Six-month extension sought to adviser registration regime

The Federal Government has been asked to give financial advice licensees and advisers up to six months breathing space on new adviser registration arrangements.
The request has come in a submission from the Financial Planning Association (FPA) and Association of Financial Advisers (AFA) before they formally became the Financial Advice Association of Australia.
The submission has been filed as part of a review being undertaken by the Senate Economics Legislation Committee.
The Financial Services Council (FSC) has similarly called for a six-month delay “to enable advisers to comply with its requirements to align with the extension of the individual adviser registration”.
As well, the AFA and FPA have urged that in the absence of such a delay, the Government should permit the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) to take a facilitative approach to enforcement of the new regime.
The explanatory memorandum around the legislative amendments explains that they are intended to “limit the risk of an inadvertent breach of the law if the licensee who registered a relevant provider revokes their authorisation”.
It said that, in such circumstances, the relevant provider could become unregistered and unknowingly give advice while authorised by another licensee.
While welcoming legislative amendments which will allow financial advisers (as relevant providers) to be registered by more than one licensee, the two organisations have asked for deferral so that ASIC can be more facilitative in allowing licensees and advisers to become compliant.
“…we are concerned about the timeliness of this legislation given the Committee is due to report by 26 May, just 25 working days, and eight Senate sitting days prior to the commencement of this requirement,” the submission said.
“The FPA and AFA request consideration of extending the registration requirement by 3 – 6 months or permit ASIC to use a facilitative approach to enforcement of this measure, to allow licensees and financial advisers to comply with the new requirement.”









Is it not a cost of completing the transaction? Why should it be removed from any analysis, applicable govt charges…
Misleading figures. We’d have millions and millions removed in our client base with LS. Almost 100% came straight back in…
Financial planners, you know exactly what will happen next. Get your wallets out- Cslr bill coming your way!
Another day and yet another shouty SMC story running about trying to push regulators to enter union super into Australian…
These funds should be a lot more concerned about their investment returns, which are starting to look very sick. Waiting…