A joint paper compiled by consultancy firm Licensing for Accountants and law firm Holley Nethercote stated that the ASIC funding model is based on the number of people included in the financial adviser register, which assumes that each person requires a similar amount of regulation.
“Limited licensing, by its very nature, is limited because those that provide financial services under their limited licence are also accountants with many other roles,” the paper explained.
Often an accountant will only spend 5 per cent of their time providing financial services under their limited licence, it said, with the remaining time spent providing tax advice.
“The funding model seems unfair for the majority of accountants who operate in this way. Instead, a ‘per office’ and usage metric should be factored into the funding model,” the paper said.
It also proposed that advisers who are subject to investigation by ASIC should be compelled to fund the costs of the investigation, such as in the NSG case, pursuant to s91 of the ASIC Act 2001 and INFO SHEET 204.
“Any such payment should reduce the overall cost that is used to calculate the per-adviser cost at the end of each financial year,” the paper stated.
Don’t get a license.
ASIC are clearly not upholding the requirement to have a license. The overlap between planning and accounting is too confusing for them. As long as you’re giving good advice and not ripping clients off then the worst case is you’ll be told to go get one, or refer to a planner. ASIC don’t seem to be policing the good guys.
It’s like driving. So long as you’re a good driver it doesn’t matter if you have a license right?
Would have thought the most risky advisers are those weekend warriors working 5pc of their time on advice. Accountants have already shown a lack of understanding around Corps Act requirements why should they be offered a discount?
As well, any sound adviser will be aware financial product advice is generally only a small portion of any advice role…
Sorry, I can’t agree with this logic. What if someone is also a mortgage broker? Or a lawyer? Or they only work 2 days a week? Or they spent 3 months of the year travelling overseas? Should we all be completing time sheets?
And what about the full time advisers who operate under a limited license?