Asset consultants' business models may contain some conflicts of interest but do not warrant further legislation, according to an Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) review.
ASIC Commissioner Greg Tanzer said ASIC's review of asset consultants' role in the superannuation industry found some fee structures based on preferred services and in-house funds contained conflicts of interest.
ASIC also found some asset consultants recommended products to multiple clients where capacity to participate in the product may have been limited.
"While there were no apparent significant or systemic issues of concern warranting an immediate regulatory response, we did identify conflicts of interest present in the business models reviewed which need to be managed appropriately," Tanzer said.
He said the review's findings were positive and included a growing trend towards in-house investment management functions, and a declining circle of clients due to merger and consolidation activity.
Tanzer said asset consultants appeared to possess a new post-GFC outlook regarding asset allocation, but still struggled to identify growth assets over different time periods.
Asset consultants were also concerned about the short-term focus of some superannuation trustees and their focus on peer risk, the report said.
In a Senate submission, the Financial Services Council said super funds should be able to nudge members on engaging with their super and has cautioned against default placements.
The Joint Associations Working Group, which counts FSC in its ranks, has issued an urgent warning to the government.
Senator Jane Hume will join the speaker lineup at the inaugural Australian Wealth Management Summit.
New research from ART has found less than a third of women feel their superannuation is in a good position, reiterating the importance of opening up the advice arena to super funds.
Add new comment