FSLAA fact sheets for advisers
For advisers: question every practice

Transitional Licensing Conditions Submissions Review

Looking at the submissions completed on the consultation on standard transitional licensing conditions, one would be forgiven for questioning whether industry participants have really understood these expectations. Note the following:

  • There were just 30 submissions
  • Even allowing for the fact that adviser businesses were covered by industry body submissions (FANZ, IBNZ, and ICNZ), there were less than 20 submissions directly from entities expecting to be licensed from the body of thousands of expected licence applicants.
  • Perhaps my compliance guru submission comment that the request in the consultation to disclose what written records are currently maintained was a barrier to existing advisory entities completing submission 
  • Perhaps just as likely, there was not good recognition of the expansion of the requirements and their potential impact.
  • In any event, the submission responses provided outlining current written records appeared remarkably silent as to whether the records would demonstrate compliance, while acknowledging that the question did not specifically ask for this.
  • I definitely think that the small number of submissions suggests there is poor recognition that these conditions are likely to be an expression of the FMA expectation on all financial service providers within the enhanced focus on conduct.

 

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The comments to this entry are closed.