“I am enormously distressed to find myself in a position where I might need to abandon a career that I have devoted my life to as I am unable to re-qualify,” Mr Woolf said.

The comments follow previous reports by ifa on the rising number of queries licensees and training providers are fielding around the lack of feedback provided by FASEA during the exam process.

Mr Woolf, who had been a financial planner for 35 years and suffered from a number of medical issues, said the government needed to “consider the impact and ramifications of imposing this exam on all members of the industry”.

“I fully understand the need to always improve standards, particularly given the scandals that emerged in the industry. However, for younger professionals, the FASEA exam is not as challenging as it is for someone my age and with my health challenges,” Mr Woolf said.

“There needs to be regard for individual circumstances including track record, number of years of ongoing compliance, initial academic qualifications and a range of other factors.”

In response, Mr Kelly said he agreed with Mr Woolf “100 per cent” and that “many of my colleagues feel the same”.

“We will be pressuring for change of this absurd policy,” Mr Kelly said.

FASEA came under fire around its handling of the exam and implementation of industry standards more broadly at a recent hearing of the House Standing Committee on Economics, of which Mr Kelly is a member.

FASEA chief executive Stephen Glenfield told the committee around 400 advisers so far had had to re-sit the exam.

“What you see with those [re-sits] is their marks do increase, so [the advisers] have been doing the work to lift their standards,” Mr Glenfield said.

“It’s an inevitable part of this exam that not everybody is going to be at the level required, so the exam is doing its job to identify those people.”