This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.

MM Leader: RDR impact must not be underestimated

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

With the RDR deadline only 19 months away, there is growing concern that firms are underestimating the radical business transformation changes that will be required.

Understandably, the focus for many has been on obtaining the new qualifications. But firms may well find that adapting their business models to abide by the RDR rules on charging and independence are a tougher hurdle to overcome.

At a Money Marketing round table event last week, a range of experts, many of whom spend their time visiting IFAs across the country, were united in their view that the advice sector is in a state of denial.

A year and a half until the new rules are due to be implemented, this is a dangerous state of affairs.

Important decisions need to be made about the type of charging structures that will employed and what client segmentation strategies are required.

This has not been helped by a lack of clarity from regulatory bodies. There is still a huge amount of confusion regarding the issue of VAT, which extends beyond adviser charging to other areas of the market. A clear set of notes from HM Revenue & Customs is needed.

Firms also await a definitive answer on whether cash rebates will be banned, a decision which may hit charging strategies.

However, despite these regulatory clouds, there are many things advisers should be doing to prepare themselves for 2013. There is no point in passing all the required qualifications if you do not have a viable model in place to stay in business.

E for effort

You can understand the Investment Management Association’s agenda for replacing the active, balanced and cautious managed sectors with the letters A, B, C and D.

Keen to avoid another arch-Cru-style embarrassment when the range was placed in the cautious managed sector, the trade body wants to absolve itself of any responsibility if a similar debacle occurs in the future.

What is less clear is how the consumer will benefit from this very strange proposal which will create less transparency and more confusion. Perhaps if the IMA review had included more than a tiny number of IFAs, a more sensible decision could have been reached.

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

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

Money Marketing Awards 2015
Put your firm forward as the leading practitioner in your field. Adviser and Advertising categories are open to entries - Enter Now.

Readers' comments (2)

  • Maybe the trade media might just stop focussing on the qualifications issue and praising the efforts of the CII etc and begin to think about ways in which help can be given with the business process - without which all else will fail.

    Why not feature people who make a profit rather than those who have a glory wall full of certificates.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Or feature those with both higher qualifications and who are profitable in recognition of the well known fact that the two are not mutually exclusive?

    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


How do you plan to vote at the general election?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments