Transparency needed on ASIC unmet needs project

ASIC

20 August 2021
| By Jassmyn |
image
image
expand image

Questions need to be asked regarding why the corporate regulator sees it unnecessary to publish the 433 submissions it received for its consultation paper on access to affordable financial advice.

The reason why the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) needs to be asked this is given the already negative views of its exponentially increasing levy for financial advisers, it needs to explain why it is not releasing information that has been paid for by advisers.

ASIC revealed to a Parliamentary committee that it had spent $386,480 on its unmet advice needs project, which went towards staffing and three pieces of commissioned research. 

Given the regulator employed external consultants, it is only fair advisers should be able to access the submissions made as the ASIC levy is paid for by advisers and covers all sorts of expenditure including enforcement activity that does not involve most advisers.

The justifications ASIC has used to not publish the submissions include the fact that it will soon publish a document that captures a “high-level summary of key issues raised in the submissions and provides public transparency of the issues raised”, some submissions were provided in confidence, and that individuals might not welcome publication of their submissions.

However, opting not to publish submissions seems contrary to the regulator claiming their soon-to-be published document is transparent given nobody will be able to cross check what has been said in submissions and what had been published in the document. 

Not only this, ASIC could redact personal information from the submissions to get around confidentiality issues.

It would be wise for ASIC to be more transparent about the work they do on advice, especially when it is funded by the advice industry, as its levy has been under scrutiny by not only the industry but by parliamentarians who have called the levy unsustainable.

Transparency would be welcomed by the industry to know what they are actually funding and it is likely ASIC will continue to be questioned on its levy justification.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

1 month ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

1 month 1 week ago

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

3 months 1 week ago

ASIC has taken action against a Queensland adviser who was sentenced last May for misappropriating $1.8 million from his clients....

3 weeks 6 days ago

AMP is to launch a digital advice service to provide retirement advice to members of its AMP Super Fund, in partnership with Bravura Solutions. ...

3 weeks 6 days ago

A former Insignia Financial C-suite exec has taken on a leadership role at MUFG Retirement Solutions as it announces chief executive Dee McGrath will depart after six yea...

1 month ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS