Stay informed Sign up for our newsletter and be the first to know.
Stay informed Sign up for our newsletter and be the first to know.
Brilliant Investment Thinking by Advisers for Advisers.
ASX
+0.33%
S&P
-1.65%
AUD
$0.69

Compliance

Share
Print

Regulation Impact Statement to be prepared post fact

Regulation Impact Statement to be prepared post fact
Share
Print

Following the 2009 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services Inquiry into Financial Products and Services in Australia, the FoFA reforms were developed.

Following the 2009 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services Inquiry into Financial Products and Services in Australia, the FoFA reforms were developed.

It identified conflicted remuneration as a leading cause of poor financial advice that was provided to clients. The resolution was to ban conflicted remuneration and to thereby remove the conflict between advisers and their clients’ interests, that seem to arise when advisers are provided with incentives from product issuers.

It determined that by removing conflict, via the removal of conflicted remuneration, advisers were more easily able to act in the best interests of their clients and provide better advice, away from the influence of product issuers.

In 2020, former Treasurer Josh Frydenberg extended the ban on conflicted remuneration to Listed Investment Companies (LICs) and Listed Investment Trusts (LITs) sold to retail clients. These are referred to as ‘stamping fees’ which represent the remuneration payable to advisers and brokers who distribute or recommend new LITs and LICs for clients.

The ban was aimed at eradicating fees that have the potential to tempt advisers and stockbrokers to act in their own interests. But an unintended consequence from the banning of stamping fees, was that no new LIC or LIT were issued in 2020.

As is the case with most advice regulations, the stamping fee ban was only directed to those advising retail clients. At the conclusion of the removal of the banning of conflicted remuneration back in May 2020, a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) was required to be prepared.

However, a RIS was not completed prior to the final decision. This week, Treasury issued a series of adviser questions required to complete a post-implementation review of the policy within two years of implementation. 

Share
Print

Even long-standing clients can create unexpected AML risk

Many advisers believe long relationships are their best defence against financial crime risk. Under the new AML framework, familiarity is no substitute for...

When ‘low-risk’ isn’t no-risk: the AML/CTF lessons professional advisers can’t ignore

With AML/CTF regulation expanding in 2026, Catherine Evans dismantles the dangerous myths that low-risk clients and good intentions are enough to keep...

Kit Legal launches AML/CTF solution for advice firms

With Tranche 2 drawing closer and institutional counterparties already testing firms’ AML maturity, Kit Legal’s new framework quietly shifts a looming...

Compliance is changing, and it could the biggest growth opportunity yet

If the past year has taught us anything, it’s this: the firms that are winning trust and ultimately market share are treating compliance as strategy, not...