ASIC needs cost-benefit analysis of actions
A Parliamentary Committee has been told the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) should be more considerate of the time and resources its requirements place on businesses.
In a submission to the a Parliamentary Committee earlier this month the Rule of Law Institute of Australia (ROLIA) made specific reference to a lengthy questionnaire sent by the regulator to some of the largest Australian Financial Services Licensees (AFSLs) last year.
The committee was told the questionnaire comprised of a 812-question document which was issued to up to 30 of the largest institutionally owned and independent dealer groups under a Notice of Direction making completion compulsory.
The ROLIA told the committee that this reflected a particular use of ASIC’s coercive powers.
Pointing to the amount of time and resources that needed to be directed to the exercise, the ROLIA submission argued that ASIC should consider voluntary surveys first and should seriously test the costs and benefits of complex and onerous data collection.
The ROLIA evidence to the parliamentary committee referenced ASIC’s own data with respect to its use of coercive powers, saying the five most frequently used powers by ASIC over the period 1 July 2007 to 17 June 2010 were: Section 33 of the ASIC Act – notice to produce documents in person’s possession (6,984 occasions); Section 30 of the ASIC Act –notice to produce books about affairs of body corporate or registered scheme (5,687 occasions); Section 19 of the ASIC Act – notice requiring appearance for examination (3,354 occasions); Section 31 of the ASIC Act – notice to produce books about financial products(1,430 occasions); and Section 912C of the Act – direction to provide a statement (939 occasions).
AUTHOR
Mike Taylor
Recommended for you
The month of April enjoyed four back-to-back weeks of growth in financial adviser numbers, with this past week seeing a net rise of five.
ASIC has permanently banned a former Perth adviser after he made “materially misleading” statements to induce investors.
The Financial Services and Credit Panel has made a written order to a relevant provider after it gave advice regarding non-concessional contributions.
With the election taking place on Saturday (3 May), Adviser Ratings examines how the two major parties could shape the advice industry in the future.
