In news that would seem to confirm the need for professional financial advice, analysis released this week shows that the early release of super has not worked as intended according to AlphaBeta founder Andrew Charlton. Meanwhile, in further pushback against the FASEA exam, one member group has called for advisers to boycott it, and a dominant player in financial planning software announced its intention to buy into the platform space…
64% of Early Accessed Super Spent on Discretionary Spending
Now, we don’t think people should be told how to spend their own money, but news of analysis around the 1st tranche of early accessed super this week revealed some startling facts that would seem to confirm the need for advice professionals. Transaction data crunched by the advisory firms AlphaBeta and Illion showed that many people dipping into their retirement nest eggs have increased spending on lifestyle items, rather than using the cash as a lifeline.
The analysis found that the early release of Super payments were indeed being spent and found that a third of the money was used up in the first two weeks after payment. On average, people withdrew $8000 and spent an extra $2855 in two weeks above their usual fortnightly spending. A sample of 13,000 people who accessed their super under the early release scheme shows 64 per cent of spending went on discretionary items. More than 10 per cent, or $327, was spent on online gambling - the second-highest spending in any category, behind repaying debts.
The scheme is intended to allow individuals facing financial stress due to the covid-19 pandemic to access funds and was meant to have eligibility criteria applied. These criteria included being unemployed, eligible to receive a job seeker payment, or have at least a 20% fall in their hours worked or turnover. But 40% of those who took advantage of the program either did not lose income, or had any loss compensated by schemes like JobSeeker and JobKeeper. There was no requirement for any supporting evidence, no income verification and no need to prove that the lost income hadn’t been made up with government support. Applicants just needed to tick a box.
The latest figures from APRA indicate 1.78 million Australians have applied to access their superannuation, with 1.63 million being paid. $12.2 billion has been paid since the inception of the scheme, totalling an average of $7,476. APRA indicated up to $15 Billon would be paid out in the first stage of the scheme.
Critics of the scheme have said it would cause people to crystallise losses in their investment portfolio when markets are low and would deprive savers of many years of compounding returns. In response to the report, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg endorsed the ability of people to use money how they saw fit, saying "This is their money. They will use that money for a range of purposes… so we are comfortable with the fact that people are accessing their money when they need it most." “This money is tax-free and that's been an important initiative by the Government, and it's been welcome”.
You can read how several advisers have responded to a consumer query about using early released super money for purchasing a property here.
Adviser Group Calls For Exam Boycott
The United Financial Advisers Association (UFAA) has said the FASEA exam is completely opaque, non-transparent in application and meaningless as an academic industry entry requirement and should be boycotted. The UFAA Chair, Alex Vagliviello said his group was “seeking a practical alternative that is both honest, transparent and filled with integrity”. “Regardless of the narrative put forward by the LNP or Labor, FASEA and the industry is confused and in disarray while over-regulated to the point where it is on the verge of collapse,” he said.
The aggressive words and stance may be supported in theory by many advisers who are feeling overwhelmed by pressure seemingly from all quarters, however, in reality, boycotting the exam will most likely see those advisers ejected from the industry and unable to practise. Though the government plans to extend to exam deadline, their appears no appetite or willingness on their part to have the exam canned or make wholesale changes to the FASEA regulatory regime.
The calls come at a time when there is increasing debate about the future direction of adviser member organisations such as the FPA and AFA. Many advisers have been critical of industry association representations on behalf of members in response to new legislation in recent years and the old chestnut of unifying advisers under one banner has again reared it’s head as part of a potential solution.
Iress Bid For OneVue
The rapidly changing landscape in advice had another jolt earlier this week when Iress said it had completed a $150 million placement that was announced earlier in the week, and that it had agreed to acquire 100 per cent of the shares in platform provider OneVue.
Iress chief executive, Andrew Walsh said “The combination of OneVue’s strength and position in administration of managed funds, superannuation, and investments, with Iress’ strength in software and data will drive innovation through technology. This includes the development of software and services that brings advice and investments closer together, resulting in greater efficiency and productivity for professional advisers and businesses in Australia”
If the acquisition proves successful, the words of Mike Taylor from Money Management may ring true: “The bottom line for the Australian platform industry is that a significant player has joined the fray with the potential to develop an offering derived of both planning software and fund administration which busy financial planners are likely to find compelling”.
Article by:
Comments10
"The COVID early super release and spend information is no surprise. However, once the stimulus stops, I feel it is likely that there will sadly be significant pain ahead for many. Re the FASEA exam, I agree it is opaque and I agree that it should be much clearer and actually used as a tool to assist advisers to understand and apply the regulations in a wide variety of situations. I sat for the exam this week. I can say it was very challenging, the tested scenarios against which the regs were placed were largely unfamiliar to me and were for the most part, not situations I had considered in my preparation beforehand. Therein lies part of the challenge and understandable frustration felt by many. There was a very interesting speech made on June 12 by senator Bilyk around the exam, drawing attention to its clear shortcomings as a method of improving an adviser's understanding. Even an adviser who 'passes' has no confirmation of where their strengths and / or weaknesses may lie. I don't think boycotting will help. Look how hard it was for parliament to pass the extension, no-one can honestly think we are going to see parliament going back on the standards now that these are LAW. We all just have to get through it but continue to argue for the process and its outcomes to be far more beneficial, maybe some additional RPL would be helpful too. We have to stay unified though, and some of us need to take a long hard look in the mirror, I read so many comments which indicate the writer(s), usually under the moniker of 'anonymous', are unilaterally dancing upon the career graves of their peers. If you are one of those and you are reading these comments, please for any sake, wake up to yourselves and show some empathy. Remember FASEA code 12 directs that we uphold the profession - think of what that means and stop making a bad situation worse for those struggling with the colossal weight of this poorly orchestrated 'forced' change. "
Tim Ross 11:01 on 19 Jun 20
"The issue is that the advice industry is fractured. Larger practices have structure and as such a greater ability to manage whereas the "do it all" adviser practice is significantly challenged, struggling to find a break in the deluge of regulation and even more disconcerting, the variation of its interpretation. The besieged adviser today needs to have lobbyist representation. One that is disconnected from the traditional representative groups like the AFA or FPA, that is not constrained in its approach. Is outcome-focused. Representation for the adviser without any care of political disconnect. Whilst FASEA exam is an example of selection against a small representation of the overall Financial and Insurance market, the absolute disregard for advisers is the requirement to further advance their academic status, to retain employment. In most cases, in an industry that they have been successfully working within. Displaying a disregard for those that have industry-standard accreditation like the Advanced Diploma's and /or have association accreditation, none of which might I add was ever just handed out. FoFA and the RC have created a bridge too far for some advisers, bringing about an exodus of experience whilst we are approaching 84% of the nation without financial advice. A government-led cancellation process of much-needed insurance within super funds. Yet we need the education"
George Sovechles 17:49 on 03 Jun 20
"Made the decision to do the exam in round one. Glad I did. I can rest easy now. One subject to go on Grad Dip and them I'm done for now. Very stressful but decided to take the bull by the horns."
Robbo 16:25 on 03 Jun 20
"IRESS should focus on getting their software working efficiently and accurately before embarking on new strategic sidetracks. "
Mick 16:10 on 03 Jun 20
"Interesting point with IRESS purchasing onevue, is this the end of IRESS domination in the tech space. One would say it is the start. To transfer from tech to platform provider the trust & the integrity of the research now has to be questioned by every adviser utilising their software. FASEA code of conduct standard 3. "
Robert Phillips 16:03 on 03 Jun 20
"This is great timing for all of us that have sat for the exam already & been through the stress of ensuring we did well. I want to have the capacity to look after my clients for the medium term so bit the bullet & Passed the exam so I could do so. I wouldn't be sitting around hoping FASEA or the Government change their mind as they already have a number Adviser's who have committed to the process. I'd have to question whether these boycotting Advisers were complying with the new Code of Ethics as well!!"
David Armstrong 16:02 on 03 Jun 20
"The sad thing is that the Government has let hundreds of thousands of people dip into their retirement savings to "help them selves out" instead of using the social security system which is for that purpose? The losses won't mount on the Govts balance sheet immediately, they will be be seen in 10, 20 and 30 years when hundreds of thousands of people will need extra help in retirement. $15 billion from private savings - almost a quarter of what the govt has promised in help. So short sighted it's not funny."
Leadership None 15:57 on 03 Jun 20
"The UFAA takes a stand which is more than anyone can say about the fools at the AFA and FPA. Members of these organisations have paid fees for no service only to be thrown under the bus each time on FOFA, grandfathering LIF and now FASEA. If you are happy to pay for this the whose the bigger fool. As for me I gave up on these clowns a log time ago.Not sure about member fees for UFAA but if they stand for what they say and do right by me, thats still better than paying fools like AFA FPA and getting done over. "
Alistairs corner 15:52 on 03 Jun 20
"I will be interested to see if UFAA Board Members, Eric Koelmeyer & Robert Porte "walk the walk' by boycotting the FASEA exam and letting themselves become de-registered. If not, it seems their words mean nothing. "
Just do it 15:46 on 03 Jun 20
"The UFAA are just grandstanding. Got coverage everywhere for their ridiculous boycott call. No paid members tells you how serious you should take them. Calls for a boycott are populist and while many may agree with the sentiment, the reality is if some poor advisers take their idiotic advice, they will be out of a job. Will Vagliviello and the rest start paying their bills? then?"
Stoopid 15:28 on 03 Jun 20