<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/broadbeach-qld-4218">Broadbeach</a> offers plenty of reasons to live vertically, but moving from a substantial family home into an apartment can expose the compromises of high-density living. Privacy, room for guests and usable living space tend to matter more when an apartment is intended as a permanent home rather than an occasional coastal base.

A typical residential floor at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-eveleigh-broadbeach-7-9-surf-parade-broadbeach-qld-4218">The Eveleigh</a>, on Surf Parade,&nbsp;contains just four apartments. The 94-residence development by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/hirsch-faigen">Hirsch &amp; Faigen</a> is predominantly made up of expansive three-bedroom homes, with a limited collection of half-floor penthouses above.

Across the apartment floors, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/rothelowman">Rothelowman</a> has used the relatively limited number of residences to give each home greater access to natural light and outlook. Living spaces extend towards full-height glazing, while a series of bay windows frame selected views across the Pacific Ocean, city and hinterland rather than treating the building edge as a continuous wall of glass.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360965]

“The apartment floors deliver a collection of homes that embrace controlled outlook via a series of bay windows deliberately framing moments of view,” Rothelowman Director Kim Lowman said.

From outside, those projecting forms contribute to the tower’s faceted profile. Strong horizontal and vertical elements establish its proportions, while the changing position of the sun alters the light, shadow and reflection across the façade throughout the day.

The same attention moves inside the apartments, where the material palette combines warm timber, natural stone, metallic detailing and softer curved forms. Kitchens sit within the main living zone, with stone island benches, integrated joinery and European appliances, before the living areas extend towards the glazing and the outlook.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360981]

Three genuine bedrooms provide room to accommodate family and guests, while two secure car spaces and storage address some of the practical considerations that can become more noticeable when moving from a larger home. Feedback from the display suite has centred on the warmth and restraint of the interiors, with buyers commenting that the residences feel like homes rather than conventional coastal apartments.

A limited collection of half-floor penthouses occupies the upper levels, increasing the scale of the living spaces and adding private balconies and elevated finishes. From this position, the outlook extends between the ocean and hinterland.

Outside the private residences, The Eveleigh separates its shared spaces between the podium and rooftop. The podium is centred on wellness, with subtropical landscaping surrounding a swimming pool and pool terrace, yoga garden, private gymnasium, sauna and hot and cold plunge facilities. Landscaped retreats and pavilions provide additional places to sit away from the main recreation areas.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360966]

Higher in the building, a rooftop pavilion and private dining suite sit alongside resident lounge, barbecue and outdoor dining areas, opening towards panoramic views across the ocean, city and hinterland.

“Buyers are no longer just looking for an apartment, but a lifestyle where they can relax, reset, and enjoy a balanced way of living,” Hirsch &amp; Faigen Director of Sales Matt George said.

Interest to date has come from established owner-occupiers and interstate lifestyle purchasers, including buyers planning a future move to the Gold Coast. Many are coming from larger homes and want to reduce ongoing maintenance without giving up space for family and guests, privacy, two car spaces or the ability to entertain at home.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360969]

Much of that daily life can also take place beyond the building without requiring a drive. Kurrawa Beach and Pratten Park are an easy walk from Surf Parade, while Pacific Fair, Oracle Boulevard, The Oasis, restaurants, cafés, entertainment and public transport are also within walking distance.

The Eveleigh is Hirsch &amp; Faigen's fourth Gold Coast development since entering the market in 2021, following The Hemingway at Palm Beach, The Emerson at Kirra and Yves at Mermaid Beach. Each of the preceding projects sold out before completion.

“Broadbeach had been on our radar throughout our time operating on the Gold Coast,” the developer said. “Following our projects in Palm Beach, Kirra and Mermaid Beach, Broadbeach represented the natural next step for the business.”

The Surf Parade site brought together proximity to the beach, protected coastal outlooks and walkability to dining, shopping and recreation. Hirsch &amp; Faigen also identified the street as an emerging premium residential address, with enough separation from Broadbeach's busier destinations to retain a quieter environment at home.

The Eveleigh is now under construction by Maxcon, with completion forecast for mid-2028. Three-bedroom residences are currently available from $2.87 million.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=149670]

Joel Robinson

The Eveleigh brings house-like apartments to Broadbeach

A long-stalled Campbelltown development site is back in play, with new plans for 139 apartments set to supersede a mixed-use scheme approved almost a decade ago but never built.

The new proposal for 28 Cordeaux Street would deliver 116 market and 23 affordable apartments in a part 14-storey building, bringing a substantial new project into a Campbelltown market where new apartment supply remains limited.

Plans have been filed over the 3,092 sqm corner site at Moore-Oxley Street, around 600 metres from Campbelltown Railway Station and the city-centre retail core.

The site already carries a mixed-use residential approval dating to 2016. Doroch Architects has now been engaged on a larger replacement scheme, which is progressing as a State Significant Development Application following a Housing Delivery Authority determination in August 2025.

The apartment mix comprises 39 one-bedroom, 72 two-bedroom and 28 three-bedroom residences. Two-bedroom apartments make up just over half of the project, while three-bedroom homes account for 20 per cent.

<img alt="First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="136dd5b9-3791-4da6-9e31-76f533f5b4de" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Campbelltown%20da2.png?VersionId=LgOSy9nwf5u.MGswBBwaGGxuX8QpHSl_" />

Of the 139 apartments, 23 will be delivered as affordable housing under the in-fill affordable housing provisions of the Housing SEPP. The affordable component represents 15 per cent of the residential gross floor area and will be managed by a registered Community Housing Provider.

Doroch has sought to break the scale of the building into two distinct elements, with a masonry podium of around four storeys establishing the street edge before the residential tower steps back above.

The corner position has shaped that approach. Cordeaux Street faces toward the commercial and civic centre, while Moore-Oxley Street leads into the lower-scale residential neighbourhood to the south, and the design verification report describes the site as "bridging the commercial core to the north and established residential areas to the south."

The podium will be expressed predominantly in face brick, while the upper levels shift to brushed and grooved concrete cladding with darker metal detailing. Recessed sections, deep balcony edges and landscaping break down the upper form, with an approximately 11.8-metre setback to the northern boundary addressing the adjoining St Peters Anglican School.

<img alt="First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="c8b3d2d3-c561-4bfc-a5d9-a68c0c10dac1" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Campbelltown%20da1.png?VersionId=AeAEyJU02Gk2k5noUj2StziCvdQ7fW4B" />

Campbelltown has been starved of new residential developments in the last decade.

The only other notable development set to come to market this year is ALAND's Queen Square, a mixed-use precinct on over two hectares that will comprise apartments above a vibrant ground-level retail and hospitality dining precinct.

First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site

First Look: Sherlock Construction pitches apartments for low-rise Deception Bay

Queensland builder-developer MAYD has revealed the first look at its major North Kirra beachfront development, lodging amended plans that reduce the number of apartments and increase the proportion of larger residences.

The project is planned across a substantial 4,742 sqm amalgamated site spanning seven lots at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/2-6-pacific-parade-bilinga-qld-4225">2-6 Pacific Parade</a> and 27-33 Golden Four Drive in Bilin​ga, directly opposite Nor​th Kirra Beach.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/mayd-group">MAYD</a> secured the site for $32.5 million in 2025, in what was one of the Gold Coast's largest property transactions of the year.

The development will be delivered across two stages, with the first stage carrying an estimated gross realisation value of around $360 million.

The latest amendments seek to reduce the overall apartment count and shift the project further toward the owner-occupier market, with larger residences designed for buyers wanting considerably more space than traditionally offered in a beachfront apartment.

The residential mix will include townhomes, oversized two-bedroom apartments, substantial three-bedroom residences and four-bedroom homes.

MAYD has appointed Cera Stribley to lead the architecture and interiors, with the Melbourne-based design practice drawing on the beachfront setting through a series of ocean-facing terraces and heavily landscaped balconies.

Strong horizontal forms and curved balconies will define the exterior, with subtropical landscaping integrated throughout the building to soften the built form and increase the connection between the residences and the beachfront.

The project will also include an extensive collection of resident wellness and lifestyle facilities, continuing the broader shift across the Gold Coast's luxury apartment market toward larger homes supported by resort-style amenity.

<img alt="MAYD" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d1bcbb05-e659-4b47-8bd4-1e595315e2ad" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-27%20at%202.05.03%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=jj0XEud1X1DuLt7_KyElhjMdZGOXmLHP" />

MAYD Founder Todd Mould said North Kirra was increasingly appealing to buyers attracted to the more established, lower-density character of the southern Gold Coast.

"North Kirra presents one of the most compelling luxury residential opportunities currently emerging in Australia, combining absolute beachfront with the character and authenticity that buyers are increasingly seeking, and the same sense of tight-knit community that defined Burleigh and Currumbin perhaps 10 or 15 years ago," Mould said.

"With Gold Coast Airport on its doorstep, it also offers a level of accessibility that broadens its appeal across almost every market demographic."

The project comes as the southern Gold Coast continues to attract an increasing share of high-end apartment development and buyer activity.

Kirra in particular has emerged as one of the region's more tightly held beachfront markets, with its relatively low-density character, established surf and hospitality scene and proximity to Gold Coast Airport differentiating it from the higher-density markets further north.

Mould said those characteristics had informed the approach MAYD and Cera Stribley had taken to the project.

"We've worked closely with Cera Stribley to create a vision that is deeply connected to its surroundings," he said.

"Inspired by the coastline itself, the architecture has been shaped around space, privacy and resort-style living, creating a collection of homes that reflects the next generation of luxury on the southern Gold Coast."

MOTIV Managing Director Carly Cottam, who has been appointed to market the project, said buyer attention had continued to move south along the Gold Coast.

"Purchasers who may once have defaulted to Broadbeach, Main Beach or Surfers Paradise are increasingly recognising the value of a genuine beachfront location that offers lower density, strong amenity and a more established sense of community," Cottam said.

"Kirra has a powerful combination of growing demand and genuine scarcity. Beachfront supply is inherently constrained, the area remains relatively low density, and buyers are increasingly placing a premium on locations that feel established, uncrowded and authentic rather than heavily developed."

Cottam said the proximity to Gold Coast Airport was also proving increasingly important for interstate and second-home buyers.

"Being minutes from Gold Coast Airport makes it particularly compelling for interstate buyers, frequent travellers and second-home purchasers who can access an authentic coastal lifestyle almost immediately after stepping off a flight."

The acquisition takes MAYD's active development portfolio to more than $500 million, with the North Kirra project representing one of its largest undertakings to date.

MAYD is targeting an early 2027 launch.

First look at MAYD's North Kirra mixed-use precinct

<main data-perf-region="main">
Castle Hill, the longtime hub of the Hills District, has been one of the major beneficiaries of Sydney's Metro expansion, with improved connectivity helping drive continued population growth, development and buyer demand across the Hills District.

But despite that growth, the suburb has seen relatively few major new apartment projects brought to market over the past 18 months.

Hills District developer Reve Group is looking to fill that gap with <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/nova-r-ve-castle-hill-2-garthowen-crescent-castle-hill-nsw-2154">Nova Rêve</a>, a major new mixed-use precinct on the corner of Garthowen Crescent and Old Castle Hill Road, a short walk from Castle Hill Metro Station and Castle Towers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377679]

The project will comprise three residential towers alongside a hotel, restaurants, cafes and a skybar, more than 1,600 sqm of ground-floor retail and almost an acre of landscaped gardens.

It represents the largest project undertaken by Reve Group, the development arm of the Kassis family, which has been building across the Hills District for more than 30 years through Kassis Homes.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377675]

Nova Rêve also represents a significant step up from the family's first apartment development, Grand Rêve, which was delivered nearby on Garthowen Crescent.

Grand Rêve introduced larger, house-like apartment layouts and premium inclusions including Wolf and Sub-Zero appliances to the Castle Hill market.

Nova Rêve takes that approach to a precinct scale, combining the residential component with hospitality, retail and substantial public and resident landscaping.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377685]

Reve Group Managing Director Sam Kassis said the project reflected the family's three decades of building in the Hills, which has evolved from trophy homes on quarter-acre blocks to larger-scale apartment development.

"Grand Rêve was our first apartment project here and it showed us what this pocket of Castle Hill could be. Nova Rêve is the refinement of that idea: not just apartments, but a place the whole suburb can use," Kassis said.

A key part of that approach is the hotel, which has been designed to operate as an amenity for the wider Castle Hill community rather than solely hotel guests.

It will include restaurants, cafes, skybars and all-day dining, alongside conference and event facilities catering to business functions, community groups and private events.

At ground level, more than 1,600 sqm of shops and cafes will open onto the surrounding streets and landscaped areas.

Almost an acre of gardens designed by Land and Form Studios will run through the precinct, incorporating pathways, seating, barbecue areas and children's play spaces.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377680]

Reve Group's Romio Georges said creating an active ground plane had been central to the planning of Nova Rêve.

"There are gardens with pathways, barbecues, seating and play areas, shops and cafes opening onto the street, and a hotel with restaurants and a skybar that anyone in Castle Hill can walk into," Georges said.

The project's elevated position on one of Sydney's highest ridgelines will also provide apartments with outlooks toward the Sydney skyline, surrounding parkland and the Blue Mountains.

More than 80 per cent of the apartments will occupy corner positions, with Turner responsible for both the architecture and interiors.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=152737]

<h3 data-end="3697" data-section-id="q3n5ak" data-start="3672">&nbsp;</h3>
</main>

Nova Rêve arrives as Reve Group bets on Castle Hill's next growth phase

Financial Advice

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The sharp rise and subsequent fall in Bitcoin’s value places it among the greatest market bubbles in history. It has outpaced the 17th-century tulip mania, the South Sea bubble of 1720, and the more recent Japanese asset price and dot-com bubbles.
<iframe style="border: none;" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/286/e04648d7cf1a157e88017b3e5c2c5557ae88bcfc/site/index.html" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="300"></iframe>
The rapid price rise garnered attention from an increasing number of academics and investment advisers. Some have suggested that Bitcoin improves portfolio performance and can even be used as a potential “safe haven” asset in place of gold.
Our work finds that much of this research is flawed and overlooks some important attributes that any investor should consider before allocating funds to such a speculative investment.
This is particularly relevant if investing in Bitcoin is rationalised as a prospective safe haven in times of market turmoil.
Hard to value
The first attribute investors consider is how to value Bitcoin. Typically, assets are valued based on the cash flows they produce. Bitcoin lacks this property.
This leads to ongoing debate as to the true value of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Some, such as the Winklevoss twins and other Bitcoin entrepreneurs, believe the price will soar far higher. Others, including Nobel prize winner Eugene Fama and esteemed investor Warren Buffett, believe the real value is closer to zero. Another Nobel winner, Robert Shiller, suggests the correct answer is “ambiguous”.
There is even wide variation in price across the various Bitcoin exchanges. This is common in fragmented markets and makes it difficult for an investor to find the best market price at any point in time – a process called price discovery.
<iframe style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/W3evi/1/" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="100%" height="500"></iframe>
High price volatility
Bitcoin prices also have a high level of variation (volatility) when compared to other possible investments including bonds, stocks and gold. Even tech stocks such as Twitter, which are considered relatively volatile, are found to have less price variation. This adds to the difficulty investors face when trying to value Bitcoin and any portfolios that contain it.
This is of particular concern given the large daily losses that Bitcoin has experienced in its relatively short life. The largest one-day decline experienced by the popular S&amp;P500 index since 2011 is 4.2%. Bitcoin has had nearly 200 days that were worse (and over 60 days worse than the biggest decline in the gold price of 10.2%).
Put another way, Bitcoin has had 200 days worse than the worst day on the stock market. This hardly seems like an enticing investment for most.
<iframe style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/80wdK/2/" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="100%" height="562"></iframe>
Low liquidity
Investors should also consider the ease with which they are able to buy and sell any assets in which they invest. One method used to measure this liquidity attribute is the bid-ask spread – the difference in the price at which one is able to buy and sell the asset.
More liquid assets have a narrow bid-ask spread. Bitcoin’s bid-ask spread varies from one exchange to another, but in general it is much larger than for other assets.
<iframe style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/brgfk/1/" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="100%" height="700"></iframe>
While bid-ask spreads provide one measure of implicit trading costs, investors also consider the explicit transaction fees they are charged when trading. Transaction fees for trading traditional investments are typically well known and have trended down over time.
While Bitcoin fees have recently declined, they have proven to be highly variable, ranging from over $30 to under $1. The time taken to process a transaction can also be greater than 78 minutes. This is much longer than for stocks or bonds and creates another layer of uncertainty for investors.
Only for the most risk-loving
Bitcoin is harder to value, more volatile, less liquid, and costlier to transact than other assets in normal market conditions. Potential investors should be wary and carefully consider whether such highly speculative assets are appropriate additions to any portfolio.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99134/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Given safe havens are typically in demand during financial crisis, when markets are more volatile and less liquid, it is highly unlikely that Bitcoin is even worth considering as a safe-haven asset.
Lee Smales, Associate Professor, Finance, University of Western Australia
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/think-carefully-before-buying-bitcoin-and-dont-buy-the-safe-haven-claims-99134" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Think carefully before buying Bitcoin – and don't buy the 'safe haven' claims: Lee Smales

<html><body>
The Dover Financial Group is set to close leaving the $4 billion dollars of investor funds from around 30,000 clients in the lurch.
It follows news that Dover Financial Group's founder, Terry McMaster has entered the final stages of its agreement with the corporate regulator, Australian Securities and Investments Commission following his recent royal commission appearance that ended in him requiring hospitalisation.
The regulator intends stripping the firm of its operating licence.
The ABC reported McMaster's email announcement to his staff on Friday, where Mr McMaster stated that ASIC, required the firm to "cancel its AFSL [Australian Financial Services Licence] by 6 July 2018" and "terminate the appointment of its authorised representatives". 
 Advisers have to cease giving new advice immediately and stop servicing the clients completely by the first week of July.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has confirmed that its inquiries into the firm were ongoing.
Fairfax Media reported McMaster had sought until the end of the year to wind down his business but that ASIC had told him that his time was up.
The 400 advisers will need to find another licence-holder to work under.
In the period to 1 April 2018 Dover incorporated a document known as the Dover Client Protection Policy into its financial services guides and its statements of advice.
On 22 March 2018 Dover was notified by ASIC that it had reviewed the Dover Client Protection Policy and believed it contained certain provisions which were unlawful and void.
The Dover website noted it does not know of any client adversely effected by those provisions.
"In good faith Dover cooperated with ASIC and immediately withdrew the Dover Client Protection Policy and replaced it with the Dover Client Information Policy, with retrospective effect, and undertook to not rely on the relevant provisions.
"Dover also wrote to each client potentially affected by those provisions."
<div class="ymInT"> </div>
</body></html>

Dover Financial Group begins ASIC-forced shutdown

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
A Productivity Commission report analysing competition in the financial sector has pointed out that our finance regulators have become enablers of an industry that is an impediment to our economic competitiveness and exploitative of their most loyal customers.
It proves the need for a board to oversee the conduct of our financial regulators, policing the bodies that are supposed to be keeping our financial system in check.
It could not have come at a worse time for our big four banks. Perennially pilloried for their rampant market misconduct (fraudulently manipulating benchmark interest rates) and their equally rampant abuse of upwards of hundreds of thousands of consumers across every one of their retail operations at one stage or another – financial advice, life insurance and credit card insurance, just to name a few.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) most recently launched a bank-bill swap rate manipulation case against the Commonwealth Bank, but only across a very narrow range of infringements. The bulk of the infringements can’t be prosecuted because ASIC has dithered for so long, the statute of limitations has run out, and the alleged crimes have proscribed.
And what of our other financial regulator - the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA)? The Productivity Commission reckons that APRA’s ham-fisted use of macro-prudential tools, usually used to reduce risk in our financial system, has benefited the big four banks to the tune of A$1 billion.
APRA has been criticised for pursuing stability in a manner that has killed competition, hurt consumers, and starved small businesses of life-giving capital. The dominance by a few banks, whose profits are based on runaway property prices, is its own systemic threat.
The result is that small banks are squeezed out, big banks raking in higher rates, and investors offsetting higher rates against their taxes and so costing the Australian Taxation Office an estimated A$500 million in deductions. As the old saying goes, when your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
Who will regulate the regulators?
So what to do about ASIC and APRA? Back in 2014, the Financial System Inquiry recommended a board of oversight – a regulator for the regulators – to ensure that the regulators discharge their mandates.
So, for example, to ensure that ASIC acts like a cop, not a co-op; that APRA acts with foresight and finesse, as opposed to damaging competition. APRA and ASIC pushed back at the time, and the Abbott government rejected the recommendation.
Now to add impetus to the Financial System Inquiry recommendation, the Productivity Commission says there is a lack of transparency and accountability exhibited by our regulators. Add to that the implications regarding regulator’s efficacy that comes with the establishment of the Financial Services Royal Commission. The public deserves better than this.
A regulator for the regulators – a Financial Regulator Assessment Board – would conduct ex post analyses of how regulators had discharged their mandates, evaluate their policies and the efficacy of their policy tools. It would be a sober second thought, and a crucial mechanism of double redundancy – to pick up on crucial elements that the regulator may have overlooked.
The idea has form. The British have created something similar, called a Financial Policy Committee, this body’s aim is to review the British regulators, while keeping a look-out for where the next “bombshell” may come from.
That development in turn builds on the work of James Barth, Gerard Caprio and Ross Levine whose research indicates that regulators simply cannot be trusted to perform these crucial functions as the guardians of finance, without oversight. The researchers call their proposed board of oversight the “Sentinel”, and point out that no industry is more adept and more practised at suborning the guardians of finance than banks and insurers. Sound familiar?
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91396/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Australia’s financial system is increasingly governed by a lawless financial sector, presided over by regulators that are at best misguided, and at worst captured. A board of oversight is the least we can do.
Andrew Schmulow, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Western Australia
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-financial-regulators-need-policing-91396" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Australia's financial regulators need policing: Andrew Schmulow

<html><body>
An Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) review of financial advice provided by the five biggest vertically integrated financial institutions has identified areas where improvements are needed to the management of conflicts of interest.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/1/25/AISC%203.jpg" alt="">
The review looked at the products that ANZ, CBA, NAB, Westpac and AMP financial advice licensees were recommending and at the quality of the advice provided on in-house products.
The review was part of a broader set of regulatory reviews of the wealth management and financial advice businesses of the largest banking and financial services institutions as part of ASIC's Wealth Management Project.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/1/25/ASIA%204.jpg" alt="">
The review found that, overall, 79% of the financial products on the firms' approved products lists (APL) were external products and 21% were internal or 'in-house' products. However, 68% of clients’ funds were invested in in-house products.
The split between internal and external product sales varied across different licensees and across different types of financial products. For example, it was more pronounced for platforms compared to direct investments. However, in most cases there was a clear weighting in the products recommended by advisers towards in-house products.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/1/25/ASIC%205.jpg" alt="">
ASIC noted that vertical integration can provide economies of scale and other benefits to both the customer and the financial institution. Consumers might choose advice from large vertically integrated firms because they seek that firm's products due to factors such as convenience and access, and recommendations of 'in-house' products may be appropriate. Nonetheless, conflicts of interest are inherent in vertically integrated firms, and these firms still need to properly manage conflicts of interest in their advisory arms and ensure good quality advice.
ASIC will consult with the financial advice industry (and other relevant groups) on a proposal to introduce more transparent public reporting on approved product lists, including where client funds are invested, for advice licensees that are part of a vertically integrated business. ASIC noted that any such requirement is likely to cover vertically integrated firms beyond those included in this review. The introduction of reporting requirements would improve transparency around management of the conflicts of interests that are inherent in these businesses.
ASIC also examined a sample of files to test whether advice to switch to in-house products satisfied the 'best interests' requirements. ASIC found that in 75% of the advice files reviewed the advisers did not demonstrate compliance with the duty to act in the best interests of their clients. Further, 10% of the advice reviewed was likely to leave the customer in a significantly worse financial position. ASIC will ensure that appropriate customer remediation takes place.
Acting ASIC Chair Peter Kell said that ASIC is already working with the major financial institutions to address the issues that have been identified in the report on quality of advice and management of conflicts of interest.
'There is ongoing work focusing on remediation where advice-related failures have led to poor customer outcomes, and the results of this review will feed into that work,' said Mr Kell.
ASIC is already working with the institutions to improve compliance and advice quality through action such as:
<ul>
<li>improvements to monitoring and supervision processes for financial advisers; and</li>
<li>improvements to adviser recruitment processes and checks.</li>
</ul>
ASIC will continue to ban advisers with serious compliance failings.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/1/25/AISC%207.png" alt="">
ASIC highlighted that the findings from this review should be carefully examined by other vertically integrated firms. 'While this review focused on five major financial services firms, the lessons should be considered by all vertically integrated firms in the financial services sector.'
</body></html>

ASIC reports on how large financial institutions manage conflicts of interest

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
It’s pretty common nowadays to see the likes of the Reserve Bank of Australia or the Australian Bureau of Statistics issue warnings about the size of Australian household debt. The reason is that the consequences of poor financial decisions often reach far wider than an individual or family.
The global financial crisis showed us how rapidly financial contagion can spread - one person’s debt is another person’s asset, so when the debt is written off so is the asset. However, there has been little improvement in financial literacy in the wake of the financial crisis, the lack of which was one of the underlying causes.
For instance, surveys just prior to the global financial crisis revealed that many Americans taking out home loans either did not read their loan documents or did not understand them. This meant that, in many cases, they did not understand that they were signing teaser loans where the interest rate starts out very low but increases after a few years.
This lack of financial literacy combined with predatory lending caused the subprime loan crisis, the precursor to the full blown financial crisis.
What is financial literacy?
Financial literacy refers to the ability to make sound financial decisions based on knowledge, skills and attitudes, taking into account personal circumstances.
Low financial literacy is particularly concerning in home loans. In an alarming parallel to the United States before the financial crisis, roughly one third of interest-only mortgagees do not understand that their repayments make no inroads into their debt, and that their interest rates will jump considerably after the interest-only period of the loan has expired.
But it isn’t just that low financial literacy increases risk. It is also important for achieving a productive economy. Economic efficiency requires borrowers to not only have good information but to understand it. This allows them to weigh up the costs of borrowing with the benefits that they expect to receive.
If the information is distorted, either deliberately by lenders or through the misunderstanding of borrowers, they will miscalculate the benefits and capital in the economy will be misallocated. Economists call this market failure, a lot of which occurred in the housing market in the United States before the global financial crisis.
Financial literacy isn’t improving
Evidence suggests that financial literacy has not improved since the global financial crisis, and may have gotten worse.
A survey of adult financial literacy in Australia found that in 2014 the number of people who could actually recognise an investment was “too good to be true” - for example a financial asset promising to pay a return much higher than the going return on similar assets and for no greater risk - had actually declined, to 50% from 53% just three years earlier.
The survey also found that those who recognised that good investments (something with relatively low risk) may fluctuate in value fell to 67% from 74%.
But financial literacy education must also go hand in hand with general literacy and numeracy. The Productivity Commission found that 14% of the adult population had relatively low literacy skills in 2011-12. This is defined as being able to, at best, locate basic information from simple texts but being unable to evaluate truth claims or arguments.
The report also found 22% of the population had low numeracy skills, meaning that they can count, add and subtract and do other basic arithmetic. But they cannot understand statistical ideas, mathematical formula or analyse data.
In other words, a significant proportion of the Australian adult population are not equipped to understand the effect of an interest rate increase on their loan repayments, or understand a loan document that includes an interest rate increase after an initial period.
Fixing the problem of financial illiteracy cannot wait until people are in the throes of negotiating home loans and credit cards. And it should definitely take place before Australians resort to pay day loans.
This was the aim of the Australian Government’s National Financial Literacy Strategy, that ends this year. The strategy proposes a number of educational initiatives including embedding financial literacy in the school curriculum, a formal teacher training program, and development of educational resources and tools.
The strategy draws on similar steps that have been adopted by other countries and recommended by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
The problem is that the curriculum is a crowded space. Financial literacy must compete with the latest fashions in school education as well as traditional curriculum content.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84695/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Fighting for curriculum space for financial literacy is a political exercise which governments must play hard. For example, by attaching serious funding to the achievement of financial literacy indicators at the school level, and training and certification for teachers. Increasing financial literacy isn’t just in the best interest of individuals, we all benefit from a more literate population.
Ross Guest is professor of economics and national senior teaching fellow at Griffith University.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/financial-literacy-is-a-public-policy-problem-84695" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

rguest-QX7SdCCSpj

Financial literacy is a public policy problem: Ross Guest

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67834/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
In it’s latest report, the Australian Securities &amp; Investments Commission (ASIC) found the big four banks sold products to some customers through their adviser network, with a fee for ongoing advice, but the advice was never given. 
None of this came to light until the banks were asked by ASIC to look at adviser compensation, following the introduction of the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) legislation in 2013. 
No wonder the banks were wary of their practices being investigated. Not only has it come to light that many customers (176,000 at the last count) were being charged for services they were not receiving but, in many cases, the banks didn’t have the data they needed to find out whether customers had been dudded or not. 
And ASIC is pretty sure why such systemic issues emerge at regular intervals, stating:
Cultural factors in the banking and financial services institutions covered by this report may have contributed to the systemic failures we observed. 
The ASIC report details the reason for the cultural failings it observed in the wealth management businesses of the major banks:
Some advice licensees prioritised advice revenue and fee generation over ensuring that they delivered the required services.
ASIC found that the IT systems in wealth management in the major banks were stone-aged at best. The banks appear to have no idea what they don’t know, but are all working to identify how many more customers need to be compensated. 
ASIC also found that some banks failed to keep complete or accurate records to enable compliance to be analysed. And in some cases, authorised representatives had taken customers’ files with them when they left the firms, making it impossible to check whether or not advice was given.
It appears that every time a question is asked of the big banks, another example of bad behaviour is unearthed.
In the recent questioning of bank CEOs by the House Economics Committee, questions were raised with all CEOs about systemic issues. The answers were generally evasive and short on specifics. 
For example, when talking about a different but related, financial planning scandal, Andrew Thorburn, NAB CEO, said:
“We did a review and we had an independent party come and do that review with us, and we concluded and we stand by that, that it was not a systemic issue.”
What Mr Thorburn and other CEOs neglected to mention was that the banks had, as revealed in ASIC’s report, all already been in the middle of deep discussions about so-called “fee-for-services failures” . The regulator wrote:
Of particular concern is that many of the banking and financial services institutions covered by this review publicly state that their core values include being customer focused, “doing what is right” for customers, and acting with integrity. We encourage the institutions reviewed in this report to consider how their culture may have supported these systemic failures, and why their stated commitment to providing excellent service to customers is not translating into good outcomes for customers in the many instances we identified in this report.
At long last, ASIC has highlighted cultural issues across the industry that the boards and management of the largest banks have long refused to acknowledge. 
The regulator has done its job and found compelling evidence that the culture of the banks is rotten. 
It’s over to the politicians now.
Pat McConnell is honorary fellow, Macquarie University Applied Finance Centre, Macquarie University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/pat-mcconnell-13137" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

ASIC report highlights a deep culture problem in Australia’s banks

<html><body>
ASIC has permanently banned former Sydney finance broker, Jennifer Farias of Elderslie, from engaging in credit activities and providing financial services.
The bannings follow an ASIC investigation and criminal action against Ms Farias who pleaded guilty in the NSW Local Court in the Downing Centre in Sydney to three charges of loan fraud.
ASIC's Deputy Chairman Peter Kell said, 'ASIC's action in this matter demonstrates how serious we are about tackling loan fraud. We won't hesitate to take action against dishonest brokers who falsify documents and remove them from the industry.'
Ms Farias has the right to appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of ASIC's decision.
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

ASIC permanently bans former Sydney finance broker 

<html><body>
<div class="_rp_h">
<div class="_rp_i ms-font-color-neutralPrimary ms-font-weight-light ms-font-xxl">
Chair of the Tax Practitioners Board (TPB), Mr Ian Taylor, has  invited stakeholders to comment on four new draft information sheets providing practical guidance on how the Code of Professional Conduct (the Code) applies to tax (financial) advisers.
‘All registered tax practitioners, including tax (financial) advisers, need to ensure they comply with their obligations under the Code. To assist tax (financial) advisers to understand what this means for them, the TPB has issued four exposure draft documents relating to acting in the best interests of their clients, taking reasonable care to ascertain a client’s state of affairs, applying tax laws correctly and managing conflicts of interest,’ Mr Taylor said.
‘I encourage all interested parties to take the opportunity to review the exposure drafts and provide their comments.’
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="_rp_E4">
<div class="_rp_q4 ms-border-color-neutralLight ShowReferenceAttachmentsLinks">
<div class="_rp_B4">
<div id="Item.MessagePartBody" class="_rp_s4">
<div id="Item.MessageUniqueBody" class="_rp_t4 ms-font-weight-regular ms-font-color-neutralDark rpHighlightAllClass rpHighlightBodyClass">
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.tpb.gov.au/TPB/Publications_and_legislation/TPB/Publications_and_legislation/ED/0714_-_Code_of_Professional_Conduct_-_Acting_lawfully_in_the_best_interests_of_clients_for_TFAs.aspx" target="_blank">TPB(I) D32/2016 Code of Professional Conduct - Acting lawfully in the best interests of clients for tax (financial) advisers</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.tpb.gov.au/TPB/Publications_and_legislation/TPB/Publications_and_legislation/ED/0715_-_Code_of_Professional_Conduct_-_Reasonable_care_to_ascertain_a_client_s_state_of_affairs_TFAs.aspx" target="_blank">TPB(I) D33/2016 Code of Professional Conduct - Reasonable care to ascertain a client's state of affairs for tax (financial) advisers</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.tpb.gov.au/TPB/Publications_and_legislation/TPB/Publications_and_legislation/ED/0716_Code_of_Professional_Conduct_-_Reasonable_care__-_taxation_laws_applied_correctly_TFAs.aspx" target="_blank">TPB(I) D34/2016 Code of Professional Conduct - Reasonable care to ensure taxation laws are applied correctly for tax (financial) advisers</a></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.tpb.gov.au/TPB/Publications_and_legislation/TPB/Publications_and_legislation/ED/0717_Code_of_Professional_Conduct_-_Having_adequate_arrangement_managing_conflicts_of_interest_TFAs.aspx" target="_blank">TPB(I) D35/2016 Code of Professional Conduct - Having adequate arrangements for managing conflicts of interest for tax (financial) advisers</a></li>
</ul>
All submissions will be reviewed and considered before the final information sheets are published on the TPB website.
Submissions on the four exposure drafts close on 11 July 2016. Comments can be sent to <a href="mailto:tpbsubmissions@tpb.gov.au" target="_blank">tpbsubmissions@tpb.gov.au</a>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Property 101: Professional conduct draft for tax advisers

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
One of the biggest frustrations I have with the financial industry is the inability and general exclusion of property discussions by financial advisers and mortgage brokers alike.
I know this general lack of care and foresight in itself is affecting clients in life changing and sometimes irreparable ways. Whether they have not benefitted from the huge growth in the property market in the last five years as the adviser thought it was "too expensive", have unfortunately bought wrong assets with huge risks because they didn’t know who to ask, or they have gone ahead and not purchased anything at all because the adviser never discussed it with them.
One of the most cherished parts of my day to day role as a trusted adviser is to help my clients think through their property related decisions.
For example, this daily discussion could be helping my clients to understand whether they should or should not buy an investment property today, or when they want to buy a home in the future. It might be to discuss whether they should sell and buy a new family home or if it is better to renovate the one they live in today. It may be a strategic plan on how to build a multiple property portfolio over the next 30 years or it could be whether they should be buying a property at all.
All of these conversations are highly interesting and add huge measurable value in the future life of my clients. I love to help them think through their decisions and help them go deep in to the property market psyche. Let me be clear, this is not recommending individual properties on individual streets, but educating them on what drives the market and what type of properties suit their plan at this stage. I leave the hard work of finding the right property to professionals who know what they are doing - called buyer's agents. They are the ones who will find the right property to suit them long-term and not just today - not me.
Unfortunately however, I know I am rarity in the financial planning and mortgage industry. I would prefer that I wasn’t but due to being a financial planner, my previous experience in a property firm and also a mortgage broker I have had exposure to the many different areas of the property market. This experience while invaluable is also unique but I believe this should be a necessity and obligation for any aspiring financial planner.
Property has been an asset class that financial advisers have never had, and purposely not had, on their radar.
While completing initial qualifications it is barely mentioned and let alone tested in any way. The major financial institutions do not have any desire to encourage or educate their financial advisers to recommend property. To put simply, it would hurt their profits and shareholders would not like that.
Why has it not been discussed? Why have the majority of the advice industry decided to ignore a recommendation for over 20 years?
Internally within the industry, we all understand that the reason financial planners do not discuss it is because they do not get paid.
Financial planners have always been paid a commission for recommending investment share based products. If they recommended clients to purchase a property, they would not get paid. Sounds simple and maybe a rhetorical question; but is that advising or selling I ask?
If they recommended their client to consider purchasing a property and not shares, they would in affect rule themselves out of a nice paycheck today and to compound the issue further a lot of income in the future.
You see the ongoing fee package for the vast majority of financial planners is based on a percentage based fee. It is called an Asset Based Management Fee and has been around 1% for a long time.
Therefore, the more an adviser recommends for you to invest with them in shares and the less for you invest in property – the more money they make every year. If you a noticing a slight conflict here, you could be on to something?
To make you aware, there are legislation restrictions on advisers from recommending individual direct property and importantly professional indemnity insurance usually does not cover this advice. I am in complete and resounding support of advisers not recommending individual property. It would be highly conflicted and we are not the right people for the job in the first place.
Property is not an investment Australians would generally go to a financial planner to discuss. I would argue however that it one of the most important things they should be able to and need to discuss.
Property has been a great asset class for investors and homeowners. An important part and only a part of an adviser role is to help their clients to invest wisely, safely and in line with their future aspirations. The property market has been a great asset to help clients achieve their aspirations. But why do so many advisers choose to avoid this asset class entirely. In my eyes this should be called either insanity or greed. I’ll let you decide.
Lets put that to one side.
If financial planners are not advising property investors; where do they go?
Unfortunately the vast majority they make this key investment decision themselves. They may ask their friends and family what to do or quickly read a property education magazine, which is full of property developers selling property.
On first glance the property market seems simple, but the more clients understand it, they realise it is not as simple as everyone tends to believe. The first big mistake is that the property market is not one market. Just like the share market every property will perform very differently to every other property over the next 10 or 30 years. Some will do better than others, some will go down in value and some will go up significantly in value. Every property is different, that’s the biggest mistake.
What can be very complex to understand is also exponentially magnified, as the industry is unregulated. Every man, woman and their dog can sell property. They can tell you how amazing growth will be and how outstanding your rental yield is.
Three years ago I was telling clients to avoid mining towns like the plague and sure we all knew a crash was coming. There are houses selling at 20% of the value they were selling three years ago.<a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/realestate/news/property-prices-in-once-booming-mining-towns-crash-providing-lesson-in-where-not-to-invest/story-fni0cly6-1227210791143" target="_blank"> </a>
There are more horror stories of people buying the in the Docklands in Melbourne, Gold Coast and Noosa. There are fundamental risks with huge developments in apartment heaven near Sydney Airport.
You see people have bought all these properties, people are making all these horrible and life changing mistakes. They are real people and they are real losses.
Clients need guidance, clients need protection and clients need help. Unfortunately the property market can say whatever they want to say. Its buyers beware people.
For most Australians, their biggest asset is their home. Therefore their biggest investment decision would usually be the purchase or sale of their home. This decision alone will without doubt have huge impacts on their future wealth and prosperity. If a planner or mortgage broker is not skilled in talking about this decision nor makes an effort to help them with it then whom I ask does? Who are clients getting help from for the biggest financial decision in their life?
The issue I have is that very few planners or mortgage brokers are educating their clients on the property decision. Is it training, conflicted remuneration, education or general lack of care? Unfortunately the consumer society we live in and the significant growth we have witnessed has caused all sorts of problems in the property market. We now believe that anything new is better than old, we now believe that the property market only goes up and we all watch the block thinking renovating and making money in property is simple. I argue however that all three of these are incredibly wrong.
The biggest reason why so many people have made money in property is not through buying smart but it is due to the fact that they have owned property in the first place. This feeling has made people think that any property will do and society pressure to get on the ladder is causing investors to take the line of least of resistance when purchasing. Something new.
The purchase or sale of the property is huge decision. This decision has a whole list of other decisions it also brings. There are hundreds of different strategies, issues and opportunities that an investor needs to understand and consider.
Chris Bates is a director at boutique financial advisors <a href="https://www.canopyprivate.com.au/" target="_blank">Canopy Private</a>.
</body></html>

ChrisBates-qgpJqFG5wJ

Greed or insanity? The financial advice industry is ignoring a key problem: Chris Bates

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
While financial planning is on the pathway to <a href="https://www.gowerpublishing.com/pdf/SamplePages/Conceptions-of-Professionalism-CH1.pdf" target="_blank">professionalism</a>, its education standards continue to be the subject of much discussion – and for good reason.
The current standards set by ASIC mandate a comparatively low level certification program that can be completed in just days. This is clearly inconsistent with the notion of a profession and is certainly not congruent with the complex financial market, product, legal, business and behavioural knowledge and skills a modern planner requires.
Recent key national reviews acknowledge this and have all recommended increasing education standards to bachelor degree level. These include the <a href="https://fsi.gov.au" target="_blank">Financial System Inquiry</a>, The <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Corporations_and_Financial_Services/Financial_Adviser_Qualifications/Report" target="_blank">Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services Inquiry</a> and the Australian Financial Services Licence Industry Working Group.
It is also worth noting that some segments of the industry and some professional associations already have degree level education requirements for membership/employment and ongoing continuing professional development.
So where is ASIC on this and why have the current low standards persisted?
Well, they have tried to raise them. In June 2013 ASIC <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/consultation-papers/cp-212-licensing-training-of-financial-product-advisers-updates-to-rg-146/" target="_blank">proposed</a> to enhance its guidelines for training of financial advisers in various ways, but this did not progress.
ASIC’s preference is for the introduction of a national exam which it first <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/consultation-papers/cp-153-licensing-assessment-and-professional-development-framework-for-financial-advisers/" target="_blank">raised</a> in April 2011. The issue was <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/consultation-papers/cp-212-licensing-training-of-financial-product-advisers-updates-to-rg-146/" target="_blank">raised again</a> last year when ASIC suggested that a national exam “may replace any obligation to do a training course”.
The original model was for the test to take the form of an online three-hour exam both for new advisers and for existing advisers (to be repeated every three years).
More recently, ASIC Chairman Greg Medcraft restated this preference as a fundamental component of <a href="https://www.afr.com/p/opinion/asic_chair_says_set_exams_for_planners_KsJkyswSVengfHmYAmzY6K" target="_blank">his vision</a> for financial advisers where the industry sets the competence levels. This is a departure from ASIC’s earlier proposals, and would see ASIC test competencies by overseeing the exam.
As a result, ASIC is positioning itself to move away from the education/training side of the current regulatory regime, where it has largely failed to deliver an appropriate framework.
This leads to the question of whether requiring advisers to undertake an exam every three years would improve adviser competence and lead to better quality advice.
Simple in theory…
The advantages of a single national exam are drawn from the potential efficiency of it – one instrument that can be completed online, give some indication of adviser competence, and provide a clear pass/fail measure that could be easily benchmarked. It is also a simple measure for consumers to utilise.
But the proposal does also raise a number of concerns.
Financial planning contains a diverse array of knowledge and skill areas (eg economics, investment, tax, legal, retirement, estate, insurance, risk, business, behavioural and client engagement). It is hard to imagine how any reasonable measure of competence could be drawn from one online exam covering all of these.
At the same time, it is difficult to assess “soft” skills in a test or exam, yet they are a key part of effective financial advice.
The licensing regime currently requires planners to be RG146 accredited only in the areas which they provide advice. And exam would therefore need multiple modules or versions to allow for various permutations.
The logistics of implementing the exam for somewhere between 18,000 and 30,000 individuals would be complex and suggests a sophisticated examination regime and significant effort in educational design to ensure the integrity of the instrument and its outcomes.
There are few examples of doing this in related professions (law, accounting, nursing, teaching, medicine) with most professions opting for a continuing professional development model.
The problem with the national exam is therefore simple – who pays?
…Difficult to deliver
To do it well, given the scale and complexity of advice, would come at significant cost. With ASIC’s budget being cut and industry suggesting it is not willing to fund it, it’s unclear how it would be achieved, particularly given concerns about the educational efficacy of it as proposed. So it appears it is unlikely to be implemented as ASIC has suggested.
Rather, the proposal should be seen as part of a broader framework that builds on existing elements such as higher education degrees in financial planning, professional associations and the Professional Standards Councils framework.
Proposals to restrict who can call themselves a financial planner/adviser (including draft legislation) and a compensation scheme add further to the options.
What might seem like an easy fix (just make them all do a test), is likely to be little more use in and of itself as RG146. However, as part of a broader professional framework a national exam may have a role to play. This could be for a more specialised purpose such as verifying currency of knowledge (given the continuous changes to taxation, superannuation and other relevant laws) than what ASIC envisages.
Other elements such as enforceable codes of conduct, complaints systems and compensations schemes would form the broader professional environment and assessment of competency. This would create a level and robust playing field for financial advice and should go some way to building consumer confidence in the sector.
Mark Brimble is discipline head of finance and financial planning at Griffith University.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/36208/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="line-height: 1.3em;">
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" style="line-height: 1.3em;">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Financial Advice

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Financial Advice

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News