Australia's financial services regulator has broadened a probe into miner TerraCom and assayer ALS Ltd over inflating coal quality in export documentation, information provided to an Australian Senate committee showed.
ASIC has conceded that it has discretion on the ballooning adviser levy, not long after outgoing chair James Shipton implied that the corporate regulator’s hands were tied due to the “mechanical” industry funding model.
In a recent response to a question from Liberal MP Andrew Wallace, which was taken on notice at the PJC enquiry in late March, ASIC explained how it consulted on industry funding arrangements through its Cost Recovery Implementation Statement (CRIS) with Treasury and the Finance Minister, but took control thereafter.
“ASIC, as an independent regulator, has discretion over the allocation of resources,” the regulator stated. “ASIC has the discretion to waive levies in exceptional circumstances. ASIC also considers applications to pay levies via a payment plan in cases of financial hardship.”
Some of those ISA member funds denied in answers to Wilson that they had directed any money to ISA over the five-year period he specified.
The answers have come as the Senate Economics Legislation Committee continues its review of the Your Future, Your Super particularly submissions around the ability of the Minister of the day to veto superannuation fund investments which are deemed to be inappropriate.
Submissions to the Senate Committee have expressed concern about how the prohibition on certain payments and investments will impact political advertising, noting that the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry had not recommended such an approach.
Print
The proposal to insert the word ‘financial’ into ‘best interests duty’ as part of the Your Future, Your Super bill is Parliamentary overreach and will have upfront negative financial implications for funds and beneficiaries, according to Market Forces.
In its submission to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee, the advocacy group said it strongly recommended to reject the proposal. It said including the word ‘financial’ was unnecessary as the existing duty required no further legislative clarification or amendment.
It said amending the duty:
Was unnecessary and amounts to parliamentary overreach;
Would have upfront negative financial implications for funds and beneficiaries;
“Some Ai Group employees provide services to AustralianSuper through their membership of AustralianSuper’s board, its Committees and Advisory Boards,” Ai said.
“As is the case for remuneration for external roles in general, under Ai Group’s employment arrangements the remuneration relating to these services is paid to Ai Group in recognition of the fact that Ai Group staff are not available to work for Ai Group while they are providing services as part of their external roles,” it said.
“Similarly, some Ai Group employees serve on the Shareholder Advisory Board of IFM Investors. These are remunerated positions and, under Ai Group’s employment arrangements, the remuneration relating to these positions is paid to Ai Group itself.”