The Financial Adviser Standards and Ethics Authority (FASEA) has indicated there will be little to no consultation between now and when legislation is introduced for the new professional standards for financial advisers and accountants next year, according to an industry body.
SMSF Association head of education and technical Peter Hogan told the SMSF Association Technical Day Series in Sydney last week the association had emphasised the need for further consultation to FASEA, adding the 1 January 2019 deadline is too soon.
“There are so many unanswered areas around the program and the framework that will be put in place,” Hogan said.
“So again, we’ve suggested the time frame is too tight and that further consultation is needed.”
He also said the association had commented on FASEA’s proposed code of conduct, calling for less subjectivity and greater clarity to allow a more practical implementation of the required standards.
The professional body specifically highlighted three areas of the code of conduct it was concerned about, including the obligation for an adviser not to act in a manner that might give them personal advantage, and asked for greater clarity on what “inappropriate personal advantage” meant.
“I guess probably the one observation around the code of conduct is everyone in this room can now add that to the six or seven other codes of conduct they have to deal with in order to simply provide advice to their clients in their daily professional lives,” Hogan said.
He also reiterated a common theme running through all the association’s submissions: the need for a separate qualification for advisers providing advice to SMSF trustees.
The qualification needs to be separate from broader super designations currently in place, he said.
He added this argument was supported by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s recent reports into SMSF advice, as well as Productivity Commission reports.
“All of our submissions, whether it is to FASEA or whether it’s to the Productivity Commission, has emphasised that need for a separate and distinct SMSF qualification in order to appropriately service this particular part of the industry,” he said.
