TPB signals embrace of FASEA CPD cross-over

The Tax Practitioners Board (TPB) has confirmed it is considering increasing the minimum number of continuing professional education (CPE) hours required for all tax practitioners to 40 hours a year – something which would bring it into line with the continuing professional development policy of the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA).

The TPB made its intention clear in a discussion paper issued this week, indicating any changes would be staged over time.

The TPB said it had received a range of views including that “the requirements for tax (financial) advisers should more closely align with FASEA requirements” and that “the TPB should adopt a position that compliance with FASEA’s CPD requirements automatically satisfies the TPB’s CPE requirements for tax (financial advisers)”.

Related News:

Importantly, the current TPB CPE requirements require tax (financial) advisers to undertake a minimum of 60 hours over a three-year period, or seven hours a year.

The TPB signalled it intended to further clarify that a tax (financial) adviser who met FASEA’s CPD requirements was also likely to meet the TPB’s CPE requirements.

“The TPB also proposes that completion of a course by a tax (financial) adviser to satisfy FASEA requirements, in order to continue to operate as a financial adviser, can count toward the TPB’s CPE requirements (if it is relevant to the tax (financial) advice service being provided),” it said.

“For clarity, courses completed for the purpose of initial registration with the TPB cannot be counted toward the TPB’s CPE requirements, consistent with the TPB’s current approach for all tax practitioners.”

Recommended for you




Why hasn't Hume or Frydenberg told the TPB to "[email protected]#$k right off out of financial advice" yet?

Financial advice is chronically over regulated and as a result it is becoming much harder for consumers to access affordable, professional advice. The TPB is one regulator that adds no incremental value whatsoever in the financial advice space. They just add cost and complexity. They should stick to their core role of regulating tax agents and leave financial advice regulation to ASIC, AFCA, FASEA, AUSTRAC, OAIC etc.

The TPB should be looking at other professions if they wish to tweak their CPD guidelines. The FASEA CPD requirements are hardly the gold standard. We have an ethics course flogger and other conflicted university representatives on the board, who have set the number of hours 25% higher than medical specialists and a ridiculous 9 hours which must be spent on ethics for god-sake! On top of that, they haven't properly engaged with the profession and we haven't even seen how this will play out in practice. So if the TPB is considering aligning their CPD with that of FASEA, it is quite concerning.

Very sad news this week of an Ethics Course lecturer charged with 6 counts of sexual penetration of a 16 yr old girl. As i have been saying for years now, being taught "ethics" doesn't make you ethical. A lot of this "education" is very questionable.

I received the latest newsletter from the TPB. It was nothing to do with financial planning. I asked a question about a client engagement letter they suggested all tax agents use, I asked if they had asked my dealership first as we cant just use these compliance things without sign off. No answer. So I think again , why are we paying these guys? Its third line forcing saying we need to be a member of the TPB or we don't get paid. Fees for no service, yes its ok when its done to planners. Please TPB, take your claws out of us, and go look after accountants and bookkeepers.

Add new comment