ASIC changes so complex you need a whiteboard

9 September 2015
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

The issues surrounding disclosing investment fees and costs are so complex and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC's) efforts to deal with them have been so problematic that a major superannuation organisation has urged a one or two day industry workshop to sort them out.

In what represents a tough assessment at ASIC's efforts to deliver a class order dealing with investment fees and costs, the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) has urged the convening of a workshop to sort out the complexity.

"By gathering a range of appropriate industry representatives in a room, with a whiteboard and butcher's paper, and allowing sufficient time, it should be possible to work through different investment arrangement and structures, identify issues and develop solutions," ASFA has said in a submission to ASIC.

What is more it is arguing that once the problems have been dealt with by such an industry workshop, the proposed changes should be subjected to a cost-benefit analysis.

"…complying with the fees and costs disclosure regime will necessitate funds incurring significant additional costs," the ASFA submission said.

"These costs should be balanced against, and commensurate with, any benefits which are delivered to consumers. An analysis should be performed of the costs incurred compared with the benefits received and an assessment made as to the extent to which the additional costs are justified."

It said the complexity and variety of the different arrangements and structures through which investments were made created a number of difficulties in complying with the current approach and this would produce inconsistent results and lead to trustees having to incur unnecessary costs.

"By way of example, where a "superwrap" trustee invests in a managed fund this produces a different disclosure outcome when compared to any other type of trustee," it said.

"There does not appear to be a compelling policy rationale for treating platforms differently to other funds."

The ASFA submission also pointed to inconsistencies with respect to fund of funds investment, unlisted unit trusts that invest in the property market, property investment , infrastructure project investment and mandate investments in equity markets.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

1 week 1 day ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

1 week 1 day ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week 2 days ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

9 months 2 weeks ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

9 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

9 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND