuation capital away from housing and other property assets.
The Property Council estimates that addressing this regulatory inconsistency could facilitate the development of approximately 35,000 additional new homes over the next five years without any cost to the government.
The review will also consider whether class order relief should be provided to ensure consistency in how internally and externally managed private credit arrangements are disclosed.
“A change like that could encourage internal management meaning lower costs for superannuation members as well as continuing to support safe credit growth for business borrowers,” Mr Longo said.
Led by ASIC with participation from industry representatives and Treasury, the review panel will seek direct submissions from experts and key stakeholders.
The review is expected to report its findings by November 30.
The Property Council said that stamp duty should still be reported but suggested it should be disclosed separately as an unavoidable tax rather than being categorised as a fee, which would improve comparability between different asset classes.
Australia’s superannuation system, valued at approximately $4 trillion, already has significant property investments, but industry feedback suggests there is an appetite for increased allocation to this asset class if regulatory barriers are addressed.
“Changing RG 97 won’t cost the Budget a cent, but it can help deliver 35,000 additional new homes for Australians over five years,” Mr Zorbas said.
“We can hope too, that the government takes this mindset into improving the investment pathways for institutions wanting to co-invest with Australian companies through the FIRB process, which has slowed down in recent years.”
