ASIC only allowed to ban advisers under new disciplinary regime

21 April 2021
| By Jassmyn |
image
image
expand image

Financial advisers who breach obligations under the Corporations Act 2001 where the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) believes banning is not appropriate will be subject to the Government’s proposed single disciplinary body, the Financial Services and Credit Panel (FSCP).

The new regime’s exposure draft legislation said the FSCP would consider ASIC’s evidence and decide whether to impose an administrative sanction, infringement notice, both, or no action.

The panel would consist of at least two industry representatives and an ASIC staff member as chair.

The minister of the day would determine the people eligible to be appointed to an FSCP. A person, it said, needed experience or knowledge in at least one of the fields: business, company administration, financial markets, financial products and services, law, economics, accounting or taxation.

When ASIC convened an FSCP, ASIC must appoint at least two members from this pool. An ASIC officer would be the chair of each FSCP.

Financial planners, financial advisers, and tax financial advisers who were authorised to provide personal advice to retail clients would be subject to the FSCP. People only providing general advice would not be subject to the panel.

Stockbrokers, actuaries, and insurers were all subject to disciplinary action by the FSCP if they were giving personal advice to retail clients.

“An Australian financial services (AFS) licence holder will only be subject to the FSCP where it is also a relevant provider and the breach relates to that person’s conduct as a financial planner or adviser. Otherwise, breaches by a licensee will continue to be dealt with by ASIC,” it said.

“The FSCP can impose a range of administrative sanctions, an infringement notice or recommend that ASIC commence court proceedings seeking a civil penalty.

“The administrative sanctions that the FSCP can apply are a warning or reprimand, directions to the adviser to undertake additional training or supervision, or suspending or cancelling the adviser’s registration for a specified period.”

The FSCP would also be able to improve an infringement notice in specific breaches carved out as Restricted Civil Penalty Provisions (RCPPs). These breaches included:

  • Not meeting the education and training standards;
  • Not complying with the code of the ethics;
  • Not meeting the requirements for supervising a provisional relevant providers;
  • Not following a direction or order given by the Financial Services and Credit Panel; and
  • Giving financial advice while unregistered.

Currently, an infringement notice amount for an alleged contravention of a RCPP was 12 penalty units for a single contravention, which was $2,664.

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...

6 days 19 hours 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...

6 days 20 hours 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 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 1 week 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 1 week ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND