In a submission to FASEA, the Financial Planning Association of Australia (FPA) is proposing one category of recognition for existing financial advisers who hold a degree which is not in financial planning and advice.
“Under this category the existing adviser must have completed a bachelor degree plus either a graduate diploma in financial planning, a certified financial planning program, an advanced diploma in financial planning or an eight-unit diploma in financial planning,” the FPA said in its submission.
In addition to this, the FPA proposes that all existing advisers complete an approved course that covers both the FASEA Code of Ethics and the legal obligations for financial advice, at an AQF7 level.
Under the current education pathways proposed by FASEA, an existing adviser with a related degree is only required to undertake a bridging course which comprises three subjects. Existing advisers with a related degree and a related post graduate degree only need to complete one subject. Accountants mostly fall into the related degree category.
Advisers with an unrelated degree, on the other hand, are required to undertake eight subjects as a graduate diploma.
Given that most accountants fall into this related degree category, according to Licensing for Accountants chief executive Kath Bowler, the FPA’s proposal would potentially see many accountants lumped with an extra five to seven units of study.
The FPA submission stated the proposal “removes reliance on the definition of related qualification, which makes it more equitable, fair, and understandable for all stakeholders, and recognises the broader benefit of tertiary education”.
“Recognition of education with learning outcomes specific to the provision of financial advice aligns with the legislative permission for FASEA to consider recognised prior learning and the key principle of providing consumers with confidence that all financial advisers have the appropriate and specific skills and knowledge needed to provide quality financial advice,” the submission said.
I think the change to ‘undergraduate degree’ rather than ‘related’ could potentially bring in more Advisers who, even though have some post graduate financial planning qualifications, don’t have a ‘related degree’ and hence a bigger (unnecessary) further study load under the FASEA proposed regime.
Accountants shouldn’t expect to be able to provide financial planning advice without having some qualification in it.
Even before FASEA, as a CPA, I was not qualified to provide financial advice despite my experience and had to complete a Graduate Diploma in Financial Planning. I also opted to complete the Financial Planning Specialist designation offered by CPA. CPA recognise further study is required as it is a different area of advice and this was before FASEA.
It is not a turf war, it is horses for courses.
This is perfectly reasonable.
If you want to work in “financial planning” which is a speciality field separate to accounting, and you have a specific “financial planning degree” of course you should get more recognition than any other degree including an accounting degree.
On the flipside, is the suggestion that a financial planning degree should have equal recognition to an accounting degree when working in accounting? Should financial planning degrees have equal recognition to accounting degrees for the purposes of Tax Agent registration and enrolment in CA and CPA programs?
Financial Planners are trying to protect their territory ! A desperate attempt for survival after Banking Royal Commission exposures !
Agree
This is looking less and less like making sensible changes to improve FP services to clients and more and more like a campaign to drive accountants and any competitors out of the space altogether.