Planners snub CFP proposal

insurance/certified-financial-planner/financial-planning-industry/CFP/

22 June 2000
| By Jason |

A proposal for a separate non-practitioner Certified Financial Planner (CFP) mark has been de-feated by strong opposition from elements within the US financial planning industry.

A proposal for a separate non-practitioner Certified Financial Planner (CFP) mark has been de-feated by strong opposition from elements within the US financial planning industry.

Vocal opposition by high profile planning figures in the US defeated the proposal by the CFP Board of Governors to introduce a CFP Practitioner with a capital “P” to indicate a planner was currently in practice. Lower case “p” CFP practitioners would then be those who held the mark but were not working as advisers.

Opponents of the new mark believe the name could have potentially divided the quality of CFPs in the minds of consumers even though the mark would not require any fundamental difference in qualifications.

"The CFP Practitioner is not an area of specialisation, it is at best a duplication of what CFP is. They claim it will identify the CFP who is ‘in practice,’ but that person is already so identified in that they deal with customers or they don't," says League Financial & Insurance Services princi-pal Paul League.

CFP Board of Governors chair Patricia Houlihan says the distinction with the "CFP Practitioner" mark was only one of semantics and the difference was for the benefit of consumers. Non-practitioners would be left alone to pursue their chosen fields without any further distinction.

The mark would require the same educational, ethical and practice standards and would not be policed by the Board.

The Board was required to meet a June filing deadline proving that it had used the mark in print and promotional materials and Houlihan says the use of the mark in advertisements was a way to hold onto it should the Board proceed with the June filing.

Critics say they were surprised to see "CFP Practitioner" appear as a trademark name which be-gan the questioning of the Board’s motivations.

Rejection of the new mark follows rejection of the Associate CFP mark in December last year. This mark was intended to be applied to planners coming from non-planning backgrounds but was widely felt by opponents as diminishing the strength of the CFP designation.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

1 week 4 days ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

1 month ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month 1 week ago

AMP has settled on two court proceedings: one class action which affected superannuation members and a second regarding insurer policies. ...

4 days 2 hours ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

2 weeks ago

The inquiry into the collapse of Dixon Advisory and broader wealth management companies by the Senate economics references committee will not be re-adopted. ...

3 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo