Speaking at the Association of Independently Owned Financial Professionals’ (AIOFP) Canberra Conference on Thursday evening, Minister for Financial Services Stephen Jones emphasised that the ASIC levy is not currently a top priority for him, suggesting that it could be addressed at a later time.
“We’ve got an industry funding model right across the board, not just for financial advisers,” Mr Jones said when asked by an AIOFP member whether he planned to tackle the escalating ASIC levy, which has, in recent years, increased disproportionately to the number of advisers in the industry.
“Is it perfect? No. Are there areas it might need to be polished up? Yes, there might be,” the minister said.
“Can we settle down on the stuff currently in front of the government?”
Earlier this month, it was confirmed that ASIC has reduced the levy charged to advisers by $400 per adviser.
Namely, the corporate regulator released the final figures that will apply for the ASIC funding levy for the 2022–23 financial year in two legislative instruments, noting that the total cost for the advice sector has been reduced by nearly $8 million to $47.6 million.
According to this data, the Financial Advice Association Australia estimated that the final amount will be around $400 per adviser lower than the original estimate, at $2,818 per adviser in addition to the minimum levy of $1,500.
Under the former government’s ASIC levy freeze, the costs charged to the sector amounted to $22.8 million. This meant that at the time, advisers were charged a minimum levy of $1,500, plus $1,142 per adviser.
Earlier this year, in a letter to members, the executive director of the AIOFP Peter Johnston said that the outrage expressed by members over the increase in the ASIC levy following the Labor government’s refusal to extend the previous freeze had prompted the association to raise its issues with Mr Jones.
“We have decided to commence some lobbying on this levy issue due to the pain and anger this is causing many members, we have not seen this much frustration since the grandfathering revenue ban was announced,” Mr Johnston said.
“You may recall we suggested commencing this strategy leading into the final 12 months of this term of government and not put another issue on the minister’s plate, but we will do both considering the circumstances.”
The FAAA, too, has previously said that it will lobby Mr Jones on the levy matter and has raised concerns about ASIC’s lack of transparency in determining the charges imposed on advisers.
Will Industry fund’s non-relevant providers need to pay the ASIC levy?? If not, why not?
The levy wasn’t reduced. The forecasts were under estimated. It is still INCREASED greatly! Biggest historical increase in fact
“Can we settle down on the stuff currently in front of the government?” The problem is that it actually is in front of the Government, but MP Jones is just delaying and deflecting since he took office as FS Minister. If he is incapable of managing his workload and portfolio, then hand it over to somebody who is more capable. Meanwhile Jones continues to fiddle while Rome burns.
Let’s make Advice more affordable Canberra says.
1) Triple the ASIC Levy (adviser taxation) $3k + each
2) Add CSLR and set up Advisers to pay for Dodgy Dixon’s MIS disaster. Potential $20k + each Adviser cost.
3) QAR Tranche 1 completely useless, actually increases Red Tape with Life Ins Comms consent, rest of it does nothing to reduce Red Tape costs.
4) QAR Tranche 2 obviously focused on Industry Funds giving advice via unqualified call centre jockeys.
Another freaking disastrous attack on Advisers.
Its called multi tasking champ.
This pretty much confirms Jones has no interest in making professional financial advice more affordable and accessable for Australian consumers. His only interest is in legalising conflicted, unqualified, unlicensed advice by union super funds.
His glacial pace on QAR has nothing to do with consultation, and everything to do with hijacking the outcome.
Thankfully with Albo tanking in the polls, there is talk of a ministerial reshuffle over Xmas. Underperformer Jones would have to be first in line to be dumped.
Clearly they care about advisers and their well being – or am I being too sarcastic? One becomes very tired of being constantly kicked by those who lack the qualifications and understanding to manage a portfolio. If it is too much work then take appropriate action but saying I have too much on the plate is a simple cop out.