Mike I am tied of the Commission argument< The real argument should be about value and the client's ability to make a value choice. It should matter not if a client chooses to pay the adviser via the commission route or a fee for service. The issue is having a process that allows the client to make this determination. I believe the following if legislated would solve the issue: 1: A true Zero commission life product priduced by every Life company that has an equivalent commission product. 2.Advisers must show the cost of both nil commission and commission over a 5 year period , the nil commission will include adviser fees.
The client may choose either payment method , and the regulator can be assured that the product was purchased based on value to the client. This is an easy solution so why isn't it happening?.
In order to give you the best site experience, we need to know what kind of investor you are. Please select the title that best describes you below.
Financial Advisers - Investment
Financial Advisers - SMSFs
Individual Investors with SMSFs
Financial Advisers - Insurance
Accountants and Solicitors
Financial Services Professional