FASEA moves on planner designations

The Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) has opened the door for industry associations such as the Financial Planning Association (FPA) and the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) to apply for accreditation of their designations such as Certified Financial Planner (CFP).

In doing so, FASEA said approved designations would be worth up to two units credit with respect to graduate diplomas.

FASEA issued a formal notice today that it had sent notices to a number of industry associations informing them of the process to have the course content of their designations approved by the authority.

“Existing advisers who have completed approved coursework in relation to approved designations will be entitled to up to two units credit into the graduate diplomas contemplated by the Standards Authority’s new education framework for advisers,” the FASEA announcement said.

“FASEA encourages all financial services industry associations with a relevant professional designation program to submit their curriculum content for approval as soon as practicable by contacting [email protected]




What would be a whole lot more useful is a full list from FASEA of the 24 units required to be completed by a new University entrant wishing to commence education as a financial adviser (or wishing to transition out of say Finance & Accounting]. Until that is nailed to the wall, all of this is semantics, quite frankly.

Here's an example - https://www.open.edu.au/degreeguide/RMI-FIN-DEG-2018
FASEA has already published the subjects that have to be covered in an approved degree - https://www.fasea.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/FASEA-Education-Path...

Serious question, why would anyone bother to complete the CFP anymore? You do five units that count for two? You have to pay over $1,000 every year to keep the designation versus a degree that never expires? Does anyone outside of financial planning even understand what a CFP is?

Exactly right. My view entirely. Only an officially Govt recognised course is worth anything. What we really need to know is what the full 24 units that are required by a new University entrant wish to become a full Financial Adviser. The rest is semantics.

Bazinga! When will members wake up that post nominal designations are just about membership fees. No fees equates to no designations. Does the designations mean one is more professional, more ethical, more educated etc.?

I don't like having to pay for the designation on an ongoing basis, but clearly you have not completed the course. The FPA making money from it should not diminish the course itself - unless you never cared to look.
Now, I will have to pay more money to complete more courses - will this make me "more professional, more ethical, more educated etc"? No, it will not, but it will make people who have never been or seen a Financial Adviser who seem keen on making more and more rules (and compliance work) happy.

What should be disclosed is any kickbacks paid by the Universities to related industry bodies whose membership are forced to study with those Unis. Not happening? pull the other leg.

Add new comment