FPA challenges ASIC on super advice fee arrangements

FPA financial planning association ASIC australian securities and investments commission advice fees superannuation

1 May 2020
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

The Financial Planning Association (FPA) has urged the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) to be more flexible around arrangements for the deduction of advice fees from superannuation accounts, arguing that requiring repeat consent processes will not be in clients’ best interests. 

In a submission filed with ASIC as part of its review of implementing the Royal Commission recommendations around advice fee consents and independence disclosure, the FPA made clear it believed ASIC’s proposed approach involving time limits and multiple consents was unnecessary. 

In doing so it pointed out that around two-thirds of clients who paid fees through superannuation would have trouble paying for advice in any other way. 

“The provision of the agreed advice services should not be restricted to a time period of how long the consent will last,” it said. “The priority must be the provision of advice services in the best interest of the client and personal advice that is appropriate for the client’s circumstances.” 

“It is most likely that the member consent would be sought at the time of the client and advice provider agreeing on the terms of the advice engagement, including the services to be provided and the non-ongoing fee for those services,” the FPA submission said. 

The submission said that the collection of vital information about the client’s circumstances and goals could significantly impact the period of time between agreeing on the terms of engagement and the provision of the advice and the statement of advice (SOA). 

It said that ASIC’s proposals would impose an expiry timeframe on the member consent, and in turn, potentially on the provision of the advice. 

“If the above factors resulted in the advice not being provided within the stated time period, this could lead to unnecessary duplication of the client consent process even though the terms of the advice engagement the client agreed to had not changed,” the submission said. 

“The FPA suggests this is unreasonable and inconvenient for the client and does not provide any additional consumer protection under this measure. It is not in line with the best interest duty in the Corporations Act or the professionalism requirements of the new FASEA code of ethics to provide advice services diligently and efficiently by including a timeframe that could result in the need to repeat the consent process.” 

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

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

1 month 3 weeks ago

This verdict highlights something deeply wrong and rotten at the heart of the FSCP. We are witnessing a heavy-handed, op...

2 months ago

Interesting. Would be good to know the details of the StrategyOne deal....

2 months ago

SuperRatings has shared the median estimated return for balanced superannuation funds for the calendar year 2024, finding the year achieved “strong and consistent positiv...

2 weeks 4 days ago

Original bidder Bain Capital, which saw its first offer rejected in December, has returned with a revised bid for Insignia Financial....

1 week 4 days ago

The FAAA has secured CSLR-related documents under the FOI process, after an extended four-month wait, which show little analysis was done on how the scheme’s cost would a...

1 week 2 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS