The Association of Financial Advisers has spoken out against organisations criticising the FOFA amendments, saying they have “vested interest” and “are not acting in the best interests of all Australians”.
The AFA said that many comments have come from those with a stake in the superannuation savings of baby boomers and are putting retirement incomes at risk by undermining confidence in financial advice.
“We have seen gross inaccuracies being reported as facts across a wide range of publications and media programs, so the question has to be asked: how are these actions, which undermine the confidence of baby boomers in personal financial advice, in the best interests of Australia?” Mr Fox said.
“As law, the amendments will give clarity so that every financial advice client, along with anyone else who wants to scrutinise the advice given to the client, will be clear on whether the adviser has or has not met this robust and comprehensive duty to act in the client’s best interests.
“It will give consumers increased confidence to trust the financial advice they receive.”
Mr Fox said that without the amendments, the ambiguity surrounding the best interest duty would need to be tested in court, leaving “a cloud hanging over” the industry for years.
He added that while many commenters, particularly Industry Super Australia, have called for transparency in the industry, the group has not made its submission to the government on the FOFA amendments publicly available.
Mr Fox said the amendments will make it “easier and less expensive” to get advice, but that “some lobby groups may not want this outcome”.
SUBSCRIBE TO THE IFA DAILY BULLETIN
- 15 Oct 2018FASEA is setting a new standard for the industry: Assistant TreasurerBy Eliot Hastie
- 12 Oct 2018ASIC takes action on compliance breachesBy Adrian Flores
- 15 Oct 2018FPA board announces new chairBy Adrian Flores
- 15 Oct 2018New adviser capability added to IOOF offeringBy Adrian Flores
- 15 Oct 2018AFA names new state directorsBy Adrian Flores
- 12 Oct 2018Westpac boss warns against further regulationBy Charbel Kadib
- view all