Not all fin services companies need AFS licences: lawyer
Financial services firms concerned about compliance may be better off sharing a licence with other parts of the business, a specialist lawyer says.
While many businesses offering financial services may believe they need their own Australian Financial Services (AFS) licence, this is not necessarily the case, according to The Fold’s senior lawyer, Jaime Lumsden Kelly.
Firms can elect to each carry their own licence or choose one entity to hold the licence and appoint other parts of the business authorised representatives, she said.
“The thing to consider with (the latter) option is which company should hold the licence,” Lumsden Kelly says.
“A holding company that does not itself provide financial services may be a good choice, but it’s not the only alternative.
“When making a decision, you need to be mindful of the fact that the entity that holds the licence will need to undertake monthly cash flow forecasts. They also need to obtain all the authorisations needed for all the financial services offered throughout the group.”
Lumsden Kelly said AFS licences can be a complicated area and companies who are confused should seek legal advice.
Recommended for you
The Financial Advice Association Australia has implored advisers to reevaluate their exposure to AML/CTF obligations ahead of new reforms that will expand their compliance requirements significantly.
With UBS Asset Management chief executive, Alison Telfer, set to join Schroders, the firm has appointed a company veteran as her interim successor.
Compared to four years ago when the divide between boutique and large licensees were largely equal, adviser movements have seen this trend shift in light of new licensees commencing.
As ongoing market uncertainty sees advisers look beyond traditional equity exposure, Fidante has found adviser interest in small caps and emerging markets for portfolio returns has almost doubled since April.
