Blogs

Commission disclosure back on the agenda

Friday 17th of August 2007

The age old debate about commissions seems to have raised its head again recently, and this time strongly.

While it was the centre of a muddled discussion at the IFA Conference, it has been in the mainstream media over the past fortnight through a series of articles – or a so called special investigation – in the Sunday Star Times.

In addition to that the life insurance side of the industry has been talking to the Minister of Commerce about the subject this week.

Over on the investment side Bridgecorp and commissions are two things have been talked about too.

My take on commissions is that that are fine as long as they are disclosed. In the investment side it would be useful to see the amount disclosed in dollar terms.

I understand one finance company is even planning to write to all its clients and tell them how much commission they had paid the adviser who recommended their product. This disclosure was going to be in dollar terms.

It would be useful to see more advisers move to a fee-based model. My understanding is this is slowly happening and one catalyst for this change has been KiwiSaver.

On the insurance side the debate is raging over whether the commission should be disclosed in dollar terms. It is a die-in-the-ditch issue for leaders in this part of the industry. They oppose dollar disclosure.

I’m leaning towards their side of the argument at the moment.

On the SST piece last week I thought it was pretty sensational and not very balanced. Also I would be interested in your views.

What would be useful though would be to see better disclosure around the soft-dollar stuff. I’m not sure we should go as far as Australia where they require firms to keep a register of soft dollar payments. But I wouldn’t be surprised to see that forced on the industry unless changes are made.

Comments (3)
Andrew Kerr
<p>THE SST special investigation is interesting given the things they have 'discovered' have been around for such a long time / will my cabinetmaker disclose the overseas conference incentive he goes on annually for using one company's hardware products in sufficient volume / run a nil commission quote and see the 'huge' price difference / can I disclose my expenses also please such as office space &amp; 3 support staff ?</p> <p>I am happy to disclose margins and soft dollar availability - as well as explain my value - but do not see specific dollar amounts as helpful in increasing the amount of risk coverage sold in our 'under insured' country.<br /> Fee only would be great but a recipe for increasing the level of 'under insurance' in NZ.</p>
0 0
17 years ago

Philip Macalister
G'day My take on this is somewhat simple.............until the public accept that they are dealing with professionals we will for ever run into the issue of charging fees! They are happy to pay fees to a lawyer and an accountant but not readily to their financial adviser..........I still cannot fathom this split and it has to be purely historical - you don't pay a Financial Adviser!!! I have a market that is primarily UK migrants and they are pretty adverse to the idea of fees but I do charge an initial upfront fee and can readily justify this by pointing out what I do for the fee and that in reality if I am going to commit my time and expertise to them they need to show some commitment as well - hence a fee. By the nature of my business I also charge a commission based on funds invested into NZ and they are happy with this approach whether its a percentage amount or a dollar amount - again the key is that prior to actually undertaking the actual investment my clients clearly know the amount that will be paid to me - its all out in the open. I appreciate that there is concern over "soft" dollars but to be frank why is that a concern to a client - if they know the premium and it fits their budget and the cover provides what they agree they need it makes not a jot of difference what the soft dollars are as it does not impact on them! In my opinion it is all about being up front and making sure you give great service and great value - clients then tend to be happy with what they are being charged or what you are earning as a commission!
0 0
17 years ago

Giles Thorman
Hello Philip, I worked in the Insurance Industry in the UK during the 80's and have been through this all once before. One thing is for sure that the UK and Australia both had many people exiting the industry as a result of legislation, not as much in the UK as the industry was larger and more established. I think advising clients directly as to dollar amounts earnt will see a lot of business just not proceeding. I would however have little problem with soft dollar commission being phased out and a schedule of maximum commissions being imposed, some of the commissions on offer currently are becoming absurd. I do object to Ed Saul stating that commission disclosure would ensure that clients get objective advise, this implys that no-one who is paid a commission gives objective advise now. I also would expect that anyone who is not paid a commission has to give a disclosure of salary and any bonuses; just to make for a level playing field. I would ask as a final question, what does the Goverment feel commission disclosure in the risk insurance market will actually achieve?
0 0
17 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.