"The proportion of SMSFs with borrowings increased from 1.1 per cent in 2008 to 3.7 per cent in 2012. The average amount borrowed increased over this period from $122,000 to $357,000. Total borrowings in 2012 were over $6.2 billion"
This might have something to do with to introduction of the exception in s67A at this time allowing borrowings.....I cannot see how this argument is supported "If allowed to continue, growth in direct leverage by superannuation funds, although embryonic, may create vulnerabilities for the superannuation and financial systems."
The exposure of borrowing in super is immaterial to the overall asset base of SMSFs. I have seen subprime - this is not subprime. Whilst there is a trend to increase - that may have a link to Australians wanting direct exposure to the real estate market market using SMSF rather than seeing their money disappear in industry funds.
Cheers Ivan