Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand (CA ANZ) said FASEA’s reforms are in line with the current professional standards that its members already meet.
It referenced a member survey that found up to 60 per cent of its advice practitioners said they would likely stop providing financial advice if the education reforms came in as proposed, while a further 20 per cent said they were undecided about what they would do.
CA ANZ senior policy adviser Bronny Speed said its members want to be recognised in the new proposed FASEA regime – including those members with a limited AFSL.
“The feedback we have received from members is that if FASEA doesn’t respect what Chartered Accountants have already completed and undertake on an ongoing basis, then many will reconsider their future in the industry and will likely exit,” Ms Speed said.
“Acknowledging the hard work that is required to gain and maintain their CA membership, which includes a TEQSA approved AQF 8 post graduate qualification and continuing professional development obligations, will mean Chartered Accountants can continue their work as trusted advisers.”
Earlier this year, Ms Speed said CA ANZ was in talks with FASEA about recognising accountants’ “significant” training compared with advisers in its new guidelines.
“Generally speaking, accountants who have operated in this area have done it for a long time. Those people with 20-plus years’ experience should be recognised as having different credentials to someone that has just got a degree and RG146,” she said.
“Surely those years and those extras equate to something.”
CA ANZ’s lobbying also follows moves from the Financial Planning Association of Australia to have FASEA recognise its certification program.
Does the accounting lobby let my financial planning degree count the same as an accounting degree for the purposes of accounting and taxation licensing? No? Then why should they be given the opposite?
simple, but well argued point.
although, they think that financial planning is a subset of the accounting discipline and recognize expertise in that area as part of their practical experience requirement (google CA final mentor report pdf – under areas of accounting) they would not allow you to be admitted without completing their designated course.
why should we ?
sorry, we don’t think your members are qualified to give financial advice, unless you have a specific degree in financial planning.
thanks,
no, they think they are the only professionals who can give advice. they take that so seriously they sue each other for the privilege (see cpa vs ca anz), their members are really happy about wasting money
in fact, what they are, are dinosaurs
yup, 20 years too late to the party folks. we will soon legally write you out of the advice space and exclude you altogether from it. nearly there!
all your lobbying won’t change a thing. NOT a thing! FASEA will tell you that shortly.
I am going to be written into legislation, a financial planner/adviser will be a protected term.
while you were battling each other (ha ha), we already won the war. ciao amigos. it was nice to meet you.
next.
Did the CA representative just admit that not only have accountants been illegally providing unlicensed financial advice, but they have been doing it for a long time?
With certain announcements being made in regards to Foreign students and Uni’s, financial planners are screwed. Foreign Student enrollments are the only thing keeping some campuses on life support. Academic jobs are very much on the line so I would expect no back tracking at all now. It’s over red rover.
wait till Bill Shorten gets in …. it will be all about industry funds !!!!!!
Yep it will be all about Union run Super funds and anything that will get more or retain FUM FUM FUM into them. Rightly or wrongly SGC paid on Maternity leave is win win for Bill and a classic example. I’m betting commissions on risk will be banned. I’m 150% positive grandfathered commissions will be banned. I’m 110% positive dealer group fees will rise by 30%. I’m 50/50 that fees on FUM will be banned. I’m thinking advice fees out of Super may even be banned as well.
Based on the national policy framework for assessing qualifications (AQF) which says that, “AQF levels and the AQF levels criteria are an indication of the relative complexity and/or depth of achievement and the autonomy required to demonstrate that achievement. AQF level 1 has the lowest complexity and AQF level 10 has the highest complexity” (source AQF)
It follow then that a qualification completed at AQF Level 9, is higher (in complexity) than one completed at AQF Level 8.
Your master of financial planning is designated at AQF Level 9, that is higher than any chartered accountant’s -whose qualification is at AQF Level 8 – whom this association is saying is qualified, and should be recognized.
your qualifications, therefore, objectively assessed and measured by the national policy for regulated qualifications in australia, are higher than that of a chartered accountant. if they are recognized so should you.
nice. to add to that. yours is a relevant qualification to financial planning and theirs is, a relevant qualification for accountants and tax agents, not financial planning.
We are an easy target and FASEA has been hijacked by the University sector and self interested bodies like the FPA. Hopefully these accounting bodies will result in common sense thinking being applied. Financial Planners with related degrees in Business/Finance and or Graduate Diplomas plus Diplomas in Financial Planning plus 10 to 20 plus years of CPD should not have to be doing ZIP or be punished because of others.
The difference between a Bachelor of Commerce and a Bachelor of Financial Planning can be only 4 subjects. We should not have to be making these individual go out and do a whole brand new Degree.
Seems like a lot commenters on this site have decided that the FPA is the cause of everything wrong in their life. Wife left you? Blame the FPA. Dog died? Blame the FPA. Footy team didn’t make the finals? Blame the FPA.
How could you possibly say that FASEA has been hijacked by the FPA when it is lobbying hard against the current FASEA proposals? The FPA is pushing for greater recognition of a broader range of prior training.
once you sit and pass the fasea exam and depending on your current qualifications complete a grad dip, masters or for those lucky enough to only have to do fasea ethics, why would you become a member of the FPA and do their course afterwards.
they’ll still be around to be a lobby group but their education offering is going to have to change and maybe get an AQF status.
Seems to me a lot of advisers don’t even care and happily pay fees every year just for a CFP logo.
Please read their original submission and white paper on FASEA. If you (1) Recommend a course listed on the current FPEC list ( a body they own) as the benchmark and write 15 pages on why and (2) you state prior education CPD, CFP studies should count for 14 points out of 100 therefore placing such little value on prior learning…and you state a Bachelor in Commerce is not sufficient…. then they are to blame for flip flopping, uncertainty of FASEA.
Finally (3) when CBA comes out and blames Planners for their mess and not senior management and calls for degrees for all and the FPA comes out in support because CBA has made it compulsory to be a member of either the FPA or AFA. Then I would say they have a lot to be blamed for.
what does the CFP logo do? engender trust in clients? bring in more, high quality clients? improve the public standing of financial planners?
ha ha, please stop
Agreed. My understanding is that, behind the scenes, the FPA is doing everything it can to bring some common sense to the FASEA process. Repeatedly kicking them in the guts for perceived injustices is utterly counterproductive (and plain stupid).
and the FPA is moving forward…how? Still same CEO, still the same board. Can’t really put my faith in Mr Magoo sorry
So where is the line drawn then? A Masters of Financial Planning plus 25 years inclusive of CPD hours plus SMSF Association member is not enough from what has been confirmed for me so far. If I’m going to get rejected and I know what I am doing in the advice space why not reject the accountants as well? Some are better than others sure, but not all are from what I’ve seen – same as financial planners eh! Sure we can argue its unfair but FASEA are taking far too long to clarify anything for anyone. In the meantime they are messing with business operators mental health due to falling business values and increased compliance obligations. The accountants at least are not financial planners – they have another side to their business that they can still continue to operate at least. And I don’t think the Labour government in particular want SMSFs to continuing growing anyway – franking credit proposal is a prime example. Its funny how the young ones might be all for this abolishment of refunds, but wait until their inheritance is gone! Aged care costs and cost of living will wipe it all out given our increasing life expectancy predictions and the low returns people are expected to receive moving forward.
I’m not sure who you have confirmed with but my understanding is that if you’ve already got a FASEA approved Master of FP then you only need to do ONE subject – Code of Ethics – and they’ve given you until 1 Jan 2024 to complete that ONE subject! I know – the world is unfair yadda yadda yadda – just pull your finger out and do that ONE subject. All the best.
you are more qualified than a chartered accountant dont’ worry if they claim they are already qualified so should you. your qualification is higher than theirs.