As The Advisers Association chief executive Neil Macdonald wrote in an opinion column for ifa, existing advisers with no degree must have an approved degree or another qualification by 1 January 2026 that he wrote will see a “mass exodus of financial advisers that will make the current stream of exits look like a trickle in percentage terms”.
Speaking to ifa, the executive director of the Association of Independently Owned Financial Professionals (AIOFP), Peter Johnston, echoed Mr Macdonald’s comments.
“We have always maintained that FASEA is a weapon used against advisers by this government to intimidate them out of the industry,” he said.
“Where else in the world do you need to pass an exam before you finish a degree? How can you not seriously recognise previous relevant degrees and experience?”
Mr Macdonald’s column received overwhelming feedback, with many comments coming from advisers who agreed saying they would be exiting the industry by January 2026.
“We are lobbying for any adviser with 15 years’ experience and a clean record does not need a degree and any risk adviser with less than 15 years’ experience only completes a risk content relevant degree,” Mr Johnston said.
“We must stop the exodus of advisers out of the industry.
“This government has been brutally uncompromising in the past but it will be different over the next few months, their jobs are now on the line. If they don’t listen they may be on the dole by the end of May.”
The Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) also supported calls for changes to the education requirements. In a statement given to ifa, AFA said it is “particularly concerned about the number of existing advisers who have passed the exam, however might decide that meeting the education standard is impossible to justify”.
“For some advisers with a relevant degree and further credits for the ADFP (or equivalent) or a professional designation, it will be achievable, however for those older advisers faced with the completion of an eight subject Graduate Diploma, it will be overwhelming,” the statement read.
The AFA renewed its call for the FASEA education standard to address what was set out in the explanatory memorandum to the 2017 Professional Standards Bill, which includes: “For the avoidance of doubt, the new law explicitly states that courses undertaken before the new law commences must be taken into consideration. The body may take into account diploma or degree courses, licensee training courses or CPD.”
“We understand that the Government will never agree to the removal of any requirement for further education, and they will argue that the extended period of time to complete the study is a concession,” AFA’s statement continued.
“We nonetheless believe that what is required should be more achievable, particularly for those who are closer to the end of their career.”
The AFA suggested to ifa that if advisers are tasked with doing four or five subject credits as opposed to eight, more will be prepared to “have a go at it” and remain in the industry.
I have 25 years experience in the industry with the old 8 subject Diploma of Financial Planning obtained in 1998. My son is doing the post grad study as required by FASEA and has only one more subject to go. In looking through the subjects I can only conclude that FASEA has no idea about the real world of financial planning, how could they otherwise approve courses that are so out of touch and not really preparing a Financial adviser for the complex situations and strategies? I think the whole course is an abolute waste of money and time and any new planner with these kind of qualifications needs at least 5 years experience in the real world to be able to identify appropriate strategies and tailored solutions for clients..I definitely will not do the studies, I think it is an absolute disgrace in treating all the planners that have worked very hard over the years and have more knowledge and experience than any FASEA graduate. Best therapy for any MP would be a compulsory week training with a planner, it would definitely increase their intelligence.
Those on this forum simply saying “do the study – you’ve had plenty of time” – are just not understanding of the many and varied scenarios this ham fisted requirement presents…many had not started yet as they had completed related degrees and were waiting for FASEA to approve them as relevant so they could THEN understand if they needed any bridging subjects or not…to assume everyone was either lazy or waiting for the govt to change the rules is just simply not true. I’m a case in point…degrees in psychology/law, business and the full DFP plus now 20 years in the industry and since my psych degree was not approved by the knobs at FASEA I have to do 5 extra Grad Dip subjects…now tell me that’s fair and reasonable!
Exactly
I’m doing both now, and it’s killing me. I’m 57. I estimate the time wasted on this pointless study will cost me over $200,000 in time (not spent with clients). It’s insane. I will never ever ever vote Liberal ever again.
I’m 52, I am 4 units short of meeting qualification even though I have been continuously in the industry for 34 years. I’ve decided to walk away in 2026.. it is not the study that bothers me, however the pressure of working full time and then trying to complete studies part-time. The industry has been hijacked by ideology and by bureaucrats who do not have one clue as to what we actually do.
Well said and spot on
James Rohn said “if we do what we have always done, we will get what we have always got”. Unless something changes, Authorised Representative numbers will fall below 10,000 in the next 4 years.
Stockbrokers are a source of funds for new companies raising funds. This a sometimes high risk speculative investment. That they part of this FASEA regime makes no sense
There is no need to extend the study timeframe. Some advisers have already wasted several years. If they have not commenced it already, hoping the government would suddenly backflip (hint – they never were) then it is their own fault. Take responsibility for your own actions. Many advisers have already started or completed the training – where is their credit for doing it already?!?!?!?