FPA backs removal of stamping fees

Fees for financial planning services should be paid by clients, not by product providers and stamping fees do not promote clients understanding and comparing the fees they are paying, according to the Financial Planning Association (FPA).

In a submission to Treasury, the FPA said it supported the removal of the exemption that allows stamping fees on listed investments and, in doing so, drew parallels with the removal of commission arrangements for financial planners.

“All commissions on investment products have been trending down for FPA members for many years and now account for an average of just 7% of members’ remuneration. This figure will reduce to close to zero with the phasing out of grandfathered commissions by the end of 2020,” it said.

Related News:

“Stamping fees on listed investment entities make up a tiny proportion of commission revenue for financial planners overall. Removing the exemption for stamping fees would not have major consequences for the vast majority of financial planners,” the submission said.

It said that, as with all changes to allowable revenue, any decision to remove the exemption on stamping fees should be accompanied with appropriate transition timeframes.




Recommended for you

Author

Comments

Comments

"Fees for financial planning services should be paid by clients, not by product providers"
Not real sure that is the position of the FPA Mike. Be careful when you use the phrase "Financial Planning Services".. Service is in the eyes of ASIC very different. Intra Fund advice fees paid to employee staff or employed Financial Planners as a salary are paid by the trustee and come from the members account - no opt in, no FDS, no requirement to provide any Advice or Service. The "they" tell me it is a fee for Intra Fund Advice, which is not actually Advice, but a service for product advice. And Benjamin Marshan (Policy at the FPA) is all for it.

I support the removal of all bonuses for all Management within the FPA, the CEO is eligible for massive bonuses to add to his $420k+ base salary every year, maybe up to $75k on top of his salary, a total remuneration of $502,000 for 2019 which is up from $445,000 in 2018. The CEO of the FPA gets $57,000 pay rise in one year? And yet he sits postulating about removing more revenue streams for Financial Planners. Do the right thing Dante, remove your own conflicts of interest, your own conflicts of interest and stop taking home massive bonuses. It is hypocritical to judge Financial Planners (including members who pay fees) and stop them from receiving revenue streams. You didn't try and stop the Insurance commission reduction and you haven't stopped the legislative burden and all while you feather your own nest with a huge salary and massive bonuses......Financial Planners cannot receive bonuses so management of the FPA should not.

Well said and it sickens me to see an increase in salary with the FPA achieving nothing but financial damage to both advisers and customers. It just demonstrates the utter contempt that CEO's have for anything but lining their own pockets.

The FPA was never a thoughtful voice for our profession. Now they are proving they never will be.

Yet the FPA is happy to be paid for by product providers?? Total hypocrisy from an organisation totally out of touch.

Dante, as a CFP, are you abiding by the rules and not accepting gifts from Product Manufactures? I mean, a bottle of wine here, and another bottle of wine there, and suddenly, you have two similar gifts? Dinner from say AMP at the Opera House, and another elsewhere - and I wouldn't think there is CPD points with that. Perhaps Dante should drop his CFP as I can see the headline now - CFP accepting gifts from product provider.

The FPA still gets paid by product providers and calls it the Professional Partner Program. I don't see the difference. FPA members are a joke.

Add new comment