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
ASIC sues First Guardian-linked auditors
ASIC has commenced proceedings against Auditeo Australia and two auditors for their involvement in the First Guardian Master Fund failure.
Acclime acquires Melbourne's Polar 993
Acclime, a provider of corporate, governance, advisory and fund services across Asia Pacific and global markets, has signed an agreement to acquire the independent trustee and fund administration business from Melbourne.
Platforms are not solution providers: AZ NGA
AZ NGA group chief executive Paul Barrett warned platforms should stay in their lane rather than overstep to improve financial adviser productivity, reiterating that it is the advice business' responsibility to do so.
Nesta pulls $247m mandate from Northern Trust over climate stance
UK research and innovation foundation Nesta Trust has transferred £120 million ($247m) of assets from Northern Trust Asset Management to Amundi after the US manager withdrew from major global climate initiatives, highlighting the growing commercial consequences of fund managers stepping back from climate ...
Videos
Brought to you by ![]()
Further Reading
Products
Expert Feed
When geopolitics becomes a portfolio risk
Geopolitics is back - again - and Australian investors can no longer treat it as distant background noise.
Does association membership still matter?
With all the changes the advice sector has experienced in recent years, such as regulatory reform and increased education and professional standards ...
Digital assets and where they stand in 2026
So far in 2026 digital assets have captured the headlines largely for the wrong reasons, but that doesn't tell the full story.
Rethinking default design in a changing market environment
The evolution underway in the US DC system highlights the value of periodically reassessing default design assumptions.
Featured Profile
Hugh Killen
MANAGING DIRECTOR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
For Hugh Killen, several life lessons came from spending time on pastoral properties stretching across northern New South Wales and South-West Queensland.
The Financial Standard podcast Tune in each week as we discuss the latest developments in Australia's wealth management industry. |  |
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.