No matter what ASIC would like the terms to mean, "non-aligned" and "non-institutionally owned" are statements of fact, not subject to interpretation. Worse still, ASIC has suggested that they will police the use of "similar terms". So, where's the line? Is "privately owned" off limits too?

I would love to see a prosecution of use of the terms survive a legal challenge.

By all means, anyone with a vested interest in a transaction should have to declare such, but there are more than two licensee models in the marketplace. Lumping all other than those with a pure fee-only offer into the same category as internal bank run houses does not serve the interests of the consumer. It DOES, interestingly, suit the big institutions quite nicely. Coincidence?

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.