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
Sequoia gives InterPrac sale a second shot
Sequoia is trying its hand at selling InterPrac Financial Planning again after its first sale attempt to Conquest Investment Management was left in the air.
American Century names APAC managing director
The new managing director will be based in Sydney and joins American Century from Dimensional Fund Advisors.
CSC tests waters on digital assets with Northern Trust
Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation, the super fund for public servants and the defence force, has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Northern Trust to advance digital investment infrastructure across institutional markets.
Vanguard adds floating rate ETF, managed fund to product suite
Vanguard has launched an Australian floating rate bond index strategy, available through both an ETF and a managed fund format.
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
Liza McDonald
HEAD OF RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT
AWARE SUPER
AWARE SUPER
Liza McDonald would have you believe her path from a legal secretary to the head of responsible investment at Aware Super was a matter of good fortune. Her career says otherwise. Riddhima Talwani writes.
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.