Responses to questions on notice from the Senate economics committee reveal FASEA’s rationale for the policy, which has caused industry concern with advisers who fail the exam locked out of some subsequent sessions.
Last week, FASEA chief executive Stephen Glenfield urged advisers who had not yet sat the exam to register for either the January or March sessions to give themselves a maximum of three opportunities to pass before the 1 January 2022 compliance deadline.
WA Liberal senator and economics committee member Slade Brockman had previously asked the authority whether the policy of only allowing advisers one exam attempt per 90 days was “a deliberate strategy” and what the rationale was behind it.
“Paragraph 4(2)(c) of the exam legislative instrument states that financial advisers must not have sat an exam within three months before registering for the exam. This time frame allows candidates to sit every second exam,” FASEA said.
“The three month gap between the exam sitting allows candidates who have failed to adequately prepare for the next exam. It also allows FASEA to maintain the integrity and fairness of the exam and our exam provider ACER to run robust processes to benchmark difficulty between exams.
“This approach was supported by a number of industry associations in consultation feedback on the draft standard and legislative instrument.”
The authority added that it would offer the exam on 15 occasions in total throughout the transition period for existing advisers.
“A relevant provider who chose to sit the first exam in June 2019 would have up to eight attempts to pass the exam. Advisers who have yet to sit the exam will have up to three attempts in 2021,” FASEA said.
According to the most recent FASEA figures, 52 per cent of advisers currently on the ASIC register, or 11,241 advisers, have so far passed the exam. In the most recent sitting in November 2020, 80 per cent of those sitting the exam for the first time and 58 per cent of those re-sitting the exam had passed.
Mr Glenfield had also previously indicated that the authority would be open to amending the policy within the legislative instrument if the situation demanded, having said last year when legislation to extend the compliance date was in doubt that FASEA would “consider other options” to give advisers more time to pass.
How about less whining and more exam sitting…
Given mid 2020 we were all sweating on the Senate extending the exam deadline to the end of 2021, I’m honestly worried for any adviser that hasnt gotten started by now. Maybe a very small % have reasons, new babies or family illness or something, but in the main, if you havent even started yet – why the heck not? Either you are enrolled now, or thinking it is going to be very easy and you are not worried or you have no intention of doing it. if about half have done the exam to date, is the rest of the industry going to vanish in just under a year from now?
Relax – most of us think the exam stinks so why would we rush to do it? Nevertheless i’ll probably enroll for the March version along with thousands of others. I did all my tertiary study years ago, did my Masters when everyone else was doing the CFP “the gold standard highest qualification in the world” which is now pretty much worthless on paper. I am the clever one. I am extremely relaxed about leaving this extra requirement hanging for a bit longer…..
Correct, any serious adviser has already passed this exam. Maybe it’s just easier to whinge online than actually attempt the exam.
It certainly seems like many advisers plan to bow out at the end of 2021, and were originally planning to do so at the end of 2020 anyway. They will whine and lobby for yet another extension to push back their exit date, but with no real intention of ever doing the exam no matter how much time they are given.
FASEA have been leading the government on some unknown path to nowhere.
With less than 50% of financial advisers having past the exam, It is very difficult for older advisers to even understand how to sit such an exam, there are many out there who through no fault of there own, other than being over the age of 50 find it near enough impossible to sit in a high stress environment little lone get a sufficient enough pass mark should not be considered a crime in this country.
That’s a fixed mindset problem, not an age problem. Fixed mindsets are a problem in any profession. I hope this entire education process weeds out those who see it this way and leaves our industry more energetic and vibrant and progressive.
You’re another one like the one below with an obnoxious tone denigrating a comment made in good faith about many (whats left of) good quality people who have spent a large part of their vocational years serving their fellow human beings. Yeah, the ones who serve their fellow man/woman, because its innate for them to be respectful and considerate when helping people make very important decisions; the ones who probably for the best part of 25+ years now, have learnt from the best teacher of all – life experience – not from academics and the like, reading about how to distinguish between good and bad, known as ‘ethics’ I believe. Maybe the simple capacity of being be able to distinguish between right and wrong is difficult for some folk – “advice” is not for them therefore. Why this character trait needs “examination” is a mystery for the ages – maybe thats part of being ‘progressive’ Timmy? I love when that “p” word comes out of someone’s mouth or mentioned in a sanctimonious comment like this one, it says a lot about the speaker. Come back to the audience once you’ve served your fellow human being for 30 years or more, and discovered the meaning of humility.
Seriously? All that over a fairly simple regulations exam. Then nothing further required until the qualifications deadline in 2026. Harden up. I’ve “served” the community for 30 years and passed the exam. Far out, these comments are woeful.
Brilliant! Soon as I’ve passed a ‘simple regulations exam’ we’ll both be serving for 30 years, and our clients will be delighted to know that we know the regulations, I’m sure.
“served” their fellow humans while making a packet out of upfront comms & trail fees for little or no ongoing service…..with altruists like that, why isnt our industry flourishing….
another “immy” who is also obviously ‘progressive’; how terrific that 20/20 hindsight allows you to sanctimoniously judge what worked in its day for everyone; today, it doesn’t work anymore and rightly so, has been replaced with the correct methods of payment for services rendered, disclosed and agreed by the parties – like numerous other areas of life and work, in the current environment where society seems to have discovered its virtuous side, all the “holier-than-thou” can look in the rear view mirror and pass judgement at how ‘bad’ they were that passed this way…what a bunch of ‘front-runners’ – who are the altruists again?
How can a failed candidate adequately prepare for the next exam when they aren’t told:
1. How much they failed by
2. what the pass mark was and
3. what sections they failed.
There has been plenty of articles post the exam where advisers need to focus. I’m concerned that anyone has failed it!
I passed the exam so I can make this comment. It did not assess me on anything that was directly relevant to my job as a financial planner. Passing the exam does not make you a good adviser, failing it does not make you a bad adviser. The only thing it does is put a tick next to your name so you can keep working as a financial planner.
Agree this is unhelpful, but the answer is, study it all, study more, invest time. If I can pass after cramming for 30 hours in the 2 days pre-exam, anyone doing proper preparation should have no issues. The system wont change, so work around it.
Just don’t do it. Pack shelves at Woolworths.
All of these dates and deadlines were set pre Covid. Since then we have had panicked clients, lockdowns loss of income etc etc. The deadlines should all be extended.
The deadlines have been extended by a year since COVID. The original exam deadline has actually passed.
Yep set pre Covid, about 2016/2017 or thereabouts. Only at least 3-4 years notice to sit a three hour exam and spend a weekend doing a ethics course. Not fair it is. No doubt the guy whose wife died, gave birth to twins and son got cancer, and cat got run over has probably finished now
Yes, it is a waste of time, but to use anything that happens as an excuse is pretty lame. Just get on with it.
The exam should cease immediately as i’m getting sick of my Linkedin feed being filled with pass certificates. Someone please explain why that do that? Is it pride, relief, informing your clients that you are smart enough to stay in the job, pressure from your employer to post on Linkedin?
Yes, that’s weird posting on linkedin. Big deal. How about all those ‘at home’ graduation picture on linkedin from Deakin university students? Never-ending, and boring.
Purely ego and arrogance. An apt description if you’ll excuse the language is ‘wanker’. Unfortunately, the FP industry has a good share of them.
There’s always going to be a reason/excuse, just get on with it. Start to finish (study plus exam) FASEA exam consumed perhaps 35-40 hours of my life. You don’t need an extension, you need to get on with it.
It’s not that hard if you know what you’re doing. And if you fail first go round and then don’t put in the necessary study so that you don’t fail a second time then you’re not really serious about staying in financial planning. All the excuses about clients, kids, family etc etc are just that excuses. If you dont pass you’ll have plenty of time to spend with your family post 2021….
And any adviser who is self-licensed and fails this exam should have their ability to run an AFSL reviewed immediately.
Completely agree
what a pathetic comment; “not really serious about staying in financial planning”, really? 30+ years already without blemish and I’m not serious? I, like many, being forced to ‘sing for my supper’, having my character tested because some academic/s (includes Hayne), think/s every single AR is a criminal in waiting???
If you’re serious about staying you would have done the exam already, after all the original deadline has passed. If you’ve been doing it for 30+ yrs then it should be a walk in the park. I’m serious about staying and sat the second round of exams. Done & dusted.
well done
Plenty of opportunity to get it done.
FARCEA will announce the change at 5 pm on the eve of a long weekend giving everyone 12 hours to register to qualify the their token gesture of “how we are listening to stakeholders” garbage! Remember they did this on a Friday at 5 pm back in 2019 the week before Christmas and gave everyone a consultation period ending just after New Years day?? So when everyone came back from holidays the consultation period was closed…. totally ETHICAL aren’t they??
What a complete mess the powers to be have put us in the last 10 years.Nothing constructive and now our livelihood is threatened by outsiders that have no experience and loaded with utopian idealism and no reality
A total Rort
I still find it strange that only a pass/fail mark is provided as a response by FASEA. How are advisers supposed to re-educate and improve if they don’t know which of their answers are right or wrong. And not providing a mark at all leaves nil transparency, did I pass/fail by an inch or a mile?
This article notes that November was the most recent sitting, however there was a session made available in December 2020. However, it was only made available to those who failed the August sitting, and no one else. I find that extremely suspicious. Why open it to only those that failed in August? Was there something wrong with that exam? Even if the cut-off date wasn’t extended to 1 Jan 2022, participating in an exam in December would not have allowed these advisers to meet the requirements. So it’s odd to say the least.
The exam is easy, I’m concerned anyone has failed it. It might be a sign for them to leave ASAP. After each exam results come out the areas that need more focussing on are explained in a range of trade websites.