ASIC should be self-funded, says ISA
Industry Super Australia (ISA) has suggested a self-funding model for the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) after numerous concerns were raised that the budget allocated to the regulator by the Government was inadequate.
In its submission to the Senate Economics References Committee into the performance of ASIC, ISA highlighted that other regulators — such as the Reserve Bank of Australia and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority — were largely funded by fees imposed on the entities they supervise.
There have been suggestions that ASIC can replace government funding with the industry levy model, which would give the regulator the ability to independently organise and plan its operation budget, ISA said in its submission.
"For this fee-paying model to work, it is necessary to have a process which clearly defines the types and amount of fees paid by firms and how fees are raised," it said.
"More importantly, there needs to be a clear accountability framework for the regulator to operate in. This should detail the regulatory body's responsibilities, reporting duties and also outline criteria for a periodic auditing process."
Essentially, the sectors that required the most supervision would be paying the most, ISA added.
To further support its case for the introduction of a self-funding model for ASIC, ISA's submission pointed to the regulator recently citing "resource limitation" as a reason for the delay in solving the Commonwealth Financial Planning case, as the same team had to deal with problems from the Storm Financial collapse.
Recommended for you
The FSCP has announced its latest verdict, suspending an adviser’s registration for failing to comply with his obligations when providing advice to three clients.
Having sold Madison to Infocus earlier this year, Clime has now set up a new financial advice licensee with eight advisers.
With licensees such as Insignia looking to AI for advice efficiencies, they are being urged to write clear AI policies as soon as possible to prevent a “Wild West” of providers being used by their practices.
Iress has revealed the number of clients per adviser that top advice firms serve, as well as how many client meetings they conduct each week.
