tmmonline.nz  |   landlords.co.nz        About Good Returns  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  RSS Feeds

NZ's Financial Adviser News Centre

GR Logo
Last Article Uploaded: Wednesday, December 25th, 8:49AM

News

rss
Latest Headlines

Officials didn't ask for regulatory changes

Officials gave Parliament's Commerce Committee plenty of advice on the legislative changes to financial adviser regulation, though nothing specific about carving mortgage brokers and insurance advisers out of the regime.

Monday, June 21st 2010, 8:22AM

by Paul McBeth

In response to MPs' concern that the proposed legislation did not "clearly carve out simple advice in relation to category two products," the Ministry of Economic Development recommended the committee amend legislation to change the definition of a financial advice service to refer to investment goals rather than financial goals, and introduce a naming restriction on who could call themselves financial planners.

On product classification, officials recommended certain types of products could fall into either category one or two, and that regulators should have discretion to specify which bracket they should fall in, according to the supplementary departmental report on the Financial Service Providers Pre-Implementation Adjustments Bill 2010 clause-by-clause analysis.

In the same document, the Securities Commission "strongly" recommended that home equity release products be considered category one, though it is unclear whether the committee report adopted that advice.

The Commission also advised "it may be unnecessary to amend the definition of ‘financial planning service' because any unintended or unwarranted coverage could be dealt with through the proposed new exemption powers," but if the committee chose to adopt this, it said it was "preferable to focus on the service that is in fact provided and whether the service is held out to be or is reasonably taken to be comprehensive."

In response to committee questions around whether cash and term portfolio investment entities should be category two products, the officials agreed, though said it should not be limited to PIEs offered by banks. The recommendation was adopted in the committee report.

 

Paul is a staff writer for Good Returns based in Wellington.

« Simon Power pledges solution for category 2 advisersReserve dispute resolution scheme revealed »

Special Offers

Commenting is closed

 

print

Printable version  

print

Email to a friend
News Bites
Latest Comments
  • The good guys get told off
    “Very prudent points as always @JohnMilner. Whilst I don’t disagree with the process, I question any advantages from the...”
    2 days ago by Pragmatic
  • [The Wrap] The year that was - and what may happen next year
    “Hope you have a good recovery Phil. Interesting points 1.Box ticking already happening with SOA 's that look identical...”
    3 days ago by Very Frustrated Adviser
  • [The Wrap] The year that was - and what may happen next year
    “Nice summary Phil. In short: . Consumers will expect more from the industry for less . Advisers will be increasingly time...”
    3 days ago by Pragmatic
  • The good guys get told off
    “I can't quite reconcile the rationale, or lack thereof, with the comments so far. Pathfinder were found to have made misleading...”
    6 days ago by John Milner
  • The good guys get told off
    “As a follow on to this conversation: I'm assuming that the Regulator will be consistent by 'naming and shaming' the other...”
    6 days ago by Pragmatic
Subscribe Now

Mortgage Rates Newsletter

Daily Weekly

Previous News

MORE NEWS»

Most Commented On
About Us  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy  |  RSS Feeds  |  Letters  |  Archive  |  Toolbox  |  Disclaimer
 
Site by Web Developer and eyelovedesign.com