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.

Joel Robinson

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

A collection of just 25 large-format apartments and penthouses overlooking Goodwin Park is entering the Coolangatta market, with <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/marea-residences-coolangatta-27-27a-dixon-street-coolangatta-qld-4225">Maréa Residences</a> combining a low-density, residential-only approach with uninterrupted park and Pacific Ocean outlooks.

Located at 27 Dixon Street, Maréa comprises three and four-bedroom residences alongside a limited number of dual-level penthouses, with the project positioned between Goodwin Park and <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/coolangatta-qld-4225">Coolangatta</a>’s coastal precinct.

Construction has commenced, with completion currently estimated for late 2027. Three-bedroom residences are priced from $1.8 million.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150999 project_image_fid=374005]

The project has been designed around its northern outlook across the park, with the building’s architecture, landscaping and material palette intended to establish a connection with the neighbouring green space. The residences have been configured to maximise natural light and views across Goodwin Park towards the ocean.

Inside, the material palette incorporates timber, stone and brushed brass, complemented by curved detailing and ambient lighting. Kitchens and bathrooms carry the same natural material approach, while residences also include basement parking, storage and lift access.

Maréa’s penthouses are arranged over two levels and include private pools, adding another layer to the project’s focus on larger-format apartment living. Across the development, residences are configured with three or four bedrooms rather than the broader mix of smaller apartment types commonly found in larger projects.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150999 project_image_fid=374010]

Resident amenity is concentrated at rooftop level, where landscaped entertaining terraces and pools take advantage of elevated views across Coolangatta and the Pacific Ocean.

The project has so far been particularly well received by local owner-occupiers and downsizers, according to Urban Activation Property Sales and Marketing Director Matt George, with the residential-only format, construction quality and northern park outlook among the features resonating with purchasers.

“The uninterrupted northern aspect overlooking Goodwin Park has been a key point of difference, with buyers attracted to the sense of serenity and open space the park provides, while still enjoying easy access to the ocean and being within walking distance of the lifestyle and amenities Coolangatta has to offer,” George said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150999 project_image_fid=374002]

“The combination of high-quality construction, a residential-only building, park outlook and proximity to the beach has resonated strongly with the local downsizer market.”

The Dixon Street address is within walking distance of Coolangatta Beach and the broader southern Gold Coast coastline, including the surf breaks at Snapper Rocks and Kirra. Coolangatta’s cafés, restaurants and retail are nearby, while Gold Coast Airport is also within close proximity.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=150999]

Maréa Residences brings parkside apartments to Coolangatta

Melbourne developer PDG has secured Victorian Government approval for its $1.5 billion Southbank development <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-one-1-queens-bridge-street-southbank-vic-3006">The One</a>, clearing the way for the long-dormant riverfront site opposite Crown to finally be developed.

The Minister for Planning has approved the project at 1-29 Queens Bridge Street, with the Department of Transport and Planning issuing the planning permit following its assessment.

The approval will allow PDG to develop the prominent 5,059 sqm site with a major mixed-use tower comprising premium apartments, including branded residences, a luxury hotel and boutique office space.

PDG acquired the site in late 2024, with its position directly opposite Crown's main entrance and near Melbourne's Arts Precinct making it one of Southbank's most significant remaining development opportunities.

<img alt="PDG" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="3933013e-6332-4386-b9be-089df05caf17" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-27%20at%209.29.22%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=sITIgBqDL0N3VNSMwWEmF5UA.uvcsRyu" />

Designed by COX in collaboration with ODO and PDG, the tower's architecture draws on the movement of the Yarra River, with six vertical pleats running the height of the sculpted facade.

The project will also see the heritage-listed Queens Bridge Hotel restored and incorporated into the development&nbsp;with new hospitality and public uses, including a rooftop venue.

A significant component of The One will be its residential amenity.

More than 5,000 sqm of resident facilities will be delivered across a single level, making it one of the largest consolidated residential amenity offerings proposed in an Australian apartment development.

The planning approval also incorporates a major upgrade of Queensbridge Square, which PDG will deliver in partnership with the City of Melbourne.

<img alt="PDG" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="73167fcd-1031-4b6f-a408-a064cfe45ed1" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-27%20at%209.29.17%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=Pf1AEWxw6SNmBqR0zQW5lyEze.MtxgFp" />

The existing square will be revitalised as a new civic and pedestrian space along the Yarra River, strengthening the connection between the project, Southbank and the riverfront.

PDG Founder and Managing Director Vince Giuliano said the approval represented a major milestone for a site which has remained largely underutilised for more than 15 years.

“This is the most significant Planning Permit approval Melbourne has seen in recent years,” Giuliano said.

“For more than 15 years, this site has remained underutilised. This approval enables us to deliver a project that will contribute meaningfully to the revitalisation of Southbank, restore and reactivate an important heritage building, and create a new civic and hospitality destination for Melbourne.”

The latest approval follows an earlier planning permit issued by the City of Melbourne covering demolition works across part of the site at 9-29 Queens Bridge Street. Those demolition and early works are already underway.

PDG has also started generating early interest in the residential component from owner-occupiers ahead of a planned public launch in early 2027.

PDG secures approval for $1.5bn Southbank apartment development, The One

Local developer Harridan is seeking to turn its Woolloongabba apartment project into the first stage of a broader transformation of Burke Street, using a new 16-storey mixed-use building to establish a greener pedestrian connection toward the rapidly evolving Boggo Road transport and knowledge precinct.

The South East Queensland developer has filed plans for 154 apartments on the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/4-burke-street-woolloongabba-qld-4102">southern side of Burke Street</a>, where its proposal has been designed alongside a wider vision by LatStudios for the street.

That vision positions the southern side of Burke Street for buildings of 15 storeys and above, while envisaging lower-rise development of up to five storeys on the northern side to transition into Woolloongabba's existing character housing. It also proposes wider pedestrian verges, deep planting, new street trees and upgrades to the pedestrian approach to Boggo Road Station.

The Harridan development itself has been designed by Brisbane-based Arqus Design and will comprise 154 apartments across 16 storeys. The mix is weighted heavily toward two-bedroom apartments, with 121 proposed alongside 10 one-bedroom and 23 three-bedroom residences. There will typically be around 14 units per floor.

A lower-ground car park and three podium levels will accommodate 156 resident parking spaces, along with visitor and commercial parking. There will also be 154 resident bicycle spaces and 40 visitor bicycle parks.

&nbsp;

Harridan is a family-owned developer and part of the Holmwood Highgate Group, with more than three decades of development activity across South East Queensland. Its portfolio spans residential, commercial and industrial property, with current residential projects including Riverbank on Byron in Bulimba, Esperance Residences in Carina and The Precinct at Kinross Road in Thornlands.

Wooloongabba has been popular for apartment developers, particularly since the announcement of the 2032 Summer Olympics games in Brisbane.

While there have been a lot of development applications, it has failed to materialize into real supply.&nbsp;

Sarazin has been the major player in the area. They are under construction at Murcia Residences, on the fringe of East Brisbane and Woolloongabba. They have just launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-stanley-residences-woolloongabba-8-trafalgar-street-woolloongabba-qld-4102">The Stanley Residences</a>, in Woolloongabba on Trafalagar Street. They also have Nuage coming soon on the nearby <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/nuage-woolloongabba-14-wellington-road-woolloongabba-qld-4102">Wellington Road</a>.

First look: Harridan plans Burke Street transformation beside Boggo Road transport hub

Financial Regulation

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The decision by the Coalition government in Canberra to push forward with plans to reform the regulatory regime around the provision of financial advice has received strong opposition from a number of quarters.
The Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) was originally the product of a Labor government seeking to address the consequences of high-profile corporate scandals and now their appropriateness and effectiveness is being called in to question.
In addition to a number of tweaks to provisions addressing conflicts and fees, perhaps most controversial is the government’s proposal to eliminate the catch-all requirement, included alongside a laundry-list of detailed prohibitions and mandates, that an adviser always act in the ‘best interest” of his or her client. There would seem to be nothing objectionable to that in principle and most clients would be shocked to have an adviser look them in the eye and say quite frankly that the advice they were providing was not in their best interest.
What is important to keep in mind, though, is the purpose of financial regulation and what the impact of open-ended, catch-all provisions is on how business is actually done day-to-day. A regulatory regime is a specially-crafted set of rules and procedures for a particular industry – in this case, financial services – that sits on top of the older and broader legal system which is of general application to the sum total of human activity. Where the statutes and judicial decisions that demarcate the boundaries of common law and equity are general in scope and to a large extent backwards looking, financial regulation is highly specific and meant to map very closely what is done in the industry currently and in the foreseeable future.
The difficulty with broad, vaguely drafted catch-all provisions becomes clear when you understand how they will be applied in practice. Imagine a rule with 17 specific requirements and prohibitions. The firm or individual seeking to comply with that rule proceeds to ensure that they are on the right side of each element. Sometime later, a regulator looks at their actions and determines that, even though fully compliant with the 17 explicit provisions, there is still for some reason something wrong in hindsight with what has occurred. But if the point of a financial regulatory regime is to be as specific as possible, what purpose does such a catch-all provision serve, especially considering that there are well-developed bodies of law, including the laws of fraud and misrepresentation, which already exists and can be relied on whenever needed?
In that light, such vague provisions can be seen as simply a “do-over” for regulators unable or unwilling to build out their case under the more explicit and detailed sections of the rulebook.
It is easy to confuse “more regulation” with “better regulation.” With every financial crisis there is the battle cry for more rules! What is actually needed in many cases is simply rules that more correctly reflect the actual problems and inefficiencies and pitfalls that have developed in the market recently. The sheer number of pages in the rule will tell you very little about how effective oversight will be.
Opponents of the Coalition’s reform proposals will say that their goal is iron-clad protection for consumers. Clearly, an admirable aspiration, when taken by itself. However, let’s not forget that the purpose of a financial regulatory regime is not to bring the level of risk down to nil. Of course, it is possible to do this, but then the volume of transactions will decline sharply and the vast financial machine of investment and savings would sputter to a halt. Instead, the goal is to maintain a level of investor protection that is acceptable while fostering a financial system that provides the economic goals, such as growth, that have been deemed essential for national prosperity.
I often give as an example a referee who is in charge of overseeing a soccer game. Too little involvement, and the game will degenerate into violence. Too much involvement, and the game will be a cacophony of whistles and flashing yellow and red cards. In either respect, the game being played will not be a game of soccer.
Where specific changes to specific rules are needed, then this can be made discreetly and with great effect. Vague catch-all provisions that in effect give regulators after-the-fact a second bite at the apple to focus on actions not previously identified as problematic merely serve to place clouds over firms and individuals that impede decision-making and create uncertainty for little clear purpose.
Timothy Spangler is adjunct professor at <a href="https://www.ucla.edu/" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">University of California, Los Angeles</a>.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Understanding the limits of financial regulation

<html><body>
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority has issued tough draft guidelines on how it expects banks to monitor and manage home mortgage risks.
Upon <a href="https://www.apra.gov.au/adi/PrudentialFramework/Pages/adi-consultation-packages.aspx" target="_blank">the release</a>, APRA chairman John Laker noted "increasing evidence of lending with higher risk characteristics and it does not want this trend to continue".
the current concern sits  against the backdrop where residential mortgage exposures have exhibited low default and loss rates in the $1.3 trillion Australian mortgage market. But the continued low interest rate environment has authorities concerned for when rates take off again.
Aimed at complacency among residential mortgage lenders, the draft guidelines still fall short of the stricker macro­-prudential rules adopted in recent times by other regulators especially in New Zealand and Canada.
But the draft guidelines suggest banks consider "geographic concentrations" of risky loans.
There might also be new limits on loans relative to incomes along with stronger stress-testing borrowers.
There is also the possibility of reducing financial incentives and commissions to mortgage brokers.
APRA chairman John Laker said credit standards were needed given “very active competition” between lenders and rising property markets.
The Australian Financial Review columnist Tony Boyd recently calculated that the net present value of annual commissions paid to mortgage brokers is about $600 million, based on brokers handling about half of the $28 billion in mortgages settled each month.
APRA suggests commissions paid upfront tend to encourage less rigorous attention to loan application quality. 
APRA has told the banks to review appropriate monitoring and controls “to guard against incentives to pursue loans with inadequate or false verification, marginal serviceability, excessive leverage or unsuitable terms for a borrower”.
In Australia, it is standard market practice to pay brokers either an upfront commission or a trailing commission, or both. 
"Experience has shown that commissions paid upfront tend to encourage less rigorous attention to loan application quality," the report said.
"Trailing commissions are more likely to provide incentives for brokers to retain and monitor customers. 
"A prudent approach to the use of third parties for residential mortgage lending would include appropriate compensation measures for brokers.
"Such measures include the ADI being able to end or claw back commissions where there are high levels of delinquency or process failures on loans originated by third parties."
The acting chief executive of the Australian Bankers’ Association, Diane Tate, said the industry had expected the new guidance.
APRA said it expected banks to closely monitor the share of new loans with high loan-to-valuation ratios (LVRs). While Australia has no caps on LVRs, it said those above 90% clearly exposed banks to a higher risk of losses.
‘‘Historically, residential mortgage exposures have exhibited low default and loss rates,” it said in the draft.
“However, lengthy periods of economic growth combined with low interest rates and a sustained period of rising house prices can create a sense of complacency among residential mortgage lenders.’’
APRA is taking industry feedback on the draft policy until late July.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Upfront mortgage broker commissions under review as APRA helps RBA on risky home lending standards

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
As public hearings into the <a href="https://futureofadvice.treasury.gov.au/Content/Content.aspx?doc=home.htm" target="_blank">Future of Financial Advice’s</a> Senate inquiry begin today, it’s probably not overstating the case to say the financial planning industry is at a crossroads.
With the F0FA regime currently in place, the opportunity presents itself for a new generation of financial planners committed to serving the best interests of consumers, without the conflicting incentive of commissions.
Unfortunately the old generation of financial planners appears intent on rejecting this opportunity. It’s probably not surprising given that, according to 2011 MFAA figures, only 11% of planners are aged under 30, and around 80% of planners are either owned or affiliated with the major banks. Hence the sales culture of the older planners and their vertically integrated organisations, wishing to cross-sell as much product as possible, is well entrenched.
As a consequence we are seeing an ongoing campaign (<a href="https://futureofadvice.treasury.gov.au/Content/Content.aspx?doc=home.htm" target="_blank">notably by some of the big banks</a>) to water down the FOFA legislation, which has only been in place since July 2013.
The proposed reforms to FOFA include removing the “opt-in” requirement where clients of financial advisers must indicate annually that they wish to continue the service, removing the need for an annual fee disclosure for clients engaging before 1 July, 2013, and a watering down of the “best interest” duty and provisions directed at removing conflicted remuneration; that is the payment of commissions, on general advice.
The process was postponed in March when assistant treasurer Arthur Sinodinos stepped aside and finance minister Mathias Cormann referred the legislative package to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee, but <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/fofa-reforms-sell-retirees-short-20140512-385tm" target="_blank">media reports</a> suggest the government may soon unveil its plans.
The banking industry claims much has changed since the impact of the global financial crisis revealed the extent of shameful practices in the advice industry.
The financial advice collapses in Australia between 2006 and 2010 - involving <a href="https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2011/february/1299634145/paul-barry/eye-storm" target="_blank">Storm Financial</a>, <a href="https://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf/byheadline/Opes+Prime?openDocument" target="_blank">Opes Prime</a>, <a href="https://www.theglobalmail.org/feature/inside-the-offshore-fraud-the-villains-and-victims-of-australias-biggest-pension-scam/789/" target="_blank">Trio Capital</a> and <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.smh.com.au/news/business/westpoint-could-have-been-wound-up-years-ago/2006/07/05/1151779013363?from=rss" target="_blank">Westpoint Property Group</a> - resulted in more than A$6 billion in losses and involved more than 120,000 people.
All involved conflicted remuneration structures and high commissions as fundamental issues.
But more recent cases involving Commonwealth Financial Planning have been brought to light <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/cba-told-to-reopen-compensation-for-advice-victims-20140516-38fd7" target="_blank">by reporting from Fairfax’s Adele Ferguson</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/05/05/3995954.htm" target="_blank">the ABC’s Four Corners</a>.
Advisers in these cases exploited their clients by offering advice that prioritised their own best interest over that of their clients.
It is difficult to understand the extent of this exploitation without reference to specifics. In one of the key cases surrounding the Storm Financial collapse, ASIC pursued Macquarie Bank and Bank of Queensland on behalf of two investors aged in their sixties, <a href="https://storm.asic.gov.au/storm/storm.nsf/byheadline/Doyle%20proceedings?opendocument" target="_blank">Barry and Deanna Doyle</a>.
Despite the fact that the Doyles had indicated to their advisers that they had a low risk appetite, they were “double-geared” into the stock market by borrowing against their home and using the cash to raise yet more money to invest.
With only part-time income of less than $20,000, some Centrelink payments, and assets which consisted of a house worth $450,000 and $640,000 in superannuation savings, the Doyles ended up owning a share portfolio costing $2.26 million, on which annual interest payments eventually rose to $191,800.
Following the fall in asset prices the Doyles’ highly leveraged share portfolio was sold, consuming all of their superannuation savings. They were left with a debt of $456,000 on their previously unencumbered home, with insufficient income to make the repayments. In return for this disastrous investment advice, which saw them increase their borrowings or exposure to the stock market no fewer than 11 times in 25 months, the Doyles paid Storm $152,000 in fees.
Not surprising then that at the heart of the FOFA legislation are two key “gatekeeper” requirements to address conflicted remuneration. First, planners must prioritise their clients interests over their own, and second, the advice must be appropriate to the client’s own situation.
It is important to note here that there are advisers who do routinely act in their client’s best interest. This is reflected in the Financial Planning Association of Australia’s <a href="https://fpa.asn.au/financial-system-inquiry-submission-recommends-consideration-fairness-co-regulation/" target="_blank">submission to the Financial System Inquiry</a>, which argues that rather than water down the FOFA legislation, there is a good case to extend this “gatekeeper standard” to other areas of financial services to protect the interests of investors more broadly.
As we have been reminded only too often over recent weeks, we have an ageing population, increasing demands on the welfare system, and a very real need to maximise our retirement savings to ensure greater self-reliance in retirement. Given the generally poor level of financial literacy in this country, this is most unlikely to happen unless individuals can access low cost and scalable advice to assist in their retirement planning. The opportunities for the financial advice industry, and the investment community more generally, is therefore enormous.
The willingness with which individuals seek such advice, however, will depend on their confidence in the financial planning industry. Research from Rice Warner indicates that as a result of collapses such as those listed above, consumers hold a low view of financial advisers, with only 25% regarding them as ethical and honest. This mistrust results in Australians not seeking financial advice when it could be beneficial for them to do so.
The FOFA legislation presents a great opportunity for the financial advice industry collectively to adopt a more ethical client focused approach, re-instilling confidence in the industry. Without that confidence, individuals will not seek the advice they need, retirement savings will not be maximised, and there is likely to be an even greater need to rely on the age pension.
Deborah Ralston is Professor of Finance and Director at <a href="https://www.australiancentre.com.au/" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">Australian Centre for Financial Studies</a><img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/26822/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 1.3em;">
Deborah Ralston is affiliated with Mortgage Choice Financial Planning and provided expert advice to ASIC on the Storm Financial case.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

jake-cSmGT7VXVf

Financial planning industry at the crossroads: Why efforts to water down FOFA must be resisted

<html><body>
Changes to the Future of Financial Advice laws could cost consumers more than $530 million a year in increased fees and charges, according to a report published today.
The report from Rice Warner says the reintroduction of commissions and other conflicted payments could hit consumers with a staggering $7.5 billion of extra costs over 14 years.
It also debunks the claims by banks and financial planners that diluting consumer protections will reduce the cost of advice.
Industry Super Australia chief executive David Whiteley said in a statement the multi-billion dollar impact explains the relentless lobbying by the banks and financial planners to reduce consumer protections.
“The reality is that cutting consumer protections just increases commissions and fees paid to financial planners to sell bank products.”
“It would seem that the banks’ objective is to be able to sell compulsory super and other products through financial planners and other staff, rather than provide Australians with the impartial financial advice that they want, need and deserve,” he said.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/" target="_blank">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

Aussies hit with $7.5 billion in extra costs due to FOFA changes

<html><body>
We live in a crazy world where we are encouraged to invest and fund our own retirement but are not provided with adequate information or legislative protection to assist us to do so.
People who are looking to enter the property market are forced to rely on patchy information, as disclosure of sale results is not mandatory and access to past sales is hidden from view. In addition consumer protection laws for property investors are almost non-existent. As the wheels of the property market begin to turn this is the reality property investors face.
Currently there is no obligation for real estate agents or vendors to disclose sale results to the public. For years the industry has hidden behind privacy concerns but consider this, even a property sold via a public auction can be undisclosed. If you are watching the auction you would know the result but because of privacy concerns the vendor can elect to hide the result. Have you ever heard of anything so ludicrous!  
<blockquote>
Lack of regulation enables practitioners to sell investors a product or concept, under the guise of providing advice without taking into account an individual’s personal or financial circumstances.
</blockquote>
On any weekend as many as 10% - 20% of all auction results are not disclosed. Imagine if the board of BHP was to keep that much information hidden from the market place. There would be up roar and rightly so!
Further the historical growth of an individual asset is a key piece of information anyone buying property needs to know to make an informed decision. However what the property last sold for is usually very hard for the average punter to find. Again imagine if you were looking to purchase some BHP shares but had no access to historical values. It would be very difficult to work out fair market value.
But it gets worse for property investors. Legislation administered by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) provides protection for investors in shares, managed funds and super. Financial planners are required to consider each client’s personal and financial situation, investment knowledge and risk tolerance before giving recommendations on strategies or products. They must also provide a rationale for the recommendations, and disclose fees and commissions they will receive if the client acts on their advice.
Investors in direct property, however, receive no such protection from the nation’s investment watchdog. This is a glaring anomaly given that, according to the Tax Office, around 1.5 million Australians declare rental income for investment properties.
The ASIC Act’s rationale for excluding direct property from the definition of what constitutes a ‘financial product’ is that — unlike shares, super and managed funds, where investors entrust day-to-day control to a third party to generate a return — direct property investors retain direct control of decisions and returns.
The fact that direct property investors retain control of their assets doesn’t mean they are any more likely to make sound investment decisions. On the contrary, the absence of a third party increases the need for inclusion in ASIC’s safety net.
Lack of regulation enables practitioners to sell investors a product or concept, under the guise of providing advice without taking into account an individual’s personal or financial circumstances.
The regulator’s attitude to direct property as an asset class is clearly out of step with the way it’s being utilised as an investment in the wider community. It’s time the legislation was amended to recognise direct property as a financial product and give property investors the same level of protection and access to information as those holding other asset classes.
The time is ripe for the nation’s corporate watchdog to step up to the plate. When investors turn their attention to property, they’ll be in a better position to make informed investment choices and less prone to the fallout from lousy investment advice.
</body></html>

marmstrong-sd3emVLPPb

Full disclosure and property investor protection

<html><body>
Investors should expect regulations that allow self-managed superannuation funds to borrow to buy property to come under government scruitiny in the coming months, an expert in the area has said.
In February, Assistant Treasurer Arthur Sinodinos ruled out a specific review into limited recourse borrowing arrangements which SMSFs use when taking out loans to buy property.
Macquarie Bank executive director David Shirlow told Property Observer it was unlikely that the government would change its position, despite Senator Sinodinos standing aside and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann taking over as Acting Assistant Treasurer.
“Whilst the prospect of a separate and specific review of the matter is off the policy agenda for the time being, there are still some live policy issues in borrowing through super,” said Shirlow, who specialises in SMSFs and sits on the board of the SMSF Professionals’ Association of Australia (SPAA).
He said some stakeholders had argued that it was inappropriate for SMSFs to borrow for property investment at all, and that further constraints on advice provided regarding limited recourse borrowing arrangements and product offerings could be considered.
The arrangements are likely to be examined as part of the Financial System Inquiry, which is due to publish an interim report in mid-2014 and a final report by November.
Numerous submissions to the Inquiry have called for government to review SMSF borrowing and put in place additional consumer protection measures and education for trustees.
Big four accounting firm KPMG noted in its submission that super funds were tax-exempt in the pension phase, which provided incentives for SMSFs to invest in long-term assets such as residential property, and even more so if the property was negatively geared.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia strongly encouraged a review of existing arrangements to ascertain whether borrowing was appropriate and, if it was, to ensure the right legislative and regulatory frameworks were in place.
Mid-tier accounting firm Chan &amp; Naylor called for urgent action to create a dedicated national SMSF educational framework, lead by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), to teach the public about the merits and pitfalls of SMSF investments.
The Reserve Bank of Australia noted that SMSFs borrowing could expose members to greater financial risks (including excessive concentration in a single asset) than they understood they were taking.
CPA Australia raised concerns about the appropriateness of advice received by SMSF trustees and members, and potential misinformation being provided by unlicensed advisers such as real estate agents, mortgage brokers and property developers.
Shirlow said ASIC considered itself to have jurisdiction, under the Corporations Act, over some aspects of property sales people giving advice on limited recourse borrowing arrangements.
“Stakeholders such as SPAA would argue that there should be some more definite consumer protection rules in place to make sure that property spruiking is not going to lead to disaster,” he added.
The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia has previously advocated for advice to SMSFs on asset classes such as investment property and limited recourse loans to be provided only through licensed financial planners.
</body></html>

zfielding-GvX3Uq9KTa

Investors should expect SMSF borrowing to come under greater government scrutiny

<html><body>
Regional banks have called on the Financial System Inquiry to address issues that they say have created competitive advantages for the big four banks in home lending and other financial services.
In a joint submission to the inquiry, Bendigo and Adelaide Bank, BOQ, ME Bank and Suncorp Bank said the fall-out from the global financial crisis had favoured the major players.
“The banking landscape is now characterised by a higher degree of market concentration, consolidation and increasing dominance of the large banks relative to other providers,” the banks noted in their submission, which was prepared with the help of Pegasus Economics.
“While smaller banks and others provide customers with real alternatives and choice when it comes to financial services, these smaller participants do so at a distinct competitive disadvantage.”
Over the past few years, the major banks had become more vertically integrate with mortgage brokers and financial advice networks, which the regional banks’ submission claimed provided advantages in distributing home loans and other financial products.
The regional banks recommended the inquiry consider commissioning the Australian Securities and Investments Commission to survey the market to assess whether the major banks’ multi-brand strategies were confusing consumers about ownership.
“If it is found that confusion does exist, then a strong disclosure obligation must be introduced to ensure customers are making informed decisions,” the banks said in their submission.
The regional banks also noted that significant funding and cost advantages were available to the big banks deemed “systemically important” and that new regulatory and prudential requirements cost more, in relative terms, for the regional banks to implement.
They also claimed that asset requirements under the Basel capital adequacy framework made it more profitable for the big banks than for the regional banks to issue home loans.
The four big Australian banks, which had undertaken advanced Basel accreditation, were required to hold on average 1.3 cents of capital against each $1 of mortgage credit, UBS Securities Australia estimated. Banks operating under the standardised accreditation – including the regional participants – must hold up to three times more capital for the same loan.
The difference in capital requirements meant that the implied return on equity for ANZ to supply a home loan (estimated to be around 50 basis points) was 34.92% while the same mortgage delivered Bank of Queensland a return on equity of just 14.17%.
Other submissions to the Financial System Inquiry did not agree that competition in the mortgage market was inadequate.
The Reserve Bank of Australia in its submission said a good deal of focus had already been placed on competition in the mortgage market since the financial crisis and that competition in the market for small business loans was more of a concern.
“The [Reserve] Bank considers that this market should be the focus of inquiries regarding competition in lending, rather than the mortgage market,” it said.
Commonwealth Bank of Australia and ANZ agreed in their separate submissions that the inquiry should focus on improving the depth and liquidity of debt markets, on ensuring regulatory standards were consistent and on improving consumers’ financial literacy.
ANZ said: “An open market should continue to be the primary mechanism for maintaining an efficient, competitive financial system. Improvements to retail bond markets and removal of interest withholding taxes would promote efficient competition.”
</body></html>

Regional banks highlight competitive disadvantages in Financial System Inquiry submission

<html><body>
People who commit white collar crime in Australia are getting off lightly compared with those found guilty of similar offenses in other countries, a report has found.
Thousands of Australians have lost millions of dollars or been put at risk by the actions of financial planners and credit brokers who have committed fraud, provided inappropriate advice and operated without an appropriate license.
A report by the Australia Securities and Investments Commission has found the penalties that can be imposed for such offenses in Australia are limited in some cases compared with those available to regulators in other jurisdictions.
For example, people who provide financial services without a license in Australia can only be fined up to $34,000. In contrast, the report found that people guilty of the same offenses in the US face maximum fines of $5.6 million. In the UK, the maximum fine is unlimited.
The maximum civil penalty in Australia for giving inappropriate advice is $200,000, while in the UK the maximum is unlimited, and in Hong Kong it is the greater of $1.4 million or three times the benefit gained by the wrongdoer. 
Individuals who broke corporate rules in the US could be sentenced to prison terms of up to 20 years. In Australia, and most other jurisdictions studied, the maximum prison term was 10 years for criminal penalties such as fraud and insider trading. The maximum prison term for providing financial services without a license in Australia is just two years.
The report compared maximum penalties in Australia to penalties imposed for similar offenses in Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canadian province, Ontario.
It found that regulators elsewhere could, in addition to imposing fines and prison terms, remove financial benefits that wrongdoers had obtained through illegal profits or avoided losses. ASIC does not have that power, although it can ask other agencies to bring an action to confiscate the proceeds of crime.
The relatively low fixed fines that ASIC can impose and the fact that it cannot remove the proceeds of crime itself meant that wrongdoers may still profit from their conduct and not be deterred by the penalties, the report warned.
“The maximum fine that may be imposed may be substantially lower than the financial benefit obtained as a result of the wrongdoing,” it said.
The report also found inconsistencies between penalties that could apply to similar offenses under different pieces of legislation within Australia. For instance, offering a financial service without a license attracted a criminal penalty under the Corporations Act with individuals fined up to $34,000, while someone giving unlicensed credit advice could be subject to the same criminal penalty, or a civil penalty of up to $340,000.
Civil penalties in the Corporations Act have been eroded by inflation as they have not increased since they were set in 1992 for individuals and 2004 for corporations. In 2007, it was suggested that the penalties should be lifted following a Treasury review, although no increases were made.
The report is the first of its kind in over a decade and ASIC has recommended further work be done.
Its findings will be fed into ASIC’s submission to the Financial System Inquiry, which closes for comment on Friday, March 28.
</body></html>

Financial Regulation

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Financial Regulation

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News