In the first show of solidarity since the three bodies met formally in 2012, Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand, CPA Australia, and the Institute of Public Accountants have now reforged the joint accounting bodies alliance, calling for a more efficient regulatory framework for advisory services.
“The joint accounting bodies have come together today as we believe the time has come to re-examine the frameworks that regulate how financial and tax advice is provided in Australia,” said CA ANZ chief executive Rick Ellis.
“We are working together on a broader and more robust solution to the complexity of the current regulatory framework that will enable both businesses and Australians to not only access the advice they need but understand that advice.”
The tripartite lobbying effort comes as the bodies believe there is a ripe opportunity to persuade the government to listen because the industry is at the crossroads of change, with the review of the Tax Practitioners Board underway, the introduction of new education and professional standards under FASEA, and the fallout of the banking royal commission.
CPA Australia’s regulatory burden report has laid the groundwork, highlighting the onerous compliance obligations borne by public practitioners and the flow-on impact on consumers who face a dearth of accountants able to provide financial advice.
“Accounting professionals need the flexibility to talk and engage with their clients – but this is often problematic when that advice falls under multiple regulatory frameworks in the same conversation, or even the same sentence,” said CPA Australia chief executive Andrew Hunter.
The IPA’s chief executive Andrew Conway, who had previously led calls for a “new, extended accountants’ exemption”, said this combined lobbying effort was needed to address the failures of the Future of Financial Advice (FoFA) reforms.
“Our shared goal is to reduce the regulatory burden on our members, so we retain financial advisers in the industry. For the first time in the best part of two decades we are at risk of creating an advice gap in the market,” said Mr Conway.
“So rather than bringing back the limited accountants’ exemption, each of our accounting bodies in our consultation with our various members has shown that we need to review the regulatory frameworks.
“We have a clear focus to revisit definitions, licensing regimes, and to harmonise obligations when members operate under multiple regulatory frameworks to provide the one piece of advice.”
The joint accounting bodies are now seeking member feedback on client experiences to inform their solution to take to government.
“It (ASIC) also rejected the idea a higher quality of advice from TFAs or accountants was a reason to reintroduce the exemption.
“We (ASIC) note that through our work, we have not seen evidence that TFAs or accountants provide more compliant or better financial advice for consumers than other financial advisers and so do not believe that concessions from the financial advice regime for accountants can be justified on this basis,” (ASIC) said.”
Now we know why this mornings headlines read “Accounting bodies ‘drop’ the need for the reintroduction of the accountants exemption”. Seems ASIC disagreed with accountants that they provide better advice than Financial advisers….
Hi Accountants……Welcome to the world of financial planning
CPA Australia’s regulatory burden report highlights the onerous compliance obligations borne by public practitioners and the flow-on impact on consumers who face a dearth of accountants able to provide financial advice.
“Accounting professionals need the flexibility to talk and engage with their clients – but this is often problematic when that advice falls under multiple regulatory frameworks in the same conversation, or even the same sentence,” said CPA Australia chief executive Andrew Hunter.
Yeah, worked out so well with Alex Malley (The Naked CEO) last time. Why would anyone give CPA Australia another go at anything to do with advice even if it is only lobbying?
something the FPA, AFA and IAOFP have never done!
In the same way that CPA Australia saved all financial planners from having to do a Bachelor of Financial Planning, with their submission to FASEA, it’s admirable the way they lobby for their members. The Key difference is that these bodies don’t get payments from firms like Xero, or Class or whatever third party. They only get payments from their practicing Accountants, past members or students. It’s that steely eyed focus to put the interest of their members and their clients (Australians) first, that gets them the ear of Treasury. The issue with organizations like the FPA is the genuine conflict of interest they have, where that’s real or not, it’s all about PERCEPTION, the FPA clearly doesn’t know whether it should represent AMP or the AMP planner. This conflict, this lack of leadership has lead the FPA’s only achievement to be the ability to witness a Stat Dec. Are planners idiots? Just how much Government intervention are you prepared to accept for a tarnished CFP logo? Are you prepared to do the same old thing expecting the same result?