ACA labels industry as structurally corrupt

financial-planners/financial-planning-industry/fee-for-service/commissions/funds-management/chief-executive/fund-manager/FPA/

9 December 2003
| By Ben Abbott |

TheAustralian Consumers’ Association (ACA) has hit out at the funds management and financial planning industry in Australia, stating it is “characterised by structural corruption”.

The comments were made last week at an industry conference by ACA chief executive Louise Sylvan, who was referring to incentives such as commissions and soft-dollar bonuses received by financial planners.

She says these incentives compromise the independence of financial planners and drive the cost of products up for consumers.

In the context of superannuation choice in Australia, Sylvan says there is a possibility that advisers will “churn” clients to obtain commissions, making the UK pension mis-selling problem “look like a picnic compared to the Australian situation”.

The comments by Sylvan come on the back of a spate of recent attacks by other industry bodies on the lack of adviser independence.

TheAustralian Prudential Regulation Authority’s Charles Littrell was recently quoted as saying the retail investment industry is “based on bribery” when referring to commission-based investment advisers, whileCPA Australiarecently claimed independent financial advice is diminishing due to increasing ownership of large dealer groups by institutions.

TheFinancial Planning Association(FPA) responded by arguing financial planners were able to adopt a professional mindset, despite commissions to provide honest, competent advice.

Sylvan disagrees, saying the ACA is considering if it will take the position that it is impossible to be both an adviser and a product seller.

She says the ACA is moving toward a possible new model of financial planning in the Australian marketplace that would see a structural separation of advice and product sales.

She also argued that the increasing dealer group reliance on fund manager infrastructure was an unsatisfying outcome for the industry.

Sylvan says that the fee-for-service model is not being taken up widely in the industry, and that while commissions exist, it will be hard for consumers to see the value in an up-front fee.

She says the problem is that advisers are seen by consumers as being independent and impartial, although in reality they are starting to act more like tied agents.

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?...

2 months 2 weeks ago

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

2 months 2 weeks ago

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

4 months 3 weeks ago

ASIC has suspended the Australian Financial Services Licence of a Melbourne-based financial advice firm....

4 days 4 hours ago

The corporate regulator has issued infringement notices to three AFSLs whose financial advisers provided personal advice to a retail client while unregistered....

1 week 2 days ago

ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025, with 241 candidates attempting the test....

2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND