About Good Returns  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  RSS Feeds Other Sites:   tmmonline.nz  |   landlords.co.nz
Last Article Uploaded: Friday, November 22nd, 10:19AM
rss
Latest Headlines

Best way to solve FAA? Bin it and start afresh

One group representing financial advisers has told the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment that the best way to progress the Financial Advisers Act review is to destroy the legislation completely.

Thursday, September 24th 2015, 6:00AM 4 Comments

by Susan Edmunds

SiFA has been having meetings with MBIE as it moves through its process of consultation with financial advice industry stakeholders.

The Ministry has received submissions on the FAA review issues paper and is preparing an options paper for release in November.

SiFA spokesman Robert Oddy said his group was asked what would be useful in terms of the review. “Our suggested was they should destroy the Financial Advisers Act completely and start afresh.”

He said regulation was adding about $100 million in costs for the clients of financial advisers every year, when the cost of running an AFA business, including authorisation and other regulations such as AML, were considered.

“Clients are having to pay that because no one else is going to sit back and pay it.”

He said there was little advantage for consumers when there were such large costs involved.

Oddy suggested that could be part of the reason that many investors decided it was easier to buy property instead. "Notwithstanding that they do not understand the risks."

He said his group had asked MBIE what the reason for regulation was, what problem it was trying to solve, and had not been able to receive a satisfactory answer.

But he said that if the burden of meeting regulatory requirements could not be eased in some way, or if the expectations on advisers increased, a significant number would likely decide to leave the industry. “There’s a certain point you reach where enough is enough,” he said. “If it’s not viable, why should you do it?”

Tags: Financial Advisers Act SiFA

« Capacity issues stifle managersLVR restrictions to be reviewed »

Special Offers

Comments from our readers

On 24 September 2015 at 10:22 am Mr Slater said:
Whilst I'm not one to argue that the FAA needs improving we need to keep in mind that we need financial regulation to ensure our markets are in line with the rest of the reputable financial world. Before legislation and to some effect still NZ was a haven for dodgy financial transactions.

For example I realise services like transactional service providers (eg FX dealing) may not be done by all advisers but it is by some and as such needs strong regulation.
On 24 September 2015 at 10:32 am Dirty Harry said:
While I agree with the points and the sentiment, I'm pretty sure that threatening to leave the industry is about as effective as smoking out a wasp nest by burning your house.

There has already been plenty of discussion about where the key FMA people come from, and where they end up, so just imagine what they might think about advisers finding the burden of regulation all a bit too much to bear.

The most effective discussion will be one that speaks to the objectives and accountabilities set down in the original discussions that were had prior to the FAA being drawn up. Pretty sure it was about confidence and security in markets and protecting investors. \

And getting rid of the cowboys.

On those measures yes, the whole thing might be said to not be working. In fact, the cowboys seem to have invaded the regulators. Sorry, couldn't help it.
On 25 September 2015 at 9:56 am Charity said:
We need regulation for the financial advisory industry. However, I agree that binning it and starting over would be the best course. It was needlessly complicated and had the smell of lawyers mucking about in something they didn't really understand.

It also felt like it was written as a lawyers' relief act--that is so it would make work for lawyers.

It did a lot to add costs and expense to advisers which did not in the end help clients in the least.
On 25 September 2015 at 12:11 pm w k said:
@charity, i sense exactly the same thing. and is this also known "churning"?

Sign In to add your comment

 

print

Printable version  

print

Email to a friend
News Bites
Latest Comments
  • Details confirmed for transitional licensing
    “And the other requirement is to have an internal complaint process as set out in the licence conditions. It’s good to see...”
    1 day ago by Mr Slater
  • When is a client really a client?
    “And this subtle upgrade to the understanding of a complaint. Which changes the ISO definition from an expression of dissatisfaction...”
    4 days ago by JPHale
  • When is a client really a client?
    “Just released additional standards from the FMA. Record keeping potentially until 7 years after the death of the life...”
    4 days ago by JPHale
  • When is a client really a client?
    “@ReganT interesting that the two life advisers involved with the code working group discussion are the ones being argued...”
    4 days ago by JPHale
  • When is a client really a client?
    “In a previous reply I responded to the concept of payment as a trigger. I actually agree it’s not. While we don’t often...”
    5 days ago by regant
Subscribe Now

Weekly Wrap

Previous News

MORE NEWS»

Most Commented On
Mortgage Rates Table

Full Rates Table | Compare Rates

Lender Flt 1yr 2yr 3yr
ANZ 5.19 4.05 3.95 4.49
ANZ Special - 3.55 3.45 3.99
ASB Bank 5.20 ▼3.89 ▲4.05 4.39
ASB Bank Special - ▼3.39 ▲3.55 3.89
BNZ - Classic - 3.55 3.45 3.99
BNZ - Mortgage One 5.90 - - -
BNZ - Rapid Repay 5.35 - - -
BNZ - Std, FlyBuys 5.30 4.45 4.35 4.55
BNZ - TotalMoney 5.30 - - -
China Construction Bank 5.50 4.70 4.80 4.95
China Construction Bank Special - 3.19 3.19 3.19
Lender Flt 1yr 2yr 3yr
Credit Union Auckland 5.95 - - -
Credit Union Baywide 6.15 4.95 4.95 -
Credit Union North 6.45 - - -
Credit Union South 6.45 - - -
Finance Direct - - - -
First Credit Union 5.85 3.99 4.49 -
Heartland 6.70 7.00 7.25 7.85
Heartland Bank - Online - - - -
Heretaunga Building Society 5.75 4.80 4.95 -
HSBC Premier 5.24 3.35 3.35 3.35
HSBC Premier LVR > 80% - - - -
Lender Flt 1yr 2yr 3yr
HSBC Special - - - -
ICBC 5.15 3.18 3.18 3.20
Kainga Ora 5.18 4.04 3.95 4.39
Kiwibank 5.80 ▼4.14 ▲4.30 4.64
Kiwibank - Capped - - - -
Kiwibank - Offset 5.15 - - -
Kiwibank Special - ▼3.39 ▲3.55 3.89
Liberty 5.69 - - -
Napier Building Society - - - -
Nelson Building Society 5.70 4.25 4.15 -
Pepper Money Near Prime 5.64 - 5.44 5.44
Lender Flt 1yr 2yr 3yr
Pepper Money Prime 5.18 - 4.98 4.98
Pepper Money Specialist 7.59 - 7.39 7.39
Resimac 4.50 4.86 3.89 3.94
RESIMAC Special - - - -
SBS Bank 5.29 4.85 5.05 5.49
SBS Bank Special - 3.55 3.39 3.89
Sovereign 5.30 4.15 4.29 4.55
Sovereign Special - 3.65 3.75 4.05
The Co-operative Bank - Owner Occ 5.15 3.49 3.59 3.89
The Co-operative Bank - Standard 5.15 3.99 4.09 4.39
TSB Bank 6.09 4.35 4.25 4.69
Lender Flt 1yr 2yr 3yr
TSB Special 5.29 3.55 3.45 3.89
Wairarapa Building Society 5.70 4.85 4.99 -
Westpac 5.34 4.15 4.09 4.49
Westpac - Offset 5.34 - - -
Westpac Special - 3.55 3.45 3.99
Median 5.34 4.02 4.09 4.39

Last updated: 21 November 2019 9:39am

News Quiz

The maximum remuneration model for Australian life insurance advisers is to be set at what?

Upfront 40% + trail 20%

Upfront 50% + trail 10%

Upfront 50% + trail 20%

Upfront 60% + trail 10%

Upfront 60% + trail 20%

MORE QUIZZES »

About Us  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy  |  RSS Feeds  |  Letters  |  Archive  |  Toolbox
 
Site by Web Developer and eyelovedesign.com