In a statement, ASIC said the changes will apply to:
- applicants that are a body corporate;
- applicants that are Australian Prudential Regulation Authority-regulated bodies; and
- applicants that are proposing to offer certain financial services or to operate in specific circumstances.
For applicants seeking authorisation to provide personal financial product advice, additional non-core proofs must be provided to ASIC around compliance arrangements, its program for monitoring, supervision and training of authorised representatives and its risk management system statement.
ASIC said the changes will enable it to ascertain whether it has reason to believe an applicant is likely to contravene its legislative obligations, including to deliver financial services “efficiently, honestly and fairly” and to ensure that the responsible officers of a body corporate applicant are of good fame or character.
“ASIC has reviewed the AFS licence assessment processes and has streamlined its assessment processes in some limited respects,” said ASIC executive director for assessment and intelligence Warren Day.
“This is designed to avoid unnecessary delays that may arise when ASIC seeks additional information during an assessment.”
ASIC’s silence about unlicensed ‘advice’ from accountants implies they think you can give advice so long as it’s not a PROACTIVE product ‘recommendation’. You seem to be able to give the client plenty of help making their decisions (tax advice, factual info, warnings and even exempt SMSF arranging) without an AFSL or SOA.
[b]Why is nobody clarifying this for us? CPA? IPA? CAANZ? ASIC? TPB? NTAA?[/b][b][/b]
Do we need an AFSLs to give ‘advice’ without a recommendation – or not??
Seems to me more “advice” is provided under the “unlicensed” umbrella. Is it a case of ASIC placing more barriers to “Licensed Advice” part of their vision for the future?