FASEA clarifies pathway for advisers who do not pass exam
The Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) has clarified the two scenarios for advisers who haven’t completed the FASEA exam by the January deadline.
FASEA confirmed in response to a question on notice to the Senate Economics Committee how an adviser could continue to be a relevant provider based on two scenarios:
- If an active adviser had not passed the exam before the 1 January, 2022 deadline; and
- If an adviser that had ceased from the industry wants to return.
If an adviser had not passed the exam:
An existing adviser before 1 January, 2022, was considered a relevant provider and must have passed the exam before 1 January, 2022.
If the adviser had not passed the FASEA exam, they would cease to be considered a relevant provider.
However, that would not prevent them from becoming a relevant provider again, but these advisers “would need to meet the standards applicable to new entrants in relation to a professional year, approved degree and have passed the exam before they can become a relevant provider”, FASEA said.
“These advisers would need to meet the standards applicable to new entrants in relation to a professional year, approved degree and have passed the exam before they can become a relevant provider.”
If they ceased to be an adviser before 2021 and returning to the industry:
If an existing provider ceased from the industry in 2021, the existing provider does not need to pass the exam before 1 January, 2022, but are still required to pass the exam upon return to the industry.
“…If an existing provider is not a relevant provider at the relevant future date (and so is not required to complete the exam requirement by the relevant dates) but they subsequently wish to return to the industry and become a relevant provider once again, they can do so but only if they have completed the exam requirement before they return to the industry,” FASEA said.
AUTHOR
Chris Dastoor
Recommended for you
Sequoia Financial Group has declined by five financial advisers in the past week, four of whom have opened up a new AFSL, according to Wealth Data.
Insignia Financial chief executive Scott Hartley has detailed whether the firm will be selecting an exclusive bidder for the second phase of due diligence as it awaits revised bids from three private equity players.
Insignia Financial has reported a statutory net loss after tax of $17 million in its first half results, although the firm has noted cost optimisation means this is an improvement from a $50 million loss last year.
With alternative funds being described as “impossible” for fund managers to target towards advisers without the support of BDMs for education, Money Management explores the evolving nature of the distribution role.
