Accountants resisting insto ‘stigma’ with SMSF licensing

In the lead up to the accountants’ exemption phase-out, accountants are resisting institutional licensing arrangements in light of several large-scale advice scandals, according to one mid-tier firm.

Greg Hayes, the Hayes Knight's chairman and joint managing director told SMSF Adviser’s sister publication AccountantsDaily that the majority of accountants do not want to align themselves with a large institutional licensee given several recent scandals involving a number of these organisations.

“From the accountants' point of view, in terms of being aligned to one of the large institutions, there's probably the greater proportion of accountants saying they don't want to do that.

==

You’re out of free articles for this month

Username or Email

Password Forgot password?

Keep me signed in on this device.

or

First Name

Last Name

Mobile

Email

Organisation Type

By becoming a member, I agree to receive information and promotional messages from SMSF Adviser. I can opt out of these communications at any time. For more information, please visit our Privacy Statement.

Need help signing up? Visit the Help Centre.

“They see that institutional alignment, even if it is only on a limited authorisation, they actually see that institutional alignment carrying with it a perceived stigma with clients and even if it doesn't come with that stigma for the clients, accountants have that perception themselves.

“Accountants are not comfortable with that institutional alignment and tend to be looking more at non-institutionally aligned groups," Mr Hayes said.

Executive director of Crystal Wealth Partners John McIlroy previously told SMSF Adviser accountants are typically “independent thinkers” and would not want to be seen to be 'product pushing' for their licensee.

“Accountants generally like to be seen in their clients’ eyes as being an independent party,” Mr McIlroy said.

He added that accountants are unlikely to join bank-aligned licensees, citing potential product restrictions and cultural differences.

You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!

Kara Kent Tuesday, 25 November 2014

I agree with George - it seems like its all just a scam to make the client spend more money on "financial planners" - even when they don't want/need advice. Good factual advice is hard to find from these FP without some kind of product being involved/pushed. Specialist SMSF accountants provide a service that cant be found elsewhere - and soon wont be found at all.

0
GeorgeVC Tuesday, 25 November 2014

Accountants are professional taxation and compliance experts. The only thing we need to know about investments is how they are taxed.

Jumping in bed with some dealer group and recommending their top five managed funds is not investment advice, may be it was 20 years ago but not any more. The public is a lot smarter than that these days.

Accountants have more integrity than to become licensed like most financial planners do, and pretend they have become an investment expert overnight.

Removing the accountants exemption is a farce. Accountants should continue providing 'factual advice' on taxation and compliance matters, without 'recommendations'. That's what clients need and want and will pay for, good factual advice. Most clients, including SMSF trustees are smart enough to work out what they want from there, without overpriced FP hand-holding.

0