Chartered Accountants ANZ (CA ANZ) has said it supports the federal opposition’s announcements aimed at enabling financial professionals to “support Australians to rebuild wealth”.
Speaking at Momentum Media’s Election 2025 event last week, shadow financial services minister Luke Howarth reiterated the Coalition’s intention to make it easier for accountants to provide advice, particularly around SMSFs, if it were to win the election.
The demand for advice, Howarth said, will “only be increasing”, which necessitates an expanding pool of advisers to match it.
As announced last Thursday, the Coalition has put a numeric target on this goal – aiming to boost the profession’s numbers to 30,000.
Forming part of this goal to expand access to advice is “making it easier for accountants to provide advice”, particularly when it comes to setting up self-managed superannuation funds.
“The current limited licensing model does not work. It isn’t being used, and we need something better,” Howarth said.
He added: “I’m just saying that accountants are good people in relation to self-managed super funds in particular, they should be able to give advice on setting them up. They should be able to give advice on closing them down.”
Susan Franks, CA ANZ tax, superannuation and financial services leader, said the association was pleased to hear the opposition address this area, along with a broader push to streamline advice regulation.
“CA ANZ has been advocating for all Australians to have access to financial advice by allowing qualified accountants to provide it and we look forward to hearing more details about the Coalition’s announcement,” Franks said.
“We note the Coalition has also promised to reform education and relevant degree standards to get more financial advisers into the industry as the current requirements are too restrictive and fail to cater for those who have related qualifications such as business degrees.
“We are pleased to see that the Coalition has committed to simplifying Australia’s corporations law and establishing a deregulation taskforce, especially in relation to financial services. The current financial services laws are a quagmire and in need of urgent reform and simplification to reduce compliance costs.”
Fixing the CSLR
Reducing the restrictions on accountants providing advice wasn’t the only measure that CA ANZ supported, with Franks adding that the body also backed measures that would see the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort’s (CSLR) costs to advisers lowered and “ensure it’s fair”.
“We have advocated for reform in this area since its operational problems began to emerge, so we’ll be keen to see what the Coalition is proposing here,” she said.
“CA ANZ is also actively engaged in current government consultations on financial advice education standards, the CSLR review and the government’s response to the Quality of Advice Review and we look forward to these consultations continuing should the government be re-elected.”
At the event last week, Howarth reiterated his belief that the CSLR was “pretty well a disaster” and said he doesn’t agree with the premise of the scheme.
While he outlined that a Coalition would reform the scheme, he told financial services delegates at the event that “I don’t even believe in the CSLR”.
In a Q&A session following his address, he said: “I think the whole thing’s stupid. It’s ridiculous … It’s not a go at anyone who’s running it … The reality is it shouldn’t have been set up to start with.
“So, we don’t want to expand it. That’s the last thing we want to do. We want to get rid of it, ultimately, and we want to reduce the cost, until we can do that, for advisers.”
At the Election 2025 event, shadow treasurer Angus Taylor confirmed that the Coalition would “fix the CSLR’s costs, making it fair and sustainable”, suggesting that the fee structures were “onerous”.
“We’re conscious of the fact that this has been a big impost on your industry,” he told advisers in the room, adding that the cost of supporting the scheme was “preventing people from serving their clients” and “making it harder”.
What a surprise they are backing this. Be good if the financial planning industry bodies had half the influence this group does.
SMSFs for everybody!! Don’t miss out!!
Ignoring the fact accountants are utterly hopeless at advice, cheap, self interested and narrow minded of course.
Easier to become an Accountant than an adviser plus cheaper M&A less compliance risk on the Accounting side. If this passes, its a no brainer to become an Accountant. Goodbye to all the post grad courses and fees higher education.
Of course you would support this.
I am both accountant and financial adviser. Comfortable with accountants providing advice but the rules must be the same for both accountants and financial advisers in transferring to smsf or transferring from a smsf and between any fund as far as that is concerned. An accountant’s tax skill is nothing to do with recommending a super fund (smsf or not). If the rules are different then can I choose whether I am providing advice as an accountant or financial adviser.
FFS
Another brainfart from a politician to curry favor with a lobby group being accountants
The coalition imposed education standards on the financial planners. Those that are left standing are now educated as per those standards with some exceeding them as I did by gaining a Masters.
Yes credits were available as well.
With CAs and CPAs mostly being degree qualified, it is likely that only a few units would need to be done to become financial planners.
But why did so many accountants give back their limited license or leave the industry.
Apparently, it was the compliance demands, costs and with that profitability for time, as well as CPD, having to do AMLs, SOAs, research and file notes.
What they really want is a free pass in the education and most likely the other areas I have mentioned.
All FPs have to meet compliance by their AFSL but how will these accountants operate, and will they be subject to the same rigors for giving advice as FPs are or will it just be “incidental” advice with no compliance.
I for one am sick of the carve outs.
If you want to be a FP then do the study and meet the requirements.
Otherwise, what really is the FP profession.
This is the dumbest thing ever, the accountants shot themselves in the foot and made it obvious why they cannot be trusted to give advice on SMSF set up. Why go back to the messy days?
As long as it’s a level playing field, I have no problem with Accountants providing advice – in an SOA or ROA, with PI cover, with ASIC levies, With CSLR costs, with license fees, with the same ASIC levies, with the same CPD, with ongoing service agreements, with unclear tax deductibility. Welcome to the party Accountant friends.
Of course the accounting body is supporting it if it enables accountants to more easily provide advice. Unfortunately accountants too often dip their toes into advising & assisting clients with many things that I would class as outside their scope & expertise. Do what you do & do it well – Tax. Leave the rest to & refer clients to the people that specialize in the other area’s.
Fine as long as accountants have to abide by the same code of ethics and complete the financial adviser exam to comply with the existing professional standards.
How about we strengthen the laws so as as bad guys such as Dixon and Evans & Partners are not only shamed for their actions but are appropriately penalised. An investigation into the private wealth of these people would reveal just how much they have taken their clients for a ride.