Regulation turning advisers into ‘admin assistants’

The Government needs to intervene to keep limited licensees in the industry and mounting regulation was turning advisers into “admin assistants with Government records”, according to AccountantsIQ founding director, Bronny Speed.

AccountsIQ helped set up limited licensees and also ran the Cram 4 Exam preparation course for the Financial Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) exam.

Speed said the fraction of revenue limited licensees made from holding a licence was not worth the cost and effort in the current regulatory environment, and there needed to be some form of Government intervention to keep limited licensees in the industry.

Related News:

“We need to have some form of recognition that accountants are highly-skilled and qualified to talk in the basics that a limited licensee used to be able to provide,” Speed said.

“There needs to be a change of Government policy and there needs to be recognition that FASEA and all the regulatory regime that’s come in post-Royal Commission is designed to account for those who are professional practitioners in financial advice, not for those who have an accounting business where they need a licence to be able to talk about a super contribution.”

Speed said more and more limited licensees would leave unless this was addressed, as well as the funding for levies which needed to include product issuers.

“Now financial advisers have to report on funds management products… can we please be careful that financial advisers aren’t just becoming admin assistants with Government records,” Speed said.

“Breach reporting, design and distribution obligations (DDO), it just goes on and on and when limited licensees are looking at all these new things, there’s no differentiation between a full licensee or a limited licensee.

“There’s a difference in revenue – that’s massive – there’s a difference in skill set and what you’re able to do.”

For limited licensees, Speed said the potential revenue was not worth the risk of having the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) looking through the business on the off-chance it found a breach.

“It leaves a massive hole for consumers, more and more highly-qualified people leaving the industry can’t talk about super yet we’ve more and more super ripped out of the system in the last 12 to 18 months,” Speed said.

“We have more and more people who want advice… and the result has been more and more people leaving and the cost of advice is going up and the advice gap is getting bigger.”

On the adviser exam, Speed – who had taken the exam in 2019 in addition to providing preparation courses – said it was an aptitude test to trick as opposed to straight-up testing of advisers’ knowledge.

“People are falling over and not passing because they’re not reading questions and they’re answering them by looking into them into too much detail without understanding the underlying methodology,” Speed said.

“There would be many people who failed who did the work and got the second-best answer as opposed to the best.”




Recommended for you

Author

Comments

Comments

hi, bronny,

have you read this?

https://www.accountantsdaily.com.au/business/16165-kpmg-fined-615k-over-...

highly skilled accountants who cheat on internal ethics tests and cannot pass what is a pretty extraordinarily simple ethics exam and education requirement from fasea.

qualified accountants (i am one) at most (those who hold a degree) only need to do an extra two or three subjects at most and pass the fasea exam.

please spare me about the accountants are highly skilled in the basics crap. if they were then they would easily pass the fasea test.

you can only have one type of professional providing financial advice, one who is appropriately qualified (not based on personal opinion on what constitutes qualified), licensed, and registered financial planners.

all others are excluded. period.

p.s any comment about the cheating? I think this is rife across the big 4, what about your professional body the ca anus any comments from them? or are they happy to be the lapdog of the big 4 sounds very much like the FPA and CBA

Bronny and all the other accountant licensees are fighting a losing battle to retain that business.

Accountants have learnt that they can give any super and investment advice they like without a licence, because ASIC is focused on persecuting licensed advisers rather than stopping unlicensed advice.

DDO obligation add nothing to the protection of retail clients. Advice provided under a financial services license already provides obligations for an adviser to recommend appropriate and well considered and researched products to their clients. Adding a new bureaucratic process that will again add to the cost of advice is tone deaf and insane in the current environment. Those in treasury and ASIC who think this is the way to go are so out of touch with what happens in the real world is hard to comprehend. DDO may be appropriate where products are sold direct or to through wholesale/sophisticated loop holes but are an expensive white elephant in the retail advice space. Yes again rushed legislation and failed regulation that will undoubtedly need to be amended adds cost and redtape and will drive more advice firms to the wall and leave more and more people without access to affordable advice for no tangible benefit.

Add new comment