Ever since the Turnbull government handed down its bombshell superannuation reforms on 3 May 2016 as part of that year’s budget, we’ve all been hoping the implementation of some of the measures would end up a little less complicated than initial assessments had predicted.

The latest buzz in financial services circles in the past few weeks has been the announcement of a royal commission into the banks. The terms of reference for the inquiry include the superannuation industry, but thankfully exclude the SMSF sector.

Superannuation is a sector of the Australian financial make-up that seems to be undergoing constant scrutiny and potentially constant change, whether the public knows it or not.

The further we move away from 1 July into the brave new world of the most recent post-super reforms, the more we are seeing the flow-on effects from the system changes be they intentional or unintentional.

July is now upon us, which means the superannuation reforms announced in the 2016 federal budget have been implemented. While plenty of people are still unhappy about the changes, most of them have had to put their heads down to get on with complying with the new regime.

Analysis is beginning to filter through as to superannuant behaviour in response to the retirement savings reforms introduced on 1 July.

August has now ticked over and the implementation of the super reforms has begun, and while we are only at the start of the process, already we can see the level of complexity that will no doubt trip up many SMSF trustees is a real and present danger.

The Queen described 1992 as an annus horribilis for herself and the British royal family as a result of several tumultuous incidents throughout the year, including the fire that ravaged Windsor Castle, and no one could blame her for that assessment.

So the 2017 budget has been handed down and everyone in the SMSF community breathed a collective sigh of relief that the sort of superannuation pain witnessed the year before was not repeated.