This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.
X
Money Marketing Cover
Categories:Other,Regulation

MM Leader: FSA should cut the dogma and heed MPs

  • Print
  • Comments (3)

In calling for a 12-month delay to the retail distribution review and softening of the cliff-edge deadline, the Treasury select committee has listened carefully to the valid concerns of many IFAs and their MPs.

But instead of taking time to consider the balanced TSC report, the FSA swiftly dismissed its key recommendations, showing a pretty shocking disregard for the respected Parliamentary committee.

The drive towards greater professionalism, higher qualification standards and more transparent charging is good news for the IFA industry and its clients. However, MPs are right to raise concerns about the way the RDR reforms are being introduced and the dangers of a significant number of IFAs not meeting the January 2013 deadline.

The publication of the TSC report is the perfect time for the FSA to take a step back and think again about what it truly wants to achieve from the RDR reforms and whether the positives of a delay now outweigh the negatives.

The positives of a one-year delay combined with some flexibility for some experienced advisers on a case-by-case basis are clear. We want as many decent IFAs remaining in the industry as possible.

If a combination of heavy work pressures and a late start in beginning the road to QCF level four mean a significant number of IFAs who would otherwise make the grade are left unable to advice for a period of time then a dose of pragmatism is required.

A softening of the cliff-edge deadline on a case-by-case basis for older advisers unlikely to remain in the industry for a significant period after 2012 would be a sensible way of addressing the anger of those who feel they are being forced out of the industry.

With less than 18 months to go until the RDR deadline, we still await the regulator’s platform rules and simplified advice proposals and there is continued uncertainty over the tax treatment of advice services and what will constitute legacy commission.

It is reasonable to suggest a relaxation of the deadline to ensure the reforms are successfully implemented with as many good IFAs as possible continuing to give advice rather than botched through a dogmatic desire to keep to an arbitrary date.

Throughout the course of the RDR the FSA has consistently failed to take on board legitimate adviser concerns. It may well regret treating MPs in the same way.

  • Print
  • Comments (3)

Daily Email Updates
If you enjoyed this article, sign up to receive the latest news and analysis from Money Marketing.

The Money Marketing CPD Centre
Build your annual CPD - you can log and plan your CPD hours for free with The Money Marketing CPD Centre.

Taxbriefs Advantage
Advantage is a digital reference source giving unbiased, independent, answers to your technical queries. Subscribe to Taxbriefs Advantage.

Readers' comments (3)

  • Whilst I accept that there are a number of areas which still need some clarification that is not an excuse to fudge the qualification requirements, which everyone has known about for years.

    If "a significant number of IFAs don't meet the January 2013 deadline" it is no-ones fault but their own. The rest of us have managed to take our qualifications despite heavy workloads etc.so why should they be given special treatment?

    I suepect that the truth is that may of these people hoped that it would all go away. Now the timescale is short they're panicking. Am I bothered?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Steve IFAs' have already been selected for "special treatment" Only problem is, that is special treatment means different things to different people.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Sorry, but the deadline must be maintained. We have all had the same timescale to study , sit and pass these exams, so why give special treatment for those foolish advisers who have sat back and not bothered with the exams ? and will a year make any difference to them if they have not been bothered so far, or in a years time will they cry again ?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your sayEdit my profile/screen name

You must sign in to make a comment

Fund Data

Editor's Pick



Poll

Do you agree with calls for a flat 30% rate of pensions tax relief?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments