Tax advisers held to higher standard with client data

financial-advice/financial-planning/tax-advice/Tax-Practitioners-Board/TPB/Code-of-Conduct/privacy-act/data-protection/

15 May 2019
| By Hannah Wootton |
image
image
expand image

Registered tax advisers are held to a higher standard than other financial planners when disclosing clients’ information to third parties, with the Tax Practitioners Board’s (TPB) Code of Conduct imposing more stringent requirements even than the Privacy Act.

According to the Fold Legal associate, Chris Deeble, this difference came down to registered tax (financial) advisers holding highly confidential information for their clients, with the rigorous disclosure obligations in the TPB Code recognising that their clients had a strong interest in ensuring their information remained confidential.

Deeble believed that financial advisers broadly could benefit from considering the Code’s standards, however: “The TPB Code standard is helpful for any professionals who hold personal, legal or financial information for their clients,” he said.

“If you’re a registered tax (financial) adviser or hold confidential client information, it’s a good idea to review your disclosure and consent processes and documents to make sure you meet your obligations.”

The difference between the Code and the laxer privacy legislation were threefold. To start, the TPB Code extended to cover all client information for example, whereas the Privacy Act extended only to personal information.

Privacy law also only required a client’s consent if advisers were disclosing secondary information or personal information for a secondary purpose, while the Code required it for any disclosure to third parties. What could qualify as a third party was extensive – storing client data in the cloud, or entering client contact details into MailChimp, would both require disclosure under the Code.

Finally, the TPB Code also required that clients actively consent to the disclosure of their information. The Privacy Act, in contrast, only required that advisers notify their clients on how their information would be used, with implied consent even proving permissible in some situations.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

4 months 1 week ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

4 months 2 weeks ago

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

6 months 2 weeks ago

Commonwealth Bank has formally dropped to zero advisers following LGT Crestone’s acquisition of its advice arm – some six years on from the Hayne royal commission. ...

1 week 3 days ago

ASIC has banned a former NSW adviser from providing advice for 10 years for investing at least $14.8 million into a cryptocurrency-based scam. ...

4 days ago

ASIC has cancelled the AFSL of an advice firm associated with Shield and First Guardian collapses, and permanently banned its responsible manager. ...

2 days 21 hours ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Fund name
3y(%)pa
1
DomaCom DFS Mortgage
92.15 3 y p.a(%)
3