Bonus rules will hit wealth managers' competitiveness with IFAs
Prev Close:
More FTSE charts & pricesPrev Close:
More FTSE charts & pricesPrev Close:
More FTSE charts & pricesby Sarah Miloudi on Jul 30, 2010 at 08:04
The proposed widening of the Financial Service Authority’s (FSA) remuneration code could lead to issues of competitiveness between independent financial advisers (IFAs) and wealth managers.
David Bennett, chief executive of Apcims – The Association of Private Client Investment Managers and Stockbrokers – has said broadening the code to include investment and financial advice firms could heap pressure upon smaller and non-listed businesses.
Under the proposals, the remuneration code would be brought in line with the Capital Requirements Directive and Financial Services Act 2010 by extending it beyond banks, building societies and brokers.
The rules put forward state that for all staff that come under the code, at least 40% of a bonus must be deferred for three years or more and at least 60% must be deferred where the bonus payout is more than £500,000. At least half of all bonuses must be made in shares, share-linked instruments or equivalent non-cash instruments of the firm.
But Apcims’ Bennett (pictured) said if introduced the new rules could raise issues of competitiveness between discretionary managers and IFAs, as only wealth management firms are governed by the Markets in Financials Instruments Directive (Mifid) – the same set of firms captured by the proposed code.
‘[The code] captures all of our member firms because they are covered by Mifid – a total of around 2,500 firms,’ Bennett said.
‘The critical issue is going to be in how the FSA chooses to implement their interpretation of proportionality and I believe that is an area where we will have discussions about what it means in practice for Apcims’ member firms and ask for further guidance.
‘The other issue is that our smaller members will be covered by this whereas IFAs will not, as they are not covered by Mifid,' Bennett continued. 'That raises issues of competitiveness.’
The Apcims head also raised concerns that smaller non-listed invesment management companies would be unable to issue bonuses in shares. 'It talks about distributing shares but that is difficult to do for non-listed companies,' Bennett said.
News sponsored by:
Spotting the stocks the smart money is buying
This week:
Email me when someone posts a new comment on this article
1 comment so far. Why not have your say?
Helicopter
Jul 30, 2010 at 10:16
The key must be to align the long term interests of clients, advisers and firms. I don't think anyone can argue against this, can they? If RDR accelerates consolidation then this is a positive if it weeds out any smaller firms with sub-optimal business models. You know who you are.
report thisleave a comment
Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.