Sec Com gives clarity on registration and deadlines
There has been confusion in the financial adviser industry regarding the registration requirements for advisers who operate as sole traders under a company name and around legislative deadlines.
Wednesday, October 20th 2010, 6:38AM 
5 Comments
by Jenha White
Securities Commission director of Financial Adviser Regulation (Implementation) Mel Hewitson says at the moment both the individual and the company have a legal obligation to register separately, with advisers operating under this structure needing to pay two registration fees.
She says the Ministry of Economic Development (MED) is currently considering how registration could be streamlined for sole traders in this situation.
"The government will need to ensure that individual advisers and the companies that are operating in the financial adviser market can be identified, also that the integrity of the dispute resolution arrangements and the authorisation framework under the law are not compromised."
Officials expect to be able to provide an update on these proposals by the end of this month.
Hewitson also says the Securities Commission has updated the AFA Get Ready Checklist to make it clearer which are legislative deadlines and which are recommended administrative ones.
"The recommended deadlines help us to plan the licensing assessment resources we need to get you all through the gates on time.
"Since we can't know exactly how many potential AFAs are out there, tracking numbers registering on the FSP register and booking with ETITO for the Set B exam really helps our planning."
She says if too many leave it to the last minute to apply then there's a real risk that some applications won't be processed by 1 July.
"None of us want to be in that situation, so a big thank you to those who are onto it already."
She says advisers can also sign up for Securities Commission web alerts to hear about financial adviser regulation updates as soon as they are available.
Jenha is a TPL staff reporter. jenha@tarawera.co.nz
| « The ABC of authorisation | Advisers not listening to regulation messages: Frampton » |
Special Offers
Comments from our readers
We already have to pay for police checks as individuals to prove we are not criminals and pay other company office fees to finance the AFA (Gestapo) audit police force who will audit us and police us anually.
I find this approach offensive as a J. P. I have already been checked out by the justice system which required a police check and a High Court Judge who interviewed me and decided I was a fit and suitable person to act as a J. P.
I remain a J.P.after over 20 years servicing the community .
What is the is the next government regulation we have to face and have to finance to be able to work in our profession ?
Good Returns, is there any chance you can chase up the officials?
We were told there would be guidance on this issue by the end of October. It's now well into November. What is the story please?
Commenting is closed
|
|
Printable version |
|
Email to a friend |
