FOFA may force bank restructures

FOFA/financial-advice/financial-services-industry/storm-financial/parliamentary-joint-committee/government/

17 January 2012
| By Staff |
image
image
expand image

Yet another key industry group has described the Government's Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) bills as failing to reflect the original findings of the Parliamentary Joint Committee which followed the collapse of Storm Financial.

This time, the Australian Bankers' Association has used its submission to the PJC reviewing the FOFA bills to say it does not believe that the FOFA legislative package is aligned with the stated policy intent.

In particular, the ABA said it considered that applying aspects of the best interests duty and conflicted remuneration provisions to basic banking products was inconsistent with the policy announcements which had been made by the Minister for Financial Services, Bill Shorten.

It said on this basis, it was essential legislation changes were put in place "to target areas of concern without imposing unnecessary regulatory requirements and compliance burdens across the banking and financial services industry".

"The ABA believes that the scope of the FOFA legislative package has extended significantly beyond the initial stated policy intent, and consequently will result in a number of adverse and unintended consequences for banks and banking groups and their customers.

"Regulation should target identified market failures," the ABA submission said. "However, we are not aware of any identified market failures, consumer detriment or systemic concerns regarding practices by banks in the offer of basic banking products or the provision of general advice by bank staff.

"We consider that the legal risks, regulatory burdens and compliance costs that will be imposed on banks as a result of the broad scope of the FOFA legislative package are unnecessary and inappropriate," it said.

The ABA submission said the organisation believed the FOFA legislative package could have extensive implications for banks and banking groups where financial advice services were delivered via diverse corporate structures, internal licensee arrangements and business models.

"In the absence of clarifying and tightening the application of the proposed provisions, we consider that there could be significant adverse and unintended consequences for banking competition domestically and the contestability of the banking and financial services industry internationally," it said.

"We are concerned that the FOFA reforms could result in banks having to substantially restructure their businesses in order to comply with the new law and/or significantly reduce choice for consumers and competition in the retail banking industry."

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?...

2 months 3 weeks ago

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

3 months ago

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

5 months ago

ASIC has suspended the Australian Financial Services Licence of a Melbourne-based financial advice firm....

2 weeks 3 days ago

The corporate regulator has issued infringement notices to three AFSLs whose financial advisers provided personal advice to a retail client while unregistered....

3 weeks 1 day ago

ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025, with 241 candidates attempting the test....

3 weeks 6 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Fund name
3y(%)pa
1
DomaCom DFS Mortgage
93.34 3 y p.a(%)
2
5
Plato Global Alpha A
28.73 3 y p.a(%)