ASIC days away from delivering remuneration review

by Miklos Bolza01 Mar 2017
The Australian Investments & Securities Commission (ASIC) has announced it will soon hand over the long awaited broker remuneration review to the government.

Talking to Australian Broker at the Responsible Lending and Borrowing Summit in Sydney yesterday (28 February), Chris Green, group senior manager of credit at ASIC, said the review would be delivered within a “couple of days”.

“There’s a lot of data to go through but it’s very close to being done.”

He said ASIC expected the government to publish the review but that it was not sure about the exact timing of when this decision would be made.

In a keynote address delivered at the Summit, Green also described the detailed nature of the data requested by the regulator.

“We asked for data on a loan-by-loan basis for all residential mortgages in both 2012 and 2015 from most of the home loan lending market,” he said. “We were provided with details in relation to nearly one and three quarter million loan facilities and about 150 data fields for each of those loans.”

This is to help ASIC in its main objective: producing a clear picture of mortgage broker remuneration structures and trends. In doing this, the review will look at both the broker channel and the proprietary channel as a point of comparison.

Related stories:

Aggregator slams “scaremongering” around ASIC review

ASIC promises "well informed" remuneration review

ASIC still finalising remuneration review



  • by Concerned Broker 1/03/2017 10:35:10 AM

    No rush... it's not as though the well being of my family is at stake or anything

  • by Another very concerned Finance broker 4/03/2017 5:20:21 PM

    Shouldn't Asic focus and be reviewing the fact that banks are giving cash incentives (of 0.4%) to Accountants, book keepers and other white professional of the , who are trusted advisors to their retail and SME clients . Cash incentives to thank accountant's and the likes, represent a conflict of interest, specifically where these trusted advisor/ professionals, do not hold appropriate knowledge/ credit advice accreditations. The clients rely on these trusted advisers, who have not assessed if the 'suggested' institution does offers the most appropriate solution, flexibility for their clients requirements, and fees in line with the current market offer, and most importantly, is the institution income, debt and credits policies most appropriate for their clients situation and objectives? They refer to one or two bankers to generate extra revenue paid by way of introducing their clients to thosninstitutions. Is this ethical? We have seen a very similar scenario within the financial planning industry, where fund managers, risk product and platforms providers were influencing in a similar manner, financial planner's to get more business. Same conflict of interest here. Time to wake up and stop these old legacy of giving cash payments to accountants, book keepers and the likes, simply to influence their judgement and them to 'introduce' their retail and SMEs clients to the big 4. It is not ethical to pay a kick back to retail / SMEs' trusted advisor for simply introducing them to bankers. It is questionable if the kick backs given is 'responsible'. It may end up placing their clients (retail or SME client(s)) in a lesser position (less net cash flow). We have seen these 'payments' within the financial planning space, as being conflict of interest and only influencing the judgment of trusted advisor over their clients' best interest - recommendation to speak to a banker without appropriate research and understating if the clients requirements and objective were in line with the banks target market and costs. Shouldn't this be reviewed as a priority?