According to the Australian Paraplanner Survey 2023, compiled by The Paraplanner Hub and Tanngo and based on a survey of some 210 paraplanners, most paraplanners do not believe QAR reforms are a threat to their jobs.
While the specific details on the new look of statements of advice (SOAs) remain unclear, the government has said it plans to replace the SOA with an “advice record that is more fit for purpose, with consultation to determine the final design of the replacement”.
“With this announcement, some paraplanners feared their positions were at risk, especially since a significant portion of their responsibilities involves ‘writing an SOA’,” the report said.
“However, as revealed by this survey, paraplanners engage in far more than just writing SOAs. Their duties extend to other areas such as conducting product research, modelling, developing advice, ensuring compliance, handling project work, software configuration, and client reviews.”
The report added that 72 per cent of paraplanners also produce records of advice (ROAs), which in most cases are a simple document to produce.
“It follows that if ROAs are mostly being written by paraplanners, then perhaps short-form advice records may still be in the paraplanner’s domain too,” it said.
According to the survey, 91 per cent of paraplanners believe that post-QAR, a document will still be provided to clients.
Moreover, just 37 per cent believe the QAR recommendations will lead to a better advice experience for the client, while an equal 37 per cent think their job could be at risk when the QAR reforms are implemented.
“A common belief is that even if legislation doesn’t mandate a client-facing document, certain service-oriented firms/licensees may still require an advice record to be provided to their clients,” the report said.
Looking at their overall feelings on the QAR, 85 per cent expressed positivity about what the new legislation may bring, with many happy to see less cumbersome SOAs on the horizon.
The report also looked at the cost to deliver an SOA, finding that there is no “definitive consensus” on the price of producing the document, with a fairly even spread of the responses ranging from $350–$851+ for the same SOA.
“Considering the time it takes to write an SOA, several paraplanners were confident that the SOA would demand 4–6 hours. At an assumed hourly rate of $65, this equates to a fee ranging from $260–$390. Even if the process took 7–10 hours to complete (the next most frequent response), the fee shouldn’t exceed $650. So, why such a significant difference?” the report said.
“It could be due to several factors: additional costs involved in preparing the SOA such as technology or other overheads, profit margins, or possibly underestimating the actual time required to produce an SOA.”
Looking at efficiency, the report found that contract paraplanners were much more efficient in producing SOAs when compared with employed paraplanners, with 79 per cent indicating it takes four to six hours to complete, while only 51 per cent of employed paraplanners reported the same.
Turnaround times were fairly consistent, with 70 per cent of paraplanners managing to turnaround an SOA within one to five days and just 5 per cent taking more than 10 days on average to complete an SOA.
Just another “industry” profiting off of advisers. Soon there will be none left and we will all look back and laugh at the thieves who are ASIC, Government, AFCA, “Remediation” Experts, Compliance and Reg Tech and support staff, that pushed out IFAs. All parties who face 0 risk of litigation, banning, costs that advisers do but feel they should dictate how advice should be delivered – not advisers or clients. Clearly after all this rot the only ones left really want to help people, even at their own cost while the pigs in the trough continue to get fatter off them.
Industry profiting off advisers? As far as I’m aware, most advisers pass on these costs to the clients. Paraplanners are supporting advisers and most have added lots of value to strategy and preventing audit breaches by making sure licensee rules are met. For a moment, stop licking your own backside and consider that the financial planning is an industry that supports the front end- the advisers. Good luck trying to do it all on your own buddy.
You can always write the SOA yourself mate, instead of dealing with all these pigs in your trough
Lol. Why don’t you self-licence, self-audit, write your own SOAs, and regulate your own financial advisory conduct. I’m sure [i]YOU [/i]could do all of that on your own and still have enough time to see clients. It’s almost as if you don’t know how delegation works…
Of course they’re not, because there won’t be any change under impotent Jones. They’re safe as houses with no risk of being banned