X
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact
Get the latest news! Subscribe to the SMSF Adviser bulletin
  • News
    • Money
    • Education
    • Strategy
  • Webcasts
  • Features
  • Events
  • Podcasts
  • Promoted Content
No Results
View All Results
  • News
    • Money
    • Education
    • Strategy
  • Webcasts
  • Features
  • Events
  • Podcasts
  • Promoted Content
No Results
View All Results
Home News

CPA Australia pushes for rethink of ASIC funding model

CPA Australia has called for changes to ASIC’s full cost recovery model, noting it is greatly impacting on the supply of SMSF auditors, financial advisers and insolvency practitioners.

by Tony Zhang
February 9, 2021
in News
Reading Time: 3 mins read
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

In its pre-budget submission, CPA Australia has urged the government to move away from the full cost recovery funding model for ASIC’s regulatory fees and instead implement a partial cost recovery model.

The accounting body stated that the government should reduce or preferably remove fees imposed under ASIC’s industry funding model, including fees imposed on Australian financial services license holders and self-managed superannuation fund auditors.

X

The government should also remove duplicated fees where service providers provide advice or services that fall under multiple regulatory regimes, such as financial advisers paying fees to ASIC and the Tax Practitioners Board.

CPA Australia stated that it does not support the full cost recovery model of the ASIC industry funding arrangement and has previously recommended that the government instead explore a partial cost recovery model.  

“Given the current pandemic, the full cost recovery model fails to recognise the impact on the financial viability of those that need to pay the charges, particularly small businesses, its negative impact on the supply of industry participants such as insolvency practitioners, SMSF auditors and financial advisers,” CPA Australia stated.

CPA Australia said that this would then have “a cumulative effect of other compliance requirements on those having to pay fees”.

“Alternatively, the government could consider modifications to its full cost recovery model. For example, should penalties and fees be used to offset costs?” CPA Australia said.

CPA Australia also said that regulatory complexity is placing a significant burden on accountants in public practice, which has flow-on effects to the community.

This also aligns with recent calls from major industry bodies which have flagged the need for reform for the financial advice framework ahead of this year’s budget.

“The complex, multi-layered nature of Australia’s current regulatory environment, especially the regulation of financial planning advice, is alienating many consumers and small business — the very people it is seeking to serve — while placing substantial strain on accountants in practice who operate under these regimes,” CPA Australia stated.

“For example, in relation to financial advice, advisers must currently comply with the Corporations Act, the Tax Agent Services Act, and the National Consumer Credit Protection Act, in addition to obligations imposed under the ASIC Act and the Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA), among others (noting the government’s recent announcement of the wind-up of FASEA).”

CPA Australia pointed to findings that found almost 90 per cent of accountants in practice believe the compliance burden of differing legislative frameworks is a concern, with less than a quarter saying that they have a clear understanding of their obligations.

“Further, regulatory complexity increases the costs many Australians pay each year to access the services of accountants, with almost 50 per cent of practitioners stating that they increased fees in the previous year to cover increasing compliance costs,” CPA Australia said.

“The impact of this structural adjustment is a growing advice gap, which disadvantages those who need financial advice in a world of increasing complexity and with an ageing population. A holistic review of financial regulatory frameworks is urgently required.”

Tags: AccountingAdviceNewsRegulation

Related Posts

ATO data set suggests Div 296 not the narrow tax it’s being sold as: auditor

by Keeli Cambourne
December 17, 2025

Naz Randeria, director of Reliance Auditing Services, said Div 296 “crosses a line” that superannuation policy has never crossed before....

Concern over reports SMSFs may be included in CSLR levy in 2027

by Keeli Cambourne
December 17, 2025

Natasha Panagis, head of technical services for the Institute of Financial Professionals Australia, said the association welcomed the government’s confirmation...

New CEO appointed to SuperConcepts board

by Keeli Cambourne
December 17, 2025

Andrew Row will take up the position following previous roles in the SMSF industry including managing director of Cavendish Superannuation,...

Comments 3

  1. Anonymous says:
    5 years ago

    As a sole practitioner my ASIC levy is close to $2,500 on top of fees to my licensee, further education and the costs of running my business. Does the government want to reduce the number planners and advisers so there is no advice business? Changes need to be made soon before we all go out of business.

    Reply
  2. Corrupt ASIC says:
    5 years ago

    What come on it’s so great paying for our own ASIC Compliance Death Squad that are killing Adviser with mass STRANGULATION BY BS REGULATION.
    – Don’t we all love paying for Master Shiptons $128,000 Personal Tax Advice Bill.
    – Don’t we all love paying for ASIC Fraudulent SMSF BS Cost Fact Sheet – that was complete lies to denigrate SMSF and promote ASICs best Buddies Industry Super. And ASIC wont publish a corrected SMSF Fact Sheet.
    – Don’t we all love paying for ASIC’s Twice Failed legal case & costs in Wagyu and Shiraz borrowing calamity.
    – Don’t we all love paying for ASIC’s massive Commissioner Wages, now way above Public service rates.
    – Don’t we all love paying for ASIC’s pathetic past of letting banks get away with 10 years of Fees for No Service and the banks run away from Advice post RC but Real Adviser’s left get to pay the massively cost increases.
    WHAT AN ABSOLUTE JOKE ASIC AND THIS GOVERNMENT ARE.
    THANKS FOR WONDERFUL ASIC ADVISER PAY MODEL O’DWYER & FRYDENBURG !!!!!!

    Reply
  3. Cancelled says:
    5 years ago

    I spent thousands to comply and obtain an AFSL licence as an accountant in practice. Then copped a yearly fee as though I was running a financial planning firm. I cancelled my AFSL and nothing is different in my life. I have no idea why I bothered in the first place.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Join our newsletter

View our privacy policy, collection notice and terms and conditions to understand how we use your personal information.
SMSF Adviser is the authoritative source of news, opinions and market intelligence for Australia’s SMSF sector. The SMSF sector now represents more than one million members and approximately one third of Australia's superannuation savings. Over the past five years the number of SMSF members has increased by close to 30 per cent, highlighting the opportunity for engaged, informed and driven professionals to build successful SMSF advice business.

Subscribe to our newsletter

View our privacy policy, collection notice and terms and conditions to understand how we use your personal information.

About Us

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Collection Notice
  • Privacy Policy

Popular Topics

  • News
  • Strategy
  • Money
  • Podcasts
  • Promoted Content
  • Feature Articles
  • Education
  • Video

© 2025 All Rights Reserved. All content published on this site is the property of Prime Creative Media. Unauthorised reproduction is prohibited

No Results
View All Results
NEWSLETTER
  • News
  • Money
  • Education
  • Strategy
  • Webcasts
  • Features
  • Events
  • Podcasts
  • Promoted Content
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

© 2025 All Rights Reserved. All content published on this site is the property of Prime Creative Media. Unauthorised reproduction is prohibited