The Financial Planning Association of Australia (FPA), the Association of Financial Advisers (AFA), Boutique Financial Planners (BFP), the Financial Services Institute of Australasia (FINSIA), the Self-Managed Super Fund Association (SMSF Association), and the Stockbrokers and Financial Advisers Association (SAFAA) came together last year to create the agreement.
Staff in the associations have already begun to see advertisements for a chair, deputy chair, plus additional governing body roles for the new code monitoring authority.
A special purpose company, Code Monitoring Australia (CMA), has been established to operate the compliance scheme, which will be called the Financial Advisers Monitoring Scheme (FAMS).
CMA is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the FPA, whose chief executive Dante De Gori lodged the application with ASIC last week.
“I can confirm we have provided what we believe is a detailed and well-considered solution to ASIC,” said Mr De Gori.
“The decision is now with them, but given how tight the timeline is until November we’re preparing as much as we can in readiness for a green light, just in case.”
The deadline to subscribe to the approved scheme is 15 November, with ASIC to work on the application in time for that.
And the annual cost to join these code monitoring bodies will be
a) $500,
b) $1,200
c) $2,500
D) enough to finally tip you over the edge and give up.
Hopefully this will help you practice also for your FASEA exam.
Hilariously, CPA and CA were nowhere to be seen on this issue – until the last minute when they called the FPA and begged to be included in the process.
The SFAA seems more cost effective than the other two main bloodsuckers by almost $200 per annum, so maybe I may give them a go, i’m paying money for nothing anyway to these associations may as well diversify.
Amazing how they can work together when it involves their own self interest
Do the professional associations have advisers support to be involved as a code monitoring body or are there conflicts of interests these professional bodies face to consider?
Yet another BS regulatory body for Advisers to report too, no doubt have to pay fees $$$$ to and quad-ripple up on already existing over the top BS regulation.
OVER BLOODY COMPLICATED O’DWYER, THE ONE WOMAN WRECKING BALL TO ADVISERS AND SUPERANNUATION !!!!!!!
What a disgrace Liberal party, what about the so called reducing over regulation and strangling business, doubling advice costs.
Yet another separate entity being established for the sole purpose of hiding conflicts of interest and providing an revenue stream. Here we go again. The FPA did the same thing with Education and Universities establishing FPEC and we ended up with Degrees for all and poor FASEA representation because the FPA was focused on Income for FPEC . You can’t be a code monitoring body and get a $60,000 payment from AMP or some other product manufacturer. There is a reason you’re doing FASEA courses, business valuations are falling, and we can’t give advice to ordinary Australians. It’s the lack of representation, the lack of clarity the lack of purpose by these groups.
FAMS, FASEA, ATO, ASIC, APRA, TPB, AFCA to name a few. POQ I think.
Are we just ignoring the underlying conflict of interest here ? Yeah sure, lets the FPA dictate terms they’re only funded by the institutions that cause the problems to start with ..