This comes after the drama of the January education deadline, with ASIC’s review commencing in February. It focused on financial advisers who did not have any qualifications or training courses marked as going toward meeting the qualifications standard.
Since 1 January 2019, financial advisers have been required to meet legislated professional standards, including completing an approved degree or equivalent qualification. Compliance requirements vary depending on an adviser’s individual circumstances.
ASIC said it is critical that information about each relevant provider is accurately recorded on the Financial Advisers Register (FAR). Approved degrees and equivalent qualifications are set out in the Corporations (Relevant Providers Degrees, Qualifications and Courses Standard) Determination 2021.
The review found that 132 existing providers who remained on the Financial Advisers Register had no qualifications or training courses recorded. In some cases, advisers had only listed the former FASEA exam as evidence of meeting the qualifications standard.
ASIC said it has conducted intervention actions with the 82 AFSLs representing the 132 advisers.
Breaking it down, the regulator said that:
- 106 RPs records on the FAR have been updated to reflect they meet the qualification standard, and
- 26 RPs have had their authorisations to give personal advice to retail clients on relevant financial products ceased.
The review found that most AFS licensees updated the Financial Advisers Register to record that their relevant providers had met the qualifications standard before the 1 January 2026 deadline.
However, ASIC reminded licensees that existing providers must still satisfy one of the approved qualification pathways to meet the standard.
These include holding an approved bachelor or higher degree (or equivalent qualification), meeting one of the existing provider pathways outlined in the Determination, or qualifying under the experienced provider pathway by making the required declaration to their AFS licensee and notifying ASIC.
ASIC has said this won’t be the end, stating it may undertake a further review looking at the details of the qualifications and training courses that AFS licensees have marked on the FAR as going toward meeting the qualifications standard for their relevant providers.
They emphasised that licensees and relevant providers should review the information recorded on the FAR in order to ensure it accurately reflects that they are meeting the qualification standards. In particular, they should:
- Check the financial adviser exam, also referred to as the FASEA exam, has not been incorrectly recorded as contributing towards meeting the qualifications standard.
- Ensure all qualifications or training courses that count towards meeting the qualifications standard have been correctly recorded, noting that listing only an ethics course is insufficient.
- Confirm a relevant provider is eligible to rely on the experienced provider pathway before lodging an experienced provider notification with ASIC.
“To assist AFS licensees and relevant providers, ASIC has made available a temporary dataset, which contains information about the qualifications and training courses that have been marked as going toward meeting the qualifications standard,” the regulator said.
“It is a serious offence to knowingly provide false or misleading information to ASIC, or to fail to take reasonable steps to ensure that information provided to ASIC is true and correct.”
