Are APLs anti-competitive?

9 April 2018
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

Do approved product lists (APLs) pass the competition sniff test?

That is a question which has been posed within a report by the key Joint Parliamentary Committee on Corporations and Financial Services report on the Life Insurance Industry which has recommended that the issue be referred to both the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).

The committee wants the two regulators to “jointly investigate whether the past use of APLs in the life insurance industry breaches any anti-competitive laws they administer”.

The committee report said the report of the investigation should also inform the government whether the current legislation inappropriately constrains the capacity of ASIC or the ACCC to investigate anti-competitive behaviour in the financial services sector, including life insurance.

The importance of the committee report is that it has been tabled at the same time as the Productivity Commission (PC) continues its inquiry into Competition in the Australian Financial System a forum within which the Financial Services Council (FSC) has spelled out the relative virtues of APLs.

Discussing APLs in its follow-up submission to the PC, the FSC claimed advisers considered them to be “valuable tools in the advice process”.

“APLs serve as a risk management mechanism for both advisers and Licensees as research has already been conducted on the products on the APL to ensure they are suitable for the Licensee’s clients,” the FSC submission said. “APLs offer cost savings for Licensees and efficiencies to advisers, providing them with comfort that the products on the APL have been reviewed and approved by the Licensee’s own internal governance.”

It said the value of APLs had also been recognised outside the industry “in that often, professional indemnity insurance cover can be voided if the adviser makes a recommendation outside the APL and does not obtain the Licensee’s prior approval”.

“APLs for investment products can be particularly helpful in ensuring advisers do not recommend complex, high-risk investments to retail clients whose risk appetites are not aggressive. APLs are used by advice licensees and advisers selling life insurance to maintain a list of life insurance products that they have available to sell. APLs are also used for providing financial advice.”

The FSC’s rosy view of APLs needs to be contrasted with the somewhat cynical view of the Parliamentary committee, with its chairman, West Australian Liberal, Steve Irons writing in his overview that “the way that APLs are currently constructed can lack transparency and generate conflicts of interest that lead to selling life insurance on the basis of misleading advice that herds customers to products from insurers that pay the most to be on the APL”.

“The committee is not convinced that the draft APL Standard being proposed by the Financial Services Council will adequately address the full range of concerns identified by this inquiry,” Irons wrote. “The committee is therefore recommending that the life insurance industry should have, as a matter of urgency, a balance of affiliated and non-affiliated products on their APLs, and if affiliated products are recommended, the affiliation should be disclosed, and the customer should be offered a comparison with non-affiliated products.

Beyond this, the committee further recommends that the industry transition to open APLs.”

It will be up to the Government to determine what elements of the committee’s recommendations it adopts, but for a Government behind in the polls and with the Royal Commission currently underway, political expediency suggests it would not stand in the way of reviews by ASIC and the ACCC.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

1 week ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

1 week ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week 1 day ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

9 months 1 week ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

9 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

9 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND