SMSF Association offers alternative to FASEA

As an alternative to satisfying FASEA’s existing education requirements by 1 January 2026, the SMSF Association has proposed that advisers with 10 or more years of full-time experiences in the last 12 years, be given the option of demonstrating they have the “necessary core and individual competencies” to provide advice.

In its submission to government, the organisation argued that this model should be available to advisers on the Financial Advisers Register with at least 10 out of 12 years’ experience as of 1 January 2019, who are unable to demonstrate recognition of prior learning from prior tertiary studies.

“Years of service or the number of years on a register alone are not an appropriate measure of skill, knowledge, or capability,” said John Maroney, chief executive of the SMSF Association.

“An alternative model is needed to allow experienced advisers to have their competencies assessed or allow education providers to use existing recognition of prior learning frameworks.”

Mr Maroney argued that the current education standards place everyone in the same box.

“The industry has a number of different types of ‘advisers’, including those who provide limited advice service, such as risk, superannuation, self-managed superannuation, or stock broking,” Mr Maroney explained.

“The education needs of each cohort are niche and considerably different, whereas the current model seeks to shoehorn all industry participants into a single cohort model that is not fit for purpose.

“We support the model proposed by the Financial Planning Association, acknowledging the possible addition of SMSF Advice as a separate and distinct individual competence and that, as proposed, it would apply to advisers providing full financial advice services. It provides a clear framework and model on which to build those needed for other industry participants.”

Mr Maroney also argued that advisers that have had their international degrees assessed by FASEA, should have the opportunity to elect to complete their education pathway under the pathway approved under FASEA or apply for RPL with an education provider.

Moreover, the CEO noted that while the SMSF Association supports and encourages further education and specialisation, “we do not support changing the Professional Year (PY) standard to require additional graduate certificate or diploma level education be undertaken”.

“Whilst we support measures that require or encourage specialisation, the PY program is not the appropriate point in time. This cohort already needs to be degree qualified and is required to prepare for and sit the prescribed financial adviser exam,” Mr Maroney said.

“Further study can be undertaken as part of the ‘advisers’ ongoing development and professional accreditation, in line with their chosen career.”