Is FASEA beginning to unravel?

Alex Burke,  Senior Writer,  No More Practice Education

Not long after Shadow Assistant Treasurer and the Shadow Minister for Financial Services Stephen Jones labelled FASEA as having been "built wrong from the ground up," three associations have submitted their criticisms of the Government's adviser education program. 

The point of contention at the moment is the revised guide to the FASEA Code of Ethics, which already attracted significant concern across the industry a year ago. Despite FASEA’s attempts to further clarify the Code, it would appear based on industry response that there’s a lot more work to be done. 

A submission by the Association of Financial Advisers, for example, argues that rather than clarifying matters, the new guide "presents additional and unnecessary complexity as FASEA's expectations on certain issues seems to have changed with the interpretation contingent on which document a financial adviser reads."

This sentiment is echoed in the Financial Planning Association’s submission, which notes that once finalised, “this document will be the second piece of guidance issued by FASEA for the Code of Ethics.” 

The submission continues: “It is important that new guidance is consolidated into a single document to ensure that financial planners have a single source that covers all official guidance issued by FASEA. The FPA recommends that FASEA incorporates any new guidance into a single document, with clear version control for ease of reference.” 

This lack of conciseness and clarity presents a practical problem for those subject to the Code, as per another submission by the Stockbrokers and Financial Advisers Association. The SAFAA statement acknowledges that FASEA has “frequently expressed its views on the intent of the Code” - referring here to both the original and revised guidance - “but the challenge is that it will not be FASEA that interprets compliance with the Code.” 

What the SAFAA statement refers to here is that penalties for breaches associated with the Code will be meted out by ASIC, AFCA and the courts, all three of which will be able to assess compliance "with the benefit of hindsight." 

"The courts are already giving extended meaning to the enforcement of the obligations in the Corporations Act to adequately manage conflicts of interest and acting efficiently, fairly and honestly," the submission continues, "and they are likely to give extended meaning to the obligations under the standards in the Code of Ethics."

There are numerous other and more specific complaints about the standards in the Code as it currently stands – including case studies about the perennial problem of clients not understanding the advice given to them, a subject discussed in the latest season of Secrets of the Money Masters. But the overall sentiment appears to be that FASEA cannot fix the current situation through additional guidance documents. 

As the AFA submission concludes: “FASEA will need to change their approach and engage with the financial advice profession in a deliberate, structured and comprehensive way to address the significant number of outstanding issues. The profession needs to be part of building the solution, not simply the recipients of updated guidance that is released from time to time.”

With aspects of FASEA now being challenged across the industry – not to mention in Parliament – it will be interesting to see how the standards body responds in the coming weeks. 


The opinions expressed in this content are those of the author shown, and do not necessarily represent those of No More Practice Education Pty Ltd or its related entities. All content is intended for a professional financial adviser audience only and does not constitute financial advice. To view our full terms and conditions, click here

Liked this article? Let us know [likebtn theme="drop" dislike_enabled="0" icon_dislike_show="0" position="top"]

Want more of the latest in opinions, expert insights and training?

Subscribe to our free eNewsletter now

/ Related content

ASIC just flagged a new adviser obligations deadline

Today, the regulator announced changes to the licensing regime following....

Adviser identifies the biggest change post-COVID

Deborah Kent discusses the role advisers will need to play in Australia'....

Code of Ethics remains key obstacle for advisers 

Today, FASEA announced a decline in the overall pass rate for the advise....

James Baxter

10/11/20

This is what happens when a bunch of academic public servants try to develop a set of guidelines around an industry that they know nothing about. The result is that advice is now more costly, more complicated and less available to those that need it.

Ken Ryan

10/11/20

Look forward to further information on changes in the industry. One that is seeing quite a "whirl wind " of them

Mervin Reed

10/11/20

The inconsistent double meaning University focused information coming out from FASEA, now needs to be addressed by the Assistant Treasurer. This present situation means that the FASEA Exams are also compromised and will need alteration. Indeed it might mean the whole adviser exam process is junked as it has resulted in confusion rather than a change in ethical focus. Cannot hurt to start again when everyone has their act together

Leave a comment /

Related content /

27 November, 2020

Alex Burke,Senior Writer,No More Practice Education

ASIC just flagged a new adviser obligations deadline

Today, the regulator announced changes to the licensing regime following the initial Royal Commission response.

Read now

26 November, 2020

Alex Burke,Senior Writer,No More Practice Education

Adviser identifies the biggest change post-COVID

Deborah Kent discusses the role advisers will need to play in Australia's new economic reality. 

Read now

26 November, 2020

Alex Burke,Senior Writer,No More Practice Education

Code of Ethics remains key obstacle for advisers 

Today, FASEA announced a decline in the overall pass rate for the adviser exam, identifying Code of Ethics compliance as a stumbling block. 

Read now