APRA and ASIC should not jointly administer super laws

12 March 2020
| By Jassmyn |
image
image
expand image

The corporate regulators should not be administering the superannuation laws jointly as it blurs the distinction between the roles, objectives, and charters of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA).

In a submission to Treasury on super regulator roles, the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA), said the covenants were originally APRA’s responsibility but now ASIC had responsibility of these provisions.

“In the event of a breach, or potential breach, of a covenant how will it be decided which regulator will take compliance action against the organisation/trustee director?” it said.

“It is difficult to visualise how such a decision would be made on an objective basis, or how the facts would need to differ in order for an appropriate determination in one set of facts is that it would be APRA, while in another it would be ASIC.

“Accordingly, it would appear that ultimately this will end up being an arbitrary decision as to which regulator would take action with respect to the non-compliance.”

ASFA said if both regulators were responsible for administering the law jointly, there might as well be one financial services regulator.

“The ‘twin peaks’ model of regulation should be maintained by ensuring that each legislative provision/obligation is characterised as being predominantly for prudential or consumer protection purposes and accordingly is regulated by APRA or ASIC respectively,” it said.

For example, ASFA said action or disclosure of a consumer issue with a particular provider might cause a run on a particular product which could serve to worsen the position of remaining consumers. In an extreme case, it could result in a loss of consumer confidence.

“Consumer issues usually can be remediated, however, a loss of consumer confidence in a particular market can have a devasting outcome and can pose a considerable systemic prudential risk,” ASFA said.

“As such, it is imperative that ASIC consult with APRA prior to taking any enforcement action against a particular financial services providers, to enable APRA to exercise its responsibilities as the prudential regulator responsible for the stability and soundness of the financial system.

“Given the different objectives of APRA and ASIC there is a question as to whether having two regulators serves to create an unnecessary, and avoidable, conflict of priorities.”

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Recommended for you

sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

4 months ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

4 months 1 week ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

4 months 1 week ago

The property group, owned by industry super fund Aware Super, has announced two new projects with a total construction value of $320 million that will add more than 700 h...

1 hour ago

A member of the super fund has approached ASIC to investigate potentially misleading or deceptive representations by UniSuper regarding the holdings of its sustainable po...

2 hours ago

The median growth fund delivered 1.9 per cent in March, adding to the “stunning” rally that has seen super funds gain 11 per cent since November....

7 hours ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND