ASIC warns 3,459 adviser laggards
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has expressed concern that as many as 3,459 financial advisers may be unable to practice next year because they are yet to confirm the accuracy of their data on the Financial Adviser Register.
The regulator said that relevant providers generally have until 1 January, next year, to meet the qualifications standards under the Corporations Act to continue providing personal advice to retail clients.
“..unless exempt, existing providers have until 31 December 2025 to complete specified courses in commercial law and taxation law to be able to provide tax (financial) advice services to retail clients for relevant financial products from 1 January 2026. Once these courses are completed, AFS licensees must update the Financial Advisers Register,” ASIC said.
It said a review of the information on the Financial Advisers Register shows:
- As of 16 September 2025, of the 15,432 relevant providers on the Financial Advisers Register, AFS licensees have notified ASIC that 7,081 relevant providers hold an approved degree or qualification, 3,966 are relying on the experienced provider pathway and 926 are recorded as holding both an approved degree or qualification and relying on the experienced provider pathway.
- The remaining 3,459 relevant providers have yet to meet the qualifications standard according to the information currently recorded on the Financial Advisers Register and of this cohort, 1,371 may be eligible for the experienced provider pathway, but their AFS licensees are yet to notify ASIC of this.
- 1,143 existing providers, unless exempt, will need to complete the specified courses in commercial law and taxation law to continue to provide tax (financial) advice services from 1 January 2026.
.
Maybe ASIC could throw another unnecessary hand grenade at another credit fund to prove that they get in front of problematic wording in official documents.
Ridiculous.
I suspect these 3,500 people are simply leaving a dying over-regulated , over-taxed industry. Very smart if they are.
ASIC charges licensees for the privilege of updating ASIC’s records. And licensees often pass this cost on to the adviser.
Many advisers will still be completing studies, and/or deciding whether to use the experience pathway.
For these reasons, a lot of advisers will be choosing to wait until the last minute.
If an adviser is waiting til the last minute of a 7 year lead in to upskill themselves I’m not sure I want them in the industry
I left it to the last minute because I wasn’t sure if I wanted to continue being an adviser. I’ve done it now, but I’m still not sure…
Coming on websites like this doesn’t improve one’s morale.
Advisers getting smashed by Canberrra year in year out.
That is a fair point and i empathise but highly doubt thats the case for 3459 people
For a lot of advisers it’s not about upskilling themselves at all. They already completed higher level studies long before it was compulsory, but corrupt FASEA refused to recognise their studies, or deemed them past their “use by date”. For those advisers it’s about going through the motions with a lesser quality course. By leaving it as late as possible there is less chance of being caught again by the “use by date” scam.
When the next iteration of corrupt FASEA comes along, much better to have a Grad Dip completed in Dec 2025, than Dec 2019.
You know what. I had some of that issue, but I decided for the betterment of moving our industry to a profession I would get off my arse and do it. I am so disappointed we have an experience pathway as it does not move us towards a profession. I’ve been doing it for 25 years. Did I learn much…no. Did it upskill me in some ways … yes
A lot of those 3,459 are not practising advisers and never have been. They are paraplanners, BDMs, compliance officers etc who joined the FAR prior to the new entrant rules coming in, just in case. They will drop off the FAR on 1 Jan when higher education (or experience) standards come into force. However they are NOT advisers leaving the profession. They were never advisers in the first place.
Practising advisers who have chosen not to meet the education standards will mostly qualify via the experience exemption. Very few of the “losses” on 1 Jan will be practising advisers.
I think you are right but when they do drop off then there will be like just 11,500 (dummies) err advisers on FAR.
It seems unlikely that in the double and triple Adviser FAR taxation world that any AFSL would keep paraplanners, BDMs, compliance officers, etc on the FAR and have to pay thousands and thousands $$$$$ for ASIC Levies and CSLR levies.
If they were going to become practicing Advisers, then maybe so.
Otherwise I doubt your assumption.
Why would their licensee have kept them on the FAR all this time paying ASIC Funding levies and more recently the CSLR Levy? The FAR shows around 4,000 advisers started between 2012 and when the new education standard commenced. None of them qualify for the Experienced Adviser Pathway and all of them will need to pass the education standard. I think there is more to this issue, rather than just assuming it is non-practicing advisers.
That is exactly the timeframe when most of the non practising registrants joined FAR to avoid the new entrant rules. Mostly in the final year of that period (2018?).
How many practising advisers are there really, that joined between 2012 and 2018, decided to continue working as an adviser until 2026, decided NOT to meet the education standards, and will walk away on 1 January? With such a narrow set of circumstances and decisions, it’s hard to imagine more than a few.
if you mulitple 3,459 by the $39 ASIC fee to update it, you’ll almost pay for the entree at the 2025/26 ASIC Christmas staff party