THE financial planning industry faces further uncertainty after calls for the industry's two main representative bodies to merge - despite large policy differences - in a year when the industry could undergo significant regulatory reform.
The Association of Financial Advisers and the Financial Planning Association received letters yesterday from a large Sydney-based advisory firm calling on the two to merge.
The AFA confirmed it had spoken to the FPA about the proposal, and leaders are expected to meet in coming weeks.
''Our current lack of united effort has confused Canberra and could disastrously result in fragmented, poorly structured legislation which we would all have to live with,'' Matrix Planning chairman Peter Franzen wrote.
''While we clearly must respond to current debate regarding commissions payments, it would appear to clients and the media that this is our primary concern and this debate is not constructive.''
Last year, the federal government received a report from the Ripoll inquiry into the financial services industry and the role of advisers. The government might decide to reform the industry when it receives the Cooper review of the superannuation sector in June.
Although the FPA and AFA run accreditation programs and represent the financial planning industry, there remain significant differences between them that would make a merger difficult.
The AFA, which has about 1500 members, disagrees with a government inquiry recommendation to ban financial advisers from receiving commissions. It argues that clients should be able to choose whether to pay an upfront fee or have their adviser receive a commission. The FPA, which has about 12,000 members, mostly from institutional firms, has started encouraging members to move towards a fee-for-service model.
Matrix managing director Rick Di Cristoforo said the merger call did not favour one position over another, but hoped it would remove conflicting information about the industry coming from the two bodies.
AFA chief executive Richard Klipin said there were ''nuances that are important'' between the two bodies, particularly in history and culture. The FPA could not be contacted for comment.
