ASIC has reminded advice firms under its regulation to provide accurate business activity metrics through its regulatory portal by 27 September after it sent a letter out in July.
It said failing to submit metrics by the deadline or submitting inaccurate metrics will involve penalties.
For example, a shortfall penalty will apply if a person makes a false or misleading statement (including through omission) that results in a smaller levy being paid than should be the case.
In such cases, the penalty will be equal to twice the amount of the shortfall between the amount paid and the levy that should be payable.
As for the late payment of levies to ASIC, the penalty will be calculated monthly as 20 per cent per annum of the outstanding amount and charged monthly.
ASIC commissioner Cathie Armour said that entities that have the letter from ASIC should act now and follow the simple steps outlined to complete the process.
“Entities that do not have their letter should refer to our website … to find out what they need to do by 27 September,” Ms Armour said.
“We appreciate that this is an entirely new funding model for all involved – and our focus is on ensuring people know what they need to do.”
After the September deadline passes, ASIC will publish its Cost Recovery Implementation Statement for 2018-19.
Then in January 2019, ASIC will issue its first levy notices to industry for 2017-18, with entities given until February to pay or “face interest penalties”. From March 2019, the regulator will begin pursuing late payments.
The government passed the bill to shift ASIC funding to a ‘fees-for-service’ model in late June.
I’m looking forward to getting my annual FDS from ASIC. Can’t wait to see what services they claim to be providing.
Ms. Armour quote, “Entities that do not have their letter should refer to our website … to find out what they need to do by 27 September,”
So, if they are negligent to send us the required paperwork to notify us, they will start racking up the penalties at 20% interest anyway?????
Classic ASIC douche bags!
Another cost that needs to be recovered from the consumer ?
I am assuming that the fee is related to what ASIC believes will be the cost of monitoring risk. ASIC sends pre populated forms with items such as amount of equity trades placed. Being an adviser that believes in direct equity ownership I have noted that AFSL’s that net trades through holding via a trust may have a much lower disclosure of trades but a much higher risk to clients. It seems this has been over looked by ASIC in formulation of the “SERVICE” . Many MDA operators use trustees and may net buyers and sellers only trading when required however individual investors may change beneficial ownership many more times than the number of direct trades made by the trustee.
History shows that not owning a stock directly has caused substantial risk in the past, Opes Prime comes to mind. If ASIC has aligned the fee to risk then surely this needs attention.
Fee for service? So if I dont use ASIC at all I dont have to pay?
I called ASIC when they sent my annual review letter alongside the new funding model and asked how I could opt out. Their representative was confused, and I asked if it seemed fair to charge people for no service without recourse. Must be nice to run a cartel and charge advisers a “protection fee”