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
Start-ups, small businesses win CGT reform carveouts
Treasury has unveiled a package of capital gains tax (CGT) discount carveouts targeting small businesses, and start-ups and their investors following backlash since the reforms were announced in the Budget on May 12. Testamentary trusts will also be given a reprieve from the new tax regime.
Aware Super sells majority stake in water portfolio
Aware Super has sold a majority portion of its Australian water portfolio from the southern Murray-Darling Basin.
ASIC slaps adviser with 10-year ban, strips AFSL
ASIC has banned Brett Newbound of Victoria, a financial adviser and the sole director of Freedom Wealth Services, which has subsequently lost its AFSL.
ATO reveals highest paid jobs, postcodes
Victoria is home to Australia's highest earning postcode for the first time, according to newly released Australian Taxation Office (ATO) data, as taxable incomes, capital gains and superannuation balances continue to climb.
Products
Featured Profile

Brian Redican
CHIEF ECONOMIST
NEW SOUTH WALES TREASURY CORPORATION
NEW SOUTH WALES TREASURY CORPORATION
What makes an economist an economist? TCorp chief economist Brian Redican reflects on over three decades of navigating Australia's economic cycles. Riddhima Talwani 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.