In a statement on Monday morning, Financial Services Minister Stephen Jones announced that the government is set to reform the current education pathway for advisers, which he said is “not sustainable”.
“The Albanese government is rebuilding a strong and sustainable financial advice industry that ensures Australians can access high quality and affordable financial advice,” Minister Jones said.
“The advice industry was abandoned and decimated by the former Coalition government, as the number of advisers fell from 28,000 in January 2019 to less than 16,000.
“The government will reform the education requirements for professional financial advisers to create a sustainable pathway for new advisers to enter the profession.”
Under the current professional pathway for financial advisers, prospective advisers are required to complete an approved qualification that is limited to those focused specifically on financial advice, the 1,600-hour professional year, the financial adviser exam, and meet continuing professional education (CPE) requirements.
“School leavers are not attracted to the specialised area of study and it is a significant investment for career changers. Fewer higher education providers are offering courses due to the lack of entrants,” Jones added.
“Under the government’s changes, the proposed education standard will centre around a new requirement to hold a bachelor’s degree or higher in any discipline.”
While the degree requirements will be opened up, the minister said prospective advisers will still need to meet minimum study requirements in relevant financial concepts “such as finance, economics or accounting”.
“They will also need to complete financial advice subjects covering ethics, legal and regulatory obligations, consumer behaviour and the financial advice process,” he said.
“This provides relevant core knowledge for an adviser, streamlines entry into the industry and retains the important role of tertiary education.
“It will also bring down the costs on prospective advisers and make it easier for people to change careers into financial advice later in life.
“For most students studying a commerce, economics or finance degree – or people moving across from other financial services careers – the cost and time to meet the requirements under the new standard will be halved.”
All of the other requirements – completing a professional year, passing the financial adviser exam and undertaking ongoing CPE – will all remain.
According to Minister Jones, the reforms will also complement the education requirements for the proposed new class of adviser, which he provided an update on in December last year.
“We will ensure the pathway is aligned to enable the new class of adviser to transition into the professional advice ranks,” the minister said.
“The government will work with industry and higher education providers to ensure an appropriate transition to the new education standard.”
He added that the government was also halting the second stage of the registration process for financial advisers established by the Better Advice Act, which would have required individual advisers to register annually with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission from 1 July 2026.
“Financial advisers are already registered by their authorising Australian Financial Services licensees under stage one. Not proceeding with stage two removes unnecessary red tape on individual advisers,” Jones said.
“These reforms build on the government’s Delivering Better Financial Outcomes package to help address the current supply shortage of financial advisers, cut red tape that is not leading to better consumer outcomes, and strengthen the industry’s ability to meet the future demand for financial advice.”
Get this flop out of office
So after all that hoo-haa, basically back to a DFP just that you need a uni degree also.
What an absolute waste of time and money these Royal Commissions and Inquiries etc have been.
Who is going to want to be a financial adviser now that you can’t make any money out of it? Just give it to the bean counters with their 1 year financial plans… aligned with tax returns… conflict of interest?
Anyway.
if a Financial Adviser or Financial Planner has not completed at least graduate diploma in FP, they can act professional, yet they are not professional in the true sense of the word, therefore financial planning will remain an industry and not a profession.
I handed back my advisor license due to a lack of an approved education degree, even although I hold a Master’s degree in Banking and Finance, a Bachelor’s degree in Economics, and have been working in the banking 20 year, and 10 year in accounting industry on advising client on smsf.
Omg you had 5 years to do 3 subjects, seriously you didn’t want to continue, no one forced you out.
This absurdity should never have been allowed to happen. For many, like yourself, these changes are too late.
AIOFP and FAAA Welcome this with open arms- they are proxies for the large funds who will re introduce the old days whilst boutique advisers will wear the cost.
This change will not result in one single additional person entering the financial planning profession. Education standards are a barrier but the real issue is the ridiculous level of regulation and the attitude of governments and regulators that all financial planners are dodgy and therefore cannot be treated fairly like all other professions. Fix this and then maybe the numbers will go up, not wasting everyone’s time with a minor change to education standards.
RG146 with extra steps, neat i never thought id live in groundhog day
Oh right, should i send the bill for the extra completed units straight to canberra once this goes through? what a joke
Another spit in the face for the rest of us who have endured this BS for what seems like forever.
So let me get this straight. Now that every remaining adviser has completed a targeted degree to keep their job and to maintain their livelihood, with 10 months to go until the deadline he backflips!??
You have got to be kidding me!!!! WHEN DOES IT END!!!!
We advisers already knew all these “reforms” were a mistake even before these politicians (on both sides) started pontificating. We’re are too smart, no, make that three-smart, for these bozos. Those of us still standing have a robust business model capable of withstanding the next round of gaffs by the muppets. In fact we say to the politicians, bring it on, muppets.
When does this clown go home ?
Read “we will relax standards to allow far less qualified bank & industry fund staff back into the game to sell”.
That ussless Arts degree will be handy then
*useless
I object to my honours degree in Psychology being labelled ‘Useless’ by someone in a field like Financial Advice, where a lot of our best work is done not in ‘selling products’ and writing ridiculously long SoAs, but in working directly with, understanding, educating and Advising clients. Financial Advisers with Psychology degrees from say the Arts Faculty of the University of Melbourne, are so useful they are also now in very short supply in the Counselling and Clinical fields. But judging by the even worse dearth of us in Financial Services ranks, who have bothered to add Masters of Graduate Diplomas in Financial Planning to our quals, there are not enough Advisers who can provide the really holistic and helpful service only a Trusted, understanding, Pyschology educated, rather than just financially educated, Adviser can equal.
I could not care less if this soon to be ex minister said “I am repealing every piece of legislation that is causing unnecessary red tape and adding costs to advisers and their clients, removing advisers from poor CSLR outcomes not of their doing, removing the useless exam to save advisers money, making the PY easier to attract new entrants, reduce SOA complexities, scrap the qualified adviser category, etc. etc. etc. because we all know he is just a has been full of talk and no action of any benefits for advisers.
This is TRUTH!!!
Here here what a useless windbag he was!
Where, where?
Well said he has only ever been a muppet full of wind…!
Answer: When is April Fools’ Day?
I have mentioned on many occasions that the FASEA exam is very unfair; the pass mark changes with each sitting. In every sitting, about 70% of candidates fail. The exam is designed this way so that the administrative costs can be covered. If you have a Master of Financial Planning, why is it necessary to pass this onerous exam? Furthermore, the true/false questions require both answers to be correct—there are no half marks for a partially correct answer. This can make a significant difference between passing and failing. If the government reduces the cost of the exam, I will claim a refund for the difference.
Due to the high operating costs, financial advisers are leaving the industry. To address these costs, insurance commissions should be paid before the 60% reduction. Insurance premiums have not decreased; in fact, they have only increased. Additionally, commissions for fund managers should be reinstated.
If this trend continues, there may be no registered financial advisers left. Is this what the government desires?
I believe you have answered your own question.
It wasn’t onerous for most of us, just those who are holding on to their advising careers with the finger tips, trying to continue doing things like they did 10 years ago despite the evolution of our industry into a profession.
The FASEA exam was not that hard and the idea that 70% fail every sitting is not true – more than 90% of people who have ever sat it have passed (with some failing one or more times). It is AQF8 standard which is equivalent to one exam from a Graduate Diploma course. Many advisers have a Graduate Diploma or Master’s and the vast majority have passed the exam with no issues.
Doubt they will be in office long enough to do anything
Really hope not, worst yet. Others may have been negative to the profession, but deliberately and without lying and gaslighting. Jones was by far the worst, most bias towards industry fund and out of touch liar to have the role of Minister of Financial Services. Genuine cancer on the profession. Suuported by a useless Treasury which can’t even draft legislation, has been called out for the pathetic implementation of csolr and wrote such poor trash the senate almost didn’t consider qar tranche 1 without a rewrite. Hopeless pathetic useless bias and anti-adviser. VOTE LABOR OUT
What is everyone getting carried away with. Really not that much change other than opening doors to a larger pool of potential new entrants. NE will still at a minimum need to complete the 3 bridging subjects, plus complete subjects in any specific knowledge area that is not covered in their degree which they wish to provide advice in.
Where is any of the follow through on reducing red tape. After fleecing us with csolr and “qualified advisers” disgrace where is the reprieve for current more highly educated encumbants??
Such a stitch up. He wants to go back to what the original idea was – bachelor degree or higher. This comes after every remaining adviser has completed a targeted degree to keep their job. Absolute shambles. I’m not saying Labor are to blame for the flip flop, that was the libs that caved to dirty lobbyist for education providers (like useless Kaplan). But going back now when there is only 10months for everyone else to complete a graddipfinplan is too late. The targeted post grad qual was always a ridiculous policy. But now most remaining advisers have completed the additional study, no doubt those same dirty lobbyists are suggesting a reduction in the requirements, because cash machine is coming to an end and will need to grow rev via cpd. So with new adviser levels being microscopic, the dirty lobbyists want lower standards to grow adviser numbers to then grow cpd revenue. What an absolute shambles. My degree might be recognised, but I’ll never recognise it as something I need to do my job. Shame!
Piecemeal ‘improvements’ to financial advice have been a feature of the profession for several decades. Some have added value. Twenty years ago a proposal for a Code of Conduct administered jointly by ASIC and the FPA foundered on the rock of self-interest. While the latest proposal has some logic (not enough advisers) it’s not addressing the real challenge.
We spent a fortune promoting financial literacy while also promoting the publication of dense legal product documents and voluminous advice plans. Is this just another change of direction without really defining the journey?
The journey for each person (and each couple) keeps changing because we have no coherent national longevity strategy. That’s a major reason for the cost and limited availability of good advice. Different silos of interest are unable to co-ordinate with each other – super, age pension and ‘retirement’ age reviews, preventive health, aged care, financial advice, estate planning and more – so people are confused and concerned.
The personal journey should start by raising longevity awareness through education and personal longevity planning. It’s simple, so no compliance issues. We need at least that, and then we really do have to lift our game collectively to bring all the silos into line under a national longevity strategy, not just have them fiddling with the parts however wisely.
I dropped 20k on the grad dip of financial planning. Are the government going to reimburse me?
The barrier to entry isn’t the education. Leave it as it is. The barrier is the lack of licensees able to take on PY candidates given the absurd costs imposed on these businesses by layer upon layer of ineffective legislation.
Totally agree with you. Have done the hard yards on completing all the study requirements only to have this watered down now. Where is the FAAA in all this?
The FAAA has done sweet FA for years. Exactly why they won’t get a cent from me. Dante De Gori sat on his pay cheque for years while the govt had a field day with our industry. How he ever got employed elsewhere I will never know. Not many positive changes since then either.
Dante is now the CEO of the Financial Planning Standards Board in the US. Go figure.
I’m slightly confused, so is the grad dip of financial planning for existing advisers no longer needed anymore? Or is it still needed and to do the entire 8 units? Are the changes only to new advisers wanting to enter the industry?
who was lobbying for this change?
Jones doesn’t listen just bs Treasury make up after killing our profession
Jones’ reforms are arguably the most significant and positive contribution he’ll make to the financial advice profession, and it couldn’t come at a more crucial time. The current system is bleeding advisers faster than it can replace them, and an industry in run-off is no good to anyone. This reform is the key to survival.
But here’s the problem—too many on the inside, as seen in the comments, are blinded by rage. Yes, they’ve been abused by years of overregulation and systemic failures. Their indignation is understandable but dangerous. This bitterness toward what they see as a ‘lower bar’ for new entrants will kill the sector if we let it. Someone with a commerce degree who decides to become an adviser and completes top-up education should be welcomed, not resisted. No rational argument can be made that this is a ‘lower bar’—it’s simply a better way forward.
For business principals, this is a win. New entrants mean future buyers, creating opportunities to sell financial planning businesses in 10-15 years. Any principal trying to build value and equity should be over the moon about this. Credit where it’s due—Jones has done a good thing, and it’s time the profession recognizes that.
The idea was to make this a profession with high standards. Now it will be a profession with low standards and thus advisers will continue to be rated on the lowest rung of trust worthiness.
But it will never be implemented so it’s of no relevance to me as a PP…
No he hasn’t done a good thing. No credit and lying useless worst minister to date. Emambarassmeny
Jones didn’t say ‘someone with a commerce degree’. He said ‘any degree’. Big difference.
Peter Swan are you for real?
30 yr old adviser here with 6 yrs experience advising (what a time to enter the industry) . Agree with your points given attributing more commerce majors generally towards our profession in university. However it takes a large effort by the universities to effectively funnel that talent and they are indifferent mainly. In addition, what have we got as a selling point to these young people, without the supposed reform to make our ability to do anything unhampered by layers of tape.
I dread to think what id be paying vs what id get for a practice succession buyout in 10-15 years. Then there’s where the capital comes from to do so. Younger people dont have houses to leverage, and dont have solid valuation conditions for practices with the regulatory environment changing every 4 minutes, and no visible large capital model, BOLR or standard valuation model to reference. That said, alot of PE investment in the background may be changing this. The opportunity is only as ripe as the attitudes of the current crop are flexible.
A top-up education for a commerce degree is doing a Graduate Diploma – this pathway already exists and contains about as concise an education as one should have to become a financial adviser.
When is the FASEA exam fee bring dropped from $1500 back to $750? 100% Govt created inflation is outrageous, particularly with resits
Client – “Can you explain to me how the Centrelink age pension system interacts with super allocated pensions? Adviser – “Hang on. Need to check my Bachelor of Circus Arts degree (accredited by Swinburne) for some tricks”.
🙂
This resigned minister became irrelevant a long time ago so don’t worry his latest thought bubble will never get implemented before his Labor mates are sent packing back into opposition soon…
ive spent $100k on my education to be treated like a 2nd class citizen by the Government, my licensee & Society. Built a client base under enforceable undertakings due to other people’s and licences past indiscretions. Finally get to peak regulatory madness and paperwork inefficiency after 50% of advisers leave the industry to just have them lower the bar.
how about make it a profession, keep the bar high, allow clients to transfer their data from licensee to licensee via open banking and advisers to upload advice to a central body with insurance to stop the ring fencing of advisers via insurance and AFSL handcuffs. The problem is simple to fix, there is just too many vested interests in keeping the status quo and making advisers the scapegoats.
I spend $150,000 pa just to open my doors every year (in Govt fees & other requirements)
Hey kids, come to financial planning its such a fun and rewarding career 🙂
they are watering down the barriers to the industry as they want more heads in the industry to make sure their levies are covered.
What happened to professionalising the industry? Seriously, make it simple, you must have a finance/accounting related degree and that’s what the entry requirement is. Full Stop.
What ever happened to the concerns about the mental health toll placed on advisors given the constant changes??
Utterly absurd and sickening.
Cannot wait to retire from this madhouse of an industry.
Exactly, I have the same thought process !
My God this MP is a full of it. All I see here is a Minister making promises leading up to an election they are very likely to lose ANYWAY. Jones has just kicked the can down the street since inheriting this portfolio. I see now reason or even incentive to return to the personal advice space from this.
You cannot trust Labor.
Never did
More evidence that his industry does not run on common sense but payments of dollars….”In any discipline”….How do we go from sensible legislation in the first instance and then change…. where we request access to the hundreds of thousands of graduates that complete a degree such as Economics, Commerce, Business with a requirement to study additional advice related subject via a Diploma or Grad dip to this mess.
Holy ****, when will the changes to our industry end. It’s like an elastic band!
Not anytime soon – the mandarins at Treasury need to look busy.
After the rest of us have completed the required education and all the new entrants have jumped through every hoop; this backflip is just a spit in the face
Bachelor of Hair Dressing – sure, I can help you with your Retirement Planning. Here we go again!
The exam is just a govt cash grab and is a waste of time and resources.
An economist or accountant (or any other degree) with one subject in actual financial planning….. classic. So much for the profession… it is now not so under any measure.
The FASEA Exam doesn’t even have questions about Financial Planning. The questions are about the Corporations Act. #smh
oh dear.. So are existing advisers who have met the experience pathway requirements safe?
people who elect to operate at the minimum level are never safe
What about the Stockbroker, who’s been in the Finance Industry for 30 to 40 year plus? Here’s a chance to have them advising Retail Clients on direct investments in small, medium and large industries listed on the ASX. Currently these Experienced experts can only advise 708’s (wealthy individuals), there’s virtually no access to these knowledgeable people leaving the retail investor no other choice than buy into a Managed Funds. These experts should be “grandfathered” to give ASX Listed company advice as required by the many Retail Clients who seek direct investment into this area.
I’m fairly certain when they were first announced the intent of the education changes was the following. Somewhere an incompetent ASIC and government changed the intent before implementation. It’s still a terrible job / career but I’m sure if they play at the edges they may at least stop the exit before there are less than 12,000 advisers.
“Under the government’s changes, the proposed education standard will centre around a new requirement to hold a bachelor’s degree or higher in any discipline.”
Jokes on all you guys – me and my back packer mates are just pulling the VW van up to the industry funds and selling super
Unfortunately, the damage was done by Jane Hume and Josh Frydenberg, so the process now is a mess. Josh is gone but not Jane Hume.
There must be a federal election on the horizon!
So our of touch and what a pathetic policy. Individual registration would have allowed the removal of afsl so not going ahead saves nothing. Worst financial services minister in history and thank God not enough sitting days for him to legislate this unfounded garbage too
Is a degree in used car sales ok?
WTF
Now the pendulum swinging back
A bit of a joke really, we should keep people going through in Financial Planning subjects so advisers are skilled outside of just investment advice. -.-
How is anyone seriously even considering listening to the bloke?? He single handedly brought an industry to its knees and it will take many years to recover after the devastating destruction he caused. It’s truly mindblowing.
I thought this idiot had resigned/retired!!! How can he make statements and then decisions if he is not going to be there??
Back on the Education roundabout again and again,
Good lord, this never ends. Is it some kind of psyop?
Is this an episode of “Yes Minister”?
Utopia or Hollowmen