In a statement, the authority said 84 per cent of candidates who sat the exam from 11 to 14 June had passed, up from 79 per cent in April.
The number of advisers sitting the online session also swelled from 470 in April to 2,282 in June.
The authority said 10,239 advisers had now sat the exam and 85 per cent had passed overall.
Around 40 per cent of advisers on the ASIC adviser register had now passed the exam.
“FASEA is pleased to present the outcomes of the sixth exam and congratulates successful candidates on completing an important component of their education requirements under the Corporations Act during the current extraordinary circumstances,” FASEA chief executive Stephen Glenfield said.
“Over 10,000 advisers have sat the exam with close to nine in 10 demonstrating they have the skill to apply their knowledge of advice construction, ethics and legal requirements to the practical scenarios tested in the exam.”
Exam questions where advisers are getting stuck
The authority also released further detail on knowledge areas where advisers who had failed the exam had commonly “underperformed” in.
These included:
Financial Advice Regulatory and Legal Requirements
– Advice documentation (including financial services guide, statement/record of advice, product disclosure statement and fee disclosure statement) – the exam tests an understanding of when to issue these to clients and what is required to be included (e.g. fees and disclosures);
– Advice types – understanding the difference between personal advice, general advice and information and how they apply to different client scenarios;
– Privacy Act – understanding the difference between personal and sensitive information and whether consent has been appropriately obtained before using information; and
– Anti-Money Laundering Act – identifying potentially suspicious transactions and required reporting in client advice scenarios.
Financial Advice Construction
– Identification of client biases and how they may influence clients’ financial decisions and/or investment choices;
– Applied ethical and professional reasoning and communication; and
– Understanding the application of the code of ethics and the Corporations Act to advice scenarios.
In addition, FASEA said more than 1,600 advisers had so far registered for the August exam, as well as 600 registering for the October exam and 300 for November.
Suggest we all just stop complaining and do the exam. I did the exam, I hated it got the results yesterday and I passed. Now I can concentrate on running my business!
just wondering what your comments may have looked like if you had not passed Mr Get on with it
It seems the areas that have caused issues to advisers are those areas where they have employed other staff to run that part of the business. I’d take a guess that those who didn’t pass the exam have larger trail books and more admin staff than some of us who have to be across the whole operations. If this is the case it seems pretty targeted.
IT’S ALL A SCAM !
Simply a money making scam for thge academics involved and their cronnies. a true FARCE, FARCE-IA. An exam on ethics – FROM THESE FOOLS – you have got to be joking.
The height of hypocrisy, politicians forcing advisers to do an ethics exam.
No Financial Institution CEOs do the exam
No Financial managers do the exam
No Super Fund trustees do the exam
No Life Insurance Institution CEOs Or Managers do the exam
No Politicians do the exam.
All these types were found severely lacking any Ethics in the RC and none of them are held accountable as Advisers are.
And a load of them don’t have degrees either.
This seems unfair on those first people that have already sat the exam to be giving these exam hints and updates. If your a University student studying a Business Degree, whilst working for the Defense Force in Afghanistan you’re expected to sit the exam 9am local time. If you can’t sit it, you obtain a medical exemption. Given the amount of damage the Financial Advice industry has caused Australians and given just how the Government had to step in and over regulate, why should Financial Planners just because they have to run a business, baby sit the kids have so so many years to complete an ordinary 3 hour exam testing 12 lousy standards and 5 values and bunch of things they do every other day.
Yup so basically FASEA have creamed advisers and AFS Licensee’s for almost $9 Million in exam fees alone and are still going to collect at least another $15 Million when this farce is all over – add that to the ever-increasing ASIC Levy’s, Ombudsman membership fees and PI premiums and it’s all a nice little income earner for them all!
Interesting feedback under the ‘Financial Advice Regulatory & Legal Requirements. I did the June exam and my feedback is that the areas identified were the areas I had identified to have very poor questions. I feel qualified to make this comment given my many years as a financial planning/accounting academic.
I agree with you 100%. I don’t know where they found the people who wrote these questions!
I too sat and passed the exam in June and agree with you 100%. My first question was a snipped image from a fee section in an SoA and had a triple-barreled multiple choice question, all of which must be correct to get 1 mark, regarding correct fee disclosure. i.e. % and $ must be shown, could an upfront fee for investment advice be charged to the Super fund under sole-purpose test and should risk advice be separated out under a new line item.
Second question was around risk commission displayed in an FDS, which by the letter of the law need not be shown in an FDS however I’m well aware of several dealer groups that mandate it is shown. A candidate from one of those groups will have to read the RG’s in close detail or they may be led astray by a divergence in licensee policy/standards vs corps act requirements. Best of luck to everyone else sitting the exam.
“40 per cent had now passed the exam”
Time is running out for the 60 per cent.
At least some of the other 60 per cent have read the smoke signals and are moving on.
Congrats on passing your exam, and good luck.
Long Gone and about time.