Grandfathering removal a policy 'black hole' says AFA

1 October 2019
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

There is a desperate need for certainty and guidance around the removal of grandfathered remuneration in circumstances where none of the submissions presented as part of the Government’s consultation process have been published, according to the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA).

What is more, the AFA has urged that implementation of the legislation be put on hold until the implications are fully known.

AFA general manager, policy and professionalism, Phil Anderson, said that there was a serious dearth of information available to the industry in circumstances where other than a recommendation from the Royal Commission and a few supporting statements, all the Government had delivered was a statement of intention and now the legislation.

“The consultation process has been limited to consideration of the draft legislation and, to the best of my understanding, there has been no formal consultation events,” Anderson said in an analysis published to members.

“It is now seven and a half months since the release of the Royal Commission final report and we still have nothing. There is no guidance and no consensus on what needs to be done.”

Anderson said that the Treasury had run a round of consultation on the draft grandfathered conflicted remuneration legislation that closed on 22 March, but six months later the submissions received by the Treasury had not been released despite the legislation passing the House of Representatives and sitting in the Senate.

“Surely the release of these submissions should assist the consultation process and inform the debate,” he said. “A further round of consultation occurred with respect to draft regulations, however submissions in response to this have not been published either.

“In the current information vacuum, product providers, licensees, fund managers and financial advisers are looking for guidance. The time has come for the Government, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and product provider organisations to deliver,” Anderson said.

“Face to face round table consultation and further research is essential to develop a detailed understanding of the complexity of the issue. The passing of this legislation should be put on hold whilst the work is done to understand the implications of this reform and to allow for sensible solutions to be developed. Otherwise this will inevitably go down in history as a policy disaster.”

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 6 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 7 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