POWERED BY MOMENTUM MEDIA
Advice cost record-keeping too onerous, says ASFA
Collective charging of super fund members for full financial advice is already prohibited, which will make the introduction of new similar obligations unnecessary, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA).
In its submission to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission regarding the updated record-keeping obligations for Australian Financial Services Licensees (AFSLs), ASFA wrote that keeping records of the cost of intra-fund advice - including details about the method of calculation - would require new systems and processes.
ASFA added that significant time and effort would be needed to comply with the requirements in proposals B1, B2 and B3 for arguably little regulatory benefit, because super funds are already prohibited from collectively charging for full advice under the Superannuation Industry Supervision (SIS) Act.
“Once a decision is made to provide advice that cannot be collectively charged for, trustees should not have the additional burden of recording how much that individual advice costs,” ASFA’s submission read.
It said funds have little or no incentive to undercharge for non-intra-fund advice, as these costs will be borne by the trustee or reflected in increased administration fees.
These record-keeping requirements will increase costs in an environment where funds are already being stretched to pay the costs associated with Stronger Super and building up the operational risk reserves required under the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) Prudential Standard over a relatively short time frame, according to ASFA.
“We submit that, instead of being required to calculate and keep records of how much each piece of non-intra-fund advice cost, it should be sufficient for the licensee to maintain records of the aggregate cost of providing non-intra-fund advice and how much was charged in total
for the provision of that advice,” the association said.
This would be sufficient to meet the desired regulatory / policy outcome - that of evidencing whether non-intra-fund advice is being charged for correctly and is not being cross-subsidised by fees received for intra-fund advice. There is no need for this to be done on a case by case basis.”
Furthermore, ASFA has pointed out similar aggregate information would be reported to APRA by RSEs as part of the new APRA data reporting standards, which will provide a “valuable source of data for the purposes of reasonableness checking”.
AUTHOR
Staff Writer
Money Management staff writers are writers who contribute to the website from time to time. If you would like to discuss the content contained within this article please contact us.
Recommended for you
The future of superannuation policy remains uncertain, with further reforms potentially on the horizon as the Albanese government seeks to curb the use of superannuation as a bequest vehicle.
Superannuation funds will have two options for charging fees for the advice provided by the new class of adviser.
The proposed reforms have been described as a key step towards delivering better products and retirement experiences for members, with many noting financial advice remains the “urgent missing piece” of the puzzle.
APRA’s latest data has revealed that superannuation funds spent $1.3 billion on advice fees, with the vast majority sent to external financial advisers.
TOP PERFORMING FUNDS
ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Fund name
3y(%)pa
1
Global X GlobalX FANG+ ETF
33.51 3 y p.a(%)
2
Spire Oaktree Opportunities XI Second Close
32.68 3 y p.a(%)
3
DomaCom Lot 21 Chellaston Road Munno Para West SA 5115 Australia
31.62 3 y p.a(%)
4
Spire Oaktree Opportunities XI First Close USD
31.36 3 y p.a(%)
5
Fidante Credit Suisse Global Private Equity
29.60 3 y p.a(%)
