Don’t be prescriptive on SMSF warnings, says FSC

FSC/SMSFs/ATO/ASIC/compliance/financial-services-council/australian-taxation-office/adviser/australian-securities-and-investments-commission/superannuation-industry/trustee/government/

25 November 2013
| By Staff |
image
image image
expand image

Advisers should warn their self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF) clients about the lack of compensation arrangements associated with this type of investment vehicle, but any prescriptive warnings should be avoided, according to the Financial Services Council (FSC).

In its submission to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC's) Consultation Paper 216 — Advice on SMSF: Specific disclosure requirements and SMSF costs — the FSC questioned whether multiple warnings in different formats using different wording on a variety of forms would be useful for the consumer.

The Council had noted the previous Government's proposal for the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) to include additional warnings that SMSF members are not eligible for compensation.

However, the submission questions ASIC's intention to consult on requiring advisers to warn the clients themselves.

"It is neither efficient nor sensible in requiring the client to sign off on the warning twice," the submission, written by FSC's senior policy manager Cecilia Storniolo, read.

The client is to sign off on the ATO Trustee Declaration form acknowledging the warning, it said.

"Further, an adviser has substantially enhanced conduct and disclosure obligations as a result of FOFA that compel [them] to have considered the client's needs and wants and provided advice that was in the best interests of the client, and that in documenting that advice, an adviser would not proceed to implement the advice they have provided the client until the client has understood the advice and authorised the adviser to proceed to implement the advice."

As such, the client will have been warned by the adviser and the client will have signed a document which contains the warning, the FSC said.

The Council is supportive of the adviser warning the client of the fact their prospective SMSF would not be protected by the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act compensation scheme.

"We are not supportive of prescriptive warnings nor of any additional and/or separate document (including disclosure inclusion in the Statement of Advice) to be signed by the client to confirm they have understood as being useful tools to aid consumer understanding."

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 4 days 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

AMP has settled on two court proceedings: one class action which affected superannuation members and a second regarding insurer policies. ...

4 days 8 hours ago

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

2 weeks 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. ...

3 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo