Update on FASEA code guidance on the wayBY ELIZABETH MCARTHUR | FRIDAY, 29 NOV 2019 2:42PMFinancial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority chief executive Stephen Glenfield has confirmed more guidance on the contested Code of Ethics is imminent. Related News |
Editor's Choice
ASIC flags gaps in super fund valuations
|ASIC has called for stronger scrutiny of unlisted investments after finding persistent weakness in how some superannuation funds and auditors assess asset valuations, raising concerns about the accuracy of members' retirement balances.
IMF sees inflation above RBA target through 2027
|The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has projected Australia's inflation to ease to 3.1% in 2027 from 3.9% this year, leaving it outside the Reserve Bank of Australia's (RBA) target range of 2% to 3%.
Treasury consults shifting tax debts from victims to abusers
|Treasury is consulting on extending the powers of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) to strengthen its response to financial abuse.
Former adviser defies permanent banning orders
|Former financial adviser Ezzat Daniel Nesseim has defied ASIC's permanent banning orders and is in the process of being prosecuted.
Further Reading
Products
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.







As a senior Financial Planner of 25 years in the game. I am very concerned about possible future interpretations of the Adviser Code of Ethics. We need a crystal clear code that is in unison with the law that is passed by parliament. I don't think that Glenfield's responses to questions are very helpful, as he seems to be saying that it all about the "Vibe" of the code....I think that the Ethics Code enforces are going to have a field day with this in the future.
De Gori's comments about only needing guidance if there is ambiguity in the code are partly correct. He's either not a lawyer?or being disingenuous. A court will always look at the terms of the Code as directed and look at the Guidance, and particularly the Values which are *paramount* (remember). The bulk of the terminology used including "conflict of interest" are already defined in the common law. So, the courts aren't just going to interpret the Code in any way they want. The Values and objectives are all consistent with basic fiduciary concepts, so the level of uncertainty is really not as claimed.
As for FASEA only creating the Code and not enforcing it, all I can say is, GOOD, that follows a constitutional principle called "separation of powers"! Hardly a criticism of FASEA.