Survey result rejects APES 230 approach
A survey conducted by the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) has confirmed the strong opposition which exists to accountants being held to higher obligations than those required by the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) legislation.
The survey, held over recent weeks and reflecting the views of nearly 300 respondents, revealed that 80 per cent were opposed to accountants being held to the higher requirements contained in the Accounting Professional and Ethical Standards Board (APESB) APES 230 standard.
Survey respondents were asked the question: "Do you agree with the proposals in APES 230 (Financial Planning Services Offered by Accountants)". It then went on to tease out attitudes to specific elements within APES 230 such as commissions on insurance and asset-based fees.
Within the responses received by the AFA, 2 per cent said they agreed with the APES 230 position that commissions on insurance should be banned, while 6 per cent agreed that percentage-based fees should be banned.
By comparison, a full 80 per cent agreed that only FOFA requirements should apply and that accountants should be treated like financial planners.
AFA chief executive Brad Fox said he believed the survey responses reflected the broad industry concerns around APES 230.
Release of the survey results to Money Management follows on from the APESB having removed discussion of APES 230 from its most recent board meeting.
The major accounting groups are understood to be still strongly lobbying on the issue.
Recommended for you
ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025, with 241 candidates attempting the test.
Quarterly Wealth Data analysis has uncovered positive improvements in financial adviser numbers compared with losses in the prior corresponding period.
Holding portfolios that are too complex or personalised can be a detractor for acquirers of financial advice firms as they require too much effort to maintain post-acquisition.
As the financial advice profession continues to wait on further DBFO legislation, industry commentators have encouraged advisers to act now in driving practice efficiency.
