Instead, the parliamentary joint committee, after a 10-month inquiry, has thrown the issue back for further consultation.

"The committee recommends that the government consult with and support industry in developing the most appropriate mechanism by which to cease payments from product manufacturers to financial advisers," the report says in one of its 11 recommendations.

The findings of the so-called Ripoll report, named after committee chair Bernie Ripoll, were also expected to influence the progress of regulation for the New Zealand financial advisory industry.

In a speech this October, Jane Diplock, head of the Securities Commission endorsed "trans-Tasman regulation of financial advisers", saying the Ripoll report would have an impact in New Zealand.

"[Australia's] Parliamentary Joint Committee on financial advice and advisers...will be the perfect moment to launch a dialogue about the regulation of financial advisers in our respective countries, and ensure emerging frameworks are mutually recognisable," Diplock said. "It's an opportunity we must be sure to seize."

While Ripoll referred on the commission issue, the Australian government committee did recommend financial advisers operate under an explicit "fiduciary duty... requiring them to place their client's interests ahead of their own".

As well, Ripoll recommended ramping up regulatory oversight of financial advisers including annual "shadow shopping exercises" to be conducted by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).

The committee also suggested the cost of advice should be tax deductible and that an independent body be set up to oversee professional standards for advisers.

Furthermore, the Ripoll report calls for a government investigation into "the costs and benefits of different models of a statutory last resort compensation fund for investors".