In a statement, FASEA said it had released the Corporations (Relevant Providers Exam Standard) Determination 2019 Amendment for consultation.
“The draft amendment proposes relief from the 3 month registration requirement for November 2021 exam sitting,” the authority said.
“The relief will allow all candidates who have been unsuccessful at any prior sitting to sit the November exam.”
FASEA said the November sitting would be offered both online and in person, depending on COVID restrictions at the time.
“This amendment aims to provide existing advisers with an additional opportunity to meet the transition requirements of the Corporations Act. FASEA welcomes stakeholder feedback on this proposed amendment,” FASEA chief executive Stephen Glenfield said.
The amendment proposed by FASEA to the exam legislative instrument would allow an exemption from the mandatory three-month gap between exam sittings for anyone sitting the exam between 1 November and 31 December 2021.
Consultation on the amendment was open to industry stakeholders until 28 July.
Whether you passed in 2019 with little to no support or in late 2021 is immaterial. The exam itself is not an easy one and the deadline remains the same. Either way is an achievment and we should be doing everything we can to help those remaining advisors to succeed.
The comments here show why advisers get screwed every time. Some of advisers biggest critics are other advisers. The “good guys” take every opportunity to bag the “bad guys”.
Advisers and advisers associations looking out for the overall industry (and not just virtue signaling their own exemplary compliance) should welcome this exemption.
BTW same things happen over here in NZ in case you are wondering. Plenty of white ants.
It’s a shame Advisers that have met the obligations are so against leniency offered to their colleges and the industry. I have successfully met all requirements and am happy to see advisers and the industry get a few breaks. It’s not about me and what I have done, it’s about my fellow colleges and helping them and it is this that I am very much supportive of.
[b]”Consultation on the amendment was open to industry stakeholders until 28 July”[/b] By any chance at all does this mean us Advisers?????????? Heaven forbid that little old US get to have a say in our very limited Futures!!!!
The freal issue isn’t the FASEA exam. The REAL issue is getting exemptions from doing 8 uni units by 2026, if you have been in the industry for over 10 years. If that isn’t addressed, there will be an exodus then.
The biggest problem that I believe EXITS our Industry from all that has been imposed upon us including “new” academic qualifications by 2026 is PEOPLE SKILLS. No amount of Degree subjects can teach People Skills. The “Experts” call it Behavioural Finances. What a joke.
I did the Behavioural Finance module of one of the providers for the graduate diploma. It was an absolute joke. The person running it had no idea how to give advice but very clear opinions. Passing meant admitting to lots of shortcomings and saying you will use more of their courses for training. High distinction, so silly.
I only got a pass as I refused to identify shortcomings I dont have. Didnt identify enough improvement areas. Maybe I dont need to improve! They didnt like that, It is a joke, that subject was a waste of time.
The Federal Liberal government has wet the bed over the number of adviser exits and desperately want to delay more until after the election.
In true Josh Frydenberg and Jane Hume ignorance, they fail to understand that the Liberal-led increases in red-tape and unnecessary compliance, coupled with significant, Liberal imposed, increases in costs (#ASICtax and #TPBtax) is why people are leaving.
You are completely underestimating Frydenberg and Hume. They know the damage they are causing and are trying to find a way out – the revengefest of the Royal Commission had to receive its sacrifice.
Now it is our job to stop product providers employing salesforces labelled ‘advisers’. If we don’t do that we are toast.
Why change the rules now?
Early adaptors had it far easier as there questions in exams has got out of control as well.
This was not handled well from day 1 and this profession took a big hit and was not supported correctly and governed by people who new how this industry works.
Early adopters, easier. Ahem.
No training available whatsoever, spent a weekend reading RG175 and the FASEA code very carefully. No other preparation was available.
Early Adapters didn[‘t have it easier. You’ll find late adapters got shown sample questions and answers and even could attend webinars run by FASEA staff talking them through the questions.
Imagine being an Adviser that purports to be a trusted advisor to their clients that can’t even pass the FASEA exam and needs this legislative change to be rushed through to remain in the industry.
The door is that way, don’t let it hit you on the way out.
If you have passed the exam just be thankful – and allow those still to pass as many opportunities as the can bear – just saying
What a joke for those that made the effort and took time out to get this done…
seems like a mad scramble
Enough is enough…… the constant changing of the rules and further extensions to support the individuals who have not placed enough emphasis on meeting the new requirements is disappointing and unfair to the early adopters. Why even have a deadline if its not going to be enforced….. all this very unprofessional.
unprofessional like the FP industry? HA yep!
Totally agree. Hope you make a submission to them.
agree. Professionals make the time….when this came out the questions were “what’s the maximum amount of time I can keep working in this industry before having to leave” ….all we’ve got now is un qualified advisers trying to string this out so they can remain in the industry..
Absolutely ridiculous. The entire thing. Why did I put my life on hold doing the right thing yonks ago !!!!!
This subject has certainly been flogged to death. Interesting to read a few days ago that 300 advisers of the last 1000 that have allegedly quit the industry had passed their farce of an exam. This may alter the final numbers as it’s generally assumed if you passed the exam you’re staying on. Clearly the ASIC levy may have altered a number of decisions.
The #ASICtax and #TPBtax is clearly responsible for the reducing adviser numbers.
Have been in the industry 35 years .went through the most anxiety I have dealt with since year 12 to sit and pass the exam at my first attempt fortunately .sat four 3 hour practice exams ( 3 with Kaplan and 1 with fasea)
The exam is a complete waste of time and the content in most cases is almost irrelevant to day to day client situations .The exam is written by lawyers and academics who have now built a nice job in shuffling and creating rules that justify their positions
Clients are now worse off. As the cost of advice gets more expensive and more about compliance rather than advice
Too many lawyers