Binding Death Benefit Nominations and SMSFs - Hill v Zuda case
By Nathan Yii
•
4m CPD time
Content may be outdated
This video is over 2 years old and may contain outdated information. Explore recent videos or report an issue.
In this High Court case, a family drama unfolds: a daughter takes her deceased father's spouse to court over the payment of superannuation death benefits. She argues that the binding death benefit nomination was not validly made under SIS Regulations. Is she correct?
This case discusses the applicability of r 6.17A on self-managed superannuation funds, particularly with regards to binding death benefit nominations. The regulation is not automatically applicable to SMSFs, which means that certain requirements such as witnessing and the 3 year lapsing rules might not be fatal.
This was presented as part of the Death & Taxes - Superannuation Death Benefits webinar with Nathan Yii, recorded on 15 September 2022.