Planners snub CFP proposal

insurance certified financial planner financial planning industry CFP

22 June 2000
| By Jason |

A proposal for a separate non-practitioner Certified Financial Planner (CFP) mark has been de-feated by strong opposition from elements within the US financial planning industry.

A proposal for a separate non-practitioner Certified Financial Planner (CFP) mark has been de-feated by strong opposition from elements within the US financial planning industry.

Vocal opposition by high profile planning figures in the US defeated the proposal by the CFP Board of Governors to introduce a CFP Practitioner with a capital “P” to indicate a planner was currently in practice. Lower case “p” CFP practitioners would then be those who held the mark but were not working as advisers.

Opponents of the new mark believe the name could have potentially divided the quality of CFPs in the minds of consumers even though the mark would not require any fundamental difference in qualifications.

"The CFP Practitioner is not an area of specialisation, it is at best a duplication of what CFP is. They claim it will identify the CFP who is ‘in practice,’ but that person is already so identified in that they deal with customers or they don't," says League Financial & Insurance Services princi-pal Paul League.

CFP Board of Governors chair Patricia Houlihan says the distinction with the "CFP Practitioner" mark was only one of semantics and the difference was for the benefit of consumers. Non-practitioners would be left alone to pursue their chosen fields without any further distinction.

The mark would require the same educational, ethical and practice standards and would not be policed by the Board.

The Board was required to meet a June filing deadline proving that it had used the mark in print and promotional materials and Houlihan says the use of the mark in advertisements was a way to hold onto it should the Board proceed with the June filing.

Critics say they were surprised to see "CFP Practitioner" appear as a trademark name which be-gan the questioning of the Board’s motivations.

Rejection of the new mark follows rejection of the Associate CFP mark in December last year. This mark was intended to be applied to planners coming from non-planning backgrounds but was widely felt by opponents as diminishing the strength of the CFP designation.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

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

15 hours ago

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

4 days 20 hours ago

It’s astonishing to see the FAAA now pushing for more advisers by courting "career changers" and international recruits,...

3 weeks 2 days ago

Insignia Financial has made four appointments, including three who have joined from TAL, to lead strategy and innovation in its retirement solutions for the MLC brand....

2 weeks 4 days ago

A former Brisbane financial adviser has been charged with 26 counts of dishonest conduct regarding a failure to disclose he would receive substantial commission payments ...

3 days 18 hours ago

Pinnacle Investment Management has announced it will acquire strategic interests in two international fund managers for $142 million....

2 days 21 hours ago