Speaking at the FSC Summit 2018, Department of Treasury division head for retirement income policy Robert Jeremenko said comprehensive income products for retirement (CIPRs) should be designed so clients won’t need advice to use them.
“The government wants to establish this in a way that the offer of a CIPR would not be financial advice, so that means we need to look at what the definition of intra-fund advice is going forward to accommodate that,” he said.
“In and of itself, the offer of a CIPR is not financial advice.”
Consequentially, Mr Jeremenko said government would not be mandating that clients seek advice prior to their decision to take up a CIPR.
“The whole idea is to make sure they are provided with the right amount of guidance to members and retirees such that they may not need to take financial advice; they can choose too but we don’t want to mandate financial advice within the taking up of a CIPR.”
Rice Warner expressed concern last month over the “structure and implementation of the proposed CIPRs framework”, cautioning that the recommendation of CIPR products should fall under the AFSL regime and not be left to intra-fund advisers.
“We are supportive of increased member engagement to assist members to better understand how they can meet their financial goals in retirement, however, we are concerned that the paper states that trustees could provide this guidance without financial advice,” the company said.
BWAHAHAHAHA!……Oh wait….this isn’t a joke.
I agree , income steams, super , insurance has so much fine print no one reads it nor understand page 62 on the PDS anyhow , lets make all products adviser free ……… but what would an industry employing 30,000 plus do then ? also what would the lawyers or FOS or ASIC do ?…..
and who’s [b]Best Interest[/b] is being looked after here. Pretty sure the ISA will create and offer theses shortly to have a piece of the action…
Well Gov’t you better give Scotty ‘no shoes” Pape a call and get him to put it in his book! Fu*k me, what is happening here!
OK so some basic intra fund advice that is not advice but sort of advice is going to educate a retiree about locking up some or all of their retirement savings for ever into a Lifetime Income product.
Zero access to capital and who knows what will be paid out on death ?
And that is going to be provided by a desk jockey beginner adviser (with a brand new FASEA degree and no experience) with zero direct client contact, just over the phone.
These products are going to be some of the most complicated products available to retirees and Treasury somehow thinks they will not be requiring AFSL advice.
[b]Treasury & ODwyer – you lot are simply beyond help. [/b]
First you butcher the biggest changes to super in 10 years because you didn’t consult the industry and we now have Over Complicated ODwyer Super to live with, massive red tape, extra admin and costs.
Now you want to force the majority of retirees into a Lifetime locked up product with no real advice.
[b]If it wasn’t so serious it would be hysterical. [/b]
This is a disgrace.
There is an agenda here that has been in train for some time and that is cutting the adviser out of the advice process.
This about MySuper ( where an individuals who had $400,000 in a superannuation default investment option was automatically deemed ” disengaged ” even though they received ongoing reviews, updates and advice and transferred to a MySuper account) and now CIPR for retirees not being deemed advice.
The more Treasury and ASIC start to get the idea that they are in fact NOT the legislators, the better off this whole space will be.
There is a blatantly obvious push for a nationalisation of financial advice and a ” mothering ” approach to the Govt thinking they need to take over because people cant take care of themselves.
Looove it. So Treasury is saying that this product WILL MEET USER EXPECTATIONS. Guaranteed, no questions asked. If it doesn’t, WILL THE LEGISLATORS TAKE RESPONSIBILITY THEN? (Unlikely) What about the PRODUCT PROVIDERS? (Hold on their job is to issue the product, not to customise it – that’s advice right?)
This has made my morning (LOL). I’d love to see which politician is going to fall into this trap. Either that, or it falls quietly by the wayside.
Bloody clueless.
WOW, just WOW.
Why not have clients do everything directly without advice as tax, centrelink and estate planning aren’t considerations.
Sufferin’ succotash. I have about as much regard for what Rice Warner say as I would have for an opinion from Warner Bros on financial advice and product issues.