Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo
 
 

FPA submission urges greater differentiation

FPA/financial-planning/FOFA/financial-advice/retail-investors/

8 April 2014
| By Staff |
image
image image
expand image

The Financial Planning Association (FPA) has used its submission to the Financial Systems Inquiry to argue for greater differentiation between general and personal advice. 

The submission, released by the FPA today, claims the current framing of 'general advice’ versus personal advice exposes investors to undue risk, with respect to the regulation of financial advice. 

“Many retail investors are not able to distinguish between general and personal advice and are at risk of making inappropriate financial decisions for their specific circumstances as a result,” the submission said. “A review of the general/personal advice definitions, and the risks these definitions pose to consumers, should therefore be considered as part of the Inquiry.” 

The FPA submission also calls for institutions and product manufacturers to be seen as intermediaries and therefore be obliged to adhere to similar obligations. 

“The concept of a 'gatekeeper’ in financial services has evolved in the last 30 years to describe the obligations of a financial intermediary whose purpose is to protect against misconduct by another party,” it said. “To function effectively in this role, gatekeepers are understood to possess reputational capital as a result of their position of trust, and lose that capital if they engage in misconduct themselves. 

“Several professions, such as auditors and lawyers, have already been described as gatekeepers in so far as their interactions with financial systems are concerned, and we believe that it is a useful concept to describe how professionalism should work in financial services. 

“For the financial system to operate effectively, product issuers must be seen as intermediaries and adhere to similar consumer and system-oriented obligations and values as those that currently apply to other market participants,” the submission said. 

“Product issuers should not be treated as outside this intermediary function. All participants must comply with the same type of obligations, otherwise the financial system will fall apart. This includes responsibilities to both financial citizens and to uphold the integrity of the financial system itself.”

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 1 day 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

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

1 week 4 days 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. ...

2 weeks 4 days ago

While the profession continues to see consolidation at the top, Adviser Ratings has compared the business models of Insignia and Entireti and how they are shaping the pro...

2 weeks 6 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND