Tupicoffs meets Corps Act IFA definition
Boutique firm Tupicoffs has taken steps to bring the company in line with the Corporations Act definition of an independent financial advice provider.
While Tupicoffs has been non-aligned since 2006, when it split from AXA, managing director Neil Kendall said the firm decided it “owed it to the public” to go fully independent.
“Being independent means we have no ownership links or affiliations with product manufacturers and don’t receive commissions or incentive payments from product providers,” Mr Kendall said in a statement.
“We believe this is the future for financial planning in Australia. Clients continue to tell us when it comes to choosing a financial planner, independence from product provider influence or incentive is the most sought after attribute, but the hardest to find.”
Mr Kendall added that while it is “fine to be independently minded” that it is better to be able to use the term “independent” and said he encourages other practices to follow suit, anticipating increasing consumer demand for independence.
The news comes as Synchron director Don Trapnell has anticipated a resurgence of non-aligned players in the financial advice market.
Perpetual profit sunk by $1.5bn outflows
Perpetual’s profit has fallen, with lower performance revenue and $1.5 billion...
IOOF results ‘an anomaly’: Morningstar
IOOF’s plunging profits are an isolated occurrence and the royal commission ha...
Conflicts of interest broader than product providers
Advisers need to consider managing conflicts of interest not just with product p...