ASIC clarifies IFA definitions, extends SoA deadlineBY JAMIE WILLIAMSON | TUESDAY, 27 JUN 2017 12:01PMASIC has stated its position on the use of restricted terms relating to the independence of financial advisers. Related News |
Editor's Choice
Janus Henderson acquires NBK Wealth, Tabula Investment Management
Janus Henderson has acquired the wealth management arm of the National Bank of Kuwait, NBK Wealth, as well as European ETF provider, Tabula Investment Management.
ART names advice and education leads
Australian Retirement Trust (ART) has revamped its advice, guidance and education team and created two new leadership roles.
Men, women in same occupation drive pay gap
A whopping 80% of the gender pay gap can be attributed to women being paid less than men within the same occupation, a new economic analysis shows.
Macquarie Group profits falls 32% to $3.52bn
Macquarie Group has reported a net profit of $3.52 billion for the year ending 31 March 2024, a 32% decrease from the previous year.
Products
Featured Profile
Robert De Dominicis
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
GBST HOLDINGS LIMITED
GBST HOLDINGS LIMITED
It was during a family sojourn to the seaside town of Pescara, Italy, Rob DeDominicis first laid eyes on what would become the harbinger of his future. Andrew McKean writes.
Seriously? So if I own my business and I'm not owned by a financial service product provider nor am I owned by a vertically integrated business but I receive commissions, then I am in breach of the Act.
Please can someone explain in plain english how the receipt of a commission then makes my business aligned and or not independently owned.
All this info is in our FSG. How is it misleading?
ASIC want a clear definition of what independent means. Try this: If you receive revenues other than client fees you are conflicted or could be seen as conflicted.
Why don't you just rebate any commissions you receive to the client? Many advisers are doing this now.
It's amazing, isn't it. If you are not institutionally owned you cannot say you are not institutionally owned because section 923A says you cannot use the words "independent, impartial or unbiased".
Does it follow that "institutionally owned" means you are dependent, partial and biased? I think it must.
I am staying out of it other than to advise all advisers to not poke the bear in the eye and to not use any potentially offensive words. There are plenty of other words to use, and life is too short to quibble.