Material differences between FOFA policy and delivery
The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) has pointed to the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) process as containing "material differences between some policy announcements and the draft legislation".
In a submission filed with the Senate Economics Committee reviewing the bills, ASFA has supported the need for a transition period for implementing the legislation on the basis that "even at the best of times it is a considerable risk to authorise the expenditure of resources based on draft legislation".
"In the context of FOFA, where there have been material differences between some policy announcements and the draft legislation, it is even riskier," the submission said.
"Decision makers committing significant financial and other resources to implementing change of this complexity and scale deserve legislative certainty," it said.
ASFA pointed to the two-year transition period allowed with respect to the Financial Services Reform Act and the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act.
It said it would support the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's stated intention to adopt an approach of "facilitated implementation" during a transition period of 12 months from 1 July, this year.
Elsewhere in its submission, ASFA has backed other financial services industry players in calling for amendments to the legislation to enable financial advisers to deliver scaled advice.
It said the bill should be amended to enable the client and the financial adviser jointly to determine the subject matter of the advice.
Recommended for you
The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has lowered rates to a level not seen since mid-2023.
Financial Services Minister Stephen Jones has shared further details on the second tranche of the Delivering Better Financial Outcomes reforms including modernising best interests duty and reforming Statements of Advice.
The Federal Court has found a company director guilty of operating unregistered managed investment schemes and carrying on a financial services business without holding an AFSL.
The Governance Institute has said ASIC’s governance arrangements are no longer “fit for purpose” in a time when financial markets are quickly innovating and cyber crime becomes a threat.
