FPA supports ASIC independence definitionBY KARREN VERGARA | FRIDAY, 30 JUN 2017 12:47PMThe Financial Planning Association of Australia is voicing its support for ASIC's definitions on independent financial advice. Related News |
Editor's Choice
MLC AM targets EM strategy with fresh mandate
MLC Asset Management has selected a global investment manager to leverage its 16-year-old emerging markets strategy.
Digital assets on the right path: Industry
Digital asset providers have evaluated the October deadline and ASIC's consultation on the looming digital asset laws and determined that these developments mark a pivotal point on the sector's implementation journey.
NCAs unlikely to solve retirement advice gap: HUB24, CFS
HUB24 and Colonial First State (CFS) say the New Class of Advisers (NCA) will unlikely solve the retirement advice gap Australians face, noting the focus needs to be on helping reduce friction for those with complex advice needs.
AustralianSuper rolls out new investment data platform
AustralianSuper has implemented a new investment data platform designed to improve portfolio oversight, risk management and decision-making as the superannuation fund expands its global operations.
Further Reading
Products
Expert Feed
Featured Profile

David Sharpe
CHAIRMAN
FINANCIAL ADVICE ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIA
FINANCIAL ADVICE ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIA
A family man, business owner, cricket fanatic and financial adviser, David Sharpe has many facets. One of his biggest legacies, as he steps down as chair of the Financial Advice Association Australia, is leaving the profession stronger than he found it.







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?