Doesn't sound expensive, doesn't sound cheap either. Perhaps it's just right, a real Goldilocks situation.
Applying its 'not unreasonable' test, the GA always tried to keep a tight lid on KiwiSaver fees, but it didn't have an airtight solution for all schemes.
This year, under its new banner, the government KiwiSaver report reveals the lid is being turned a little tighter to stop some previously invisible fees escaping the jar unnoticed.
"An issue that has recently come to light which deserves comment in this report relates to Trustees investing in sub funds where the fees are deducted from the assets and a net return is declared," the FMA KiwiSaver report says.
That is, some KiwiSaver providers probably didn't declare the true cost of running their schemes because fees were buried in funds delegated to external managers.
How much of a big deal that is will vary, of course, from scheme to scheme. But the Mercer KiwiSaver scheme provides a good example for comparing fee differentials.
This year for the first time, Mercer - which is an actuarial firm at heart - provided a breakdown of fees paid to investment managers that were previously bundled up in the unit trust price. Happily, Mercer also back-dated the process to last year, confessing total fees/expenses in 2009/10 of $3.67 million, of which about $660,000 was formerly invisible.
A victory for the actuary.