In responses to questions on notice from the House economics committee, ASIC said the consultation paper, which was previously flagged by ASIC commissioner Danielle Press at the FSC’s Future of Advice Summit, would form part of its broader project on unmet advice needs and be released in the final quarter of 2020.
“Our first public output for the unmet advice needs project is a consultation paper, which seeks to gather information from industry participants (licensees and individual advisers) to help us understand what impediments [or] issues exist in relation to them providing limited and affordable personal advice to consumers,” the regulator said.
“Our focus is on what practical steps ASIC or the industry could take to promote limited and affordable advice.”
ASIC said its unmet advice needs project was “specifically seeking to address the concern that consumers may find it difficult to access affordable personal advice”.
“Through previous consumer research ASIC has undertaken, we know that consumers want access to ‘limited’ (‘single-issue’) and affordable personal advice,” the regulator said.
ASIC said while the legislative settings around the sector were the responsibility of government, the regulator was focused on “whether it can assist the industry [to] overcome some of the barriers it faces in providing good-quality ‘limited’ and affordable personal advice through actions within its regulatory purview”.
“For example, we are currently exploring matters such as whether further guidance or guidance in a different form would help the industry,” ASIC stated.
The regulator added that as part of the unmet advice needs project, it was also undertaking research to ascertain “the true cost of providing advice”.
The most effective thing that ASIC can do to reduce the cost of advice to Australian consumers it to admit failure and get out of the road. A profession, even an emerging profession, should be regulated by professionals who understand the matter at hand. Not by relentlessly inept bureaucrats – far less by those with such obvious integrity issues in the C Suite.
Just the same as a limited license is rubbish. Yet costs the same as a full licence? Anyone with such a license is doomed. I guess this is how ASIC intended things to play out: Be seen to be doing something, but actually give nothing!
Scaled advice is rubbish advice. For gods sake just give it UP ASIC. No adviser in his right mind can ignore important aspects of advice just because a client does not want to pay for it. Giving warnings and moving forwards regardless just undermines the integrity of the advice given in isolation. It is you ASIC that would be the first to beat advisers over the head for not considering all the aspects of the clients circumstances when things go wrong.