ASIC/APRA/ATO need to be audited on value for money

Association-of-Superannuation-Funds-of-Australia/ASFA/australian-securities-and-investments-commission/ASIC/australian-prudential-regulation-authority/APRA/australian-taxation-office/ATO/ANAO/audit/

19 September 2019
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) should be the subject of a comprehensive audit to ensure they are doing their jobs properly and efficiently.

That is the assessment of the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) which has called for the audit task to be referred to the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) arguing that there is a form of moral hazard in the current arrangements with the regulators having a vested interest in increasing industry levies to increase their discretionary coffers.

What is more the superannuation funds do not want to pay levies which effectively cross-subsidise ASIC’s handling of financial advisers and Self-Managed Superannuation Funds which are not directly subjected to levies.

In a submission to Treasury dealing with the Financial Institutions Supervisory Levies being used to fund the regulators, the ASFA has pointed out that superannuation funds will pay over $89.1 million this year in supervisory levies, up from $6.8 million and it wants to know whether the industry is getting value for money.

“Given that this is money which could otherwise have been attributed to member accounts, it is critical that all of the agencies who receive the levy are accountable for the costs and expenditure they incur,” it said.

On the question of moral hazard, the submission said levies represented “a form of moral hazard, in that the agencies have a vested interest in increasing the levies with relatively little accountability while the parties providing the funding (industry) have no control over the resourcing decisions made by the agencies”.

“This extends to the type, and in particular the scope, of activities engaged in by the agency and the quantum, and nature, of the resources used,” it said.

Elsewhere in its submission, the ASFA argued that because, functionally, superannuation was a part of wealth management it was “critical to ensure that superannuation funds only pay levies with respect to consumer protection within superannuation and not with respect to other wealth management sectors, such as managed investments and financial advisers”.

It said this was because neither Self-Managed Superannuation Funds (SMSFs) nor financial advisers paid levies.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

2 months ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

2 months ago

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

4 months 1 week ago

A Sydney financial adviser has been permanently banned from providing any financial services, with the regulator deriding his “lack of integrity, trustworthiness and prof...

3 weeks 1 day ago

Minister for Financial Services, Stephen Jones, has provided further information about the second tranche of the Delivering Better Financial Outcomes (DBFO) reforms....

2 weeks ago

One licensee has lost 27 advisers in the past week, now sitting at zero, according to the latest Wealth Data figures....

3 weeks 1 day ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS