ASIC levy rises again as advisers hit with $600 increase

Financial advisers will see a 27 per cent rise in the ASIC adviser levy, with the regulator’s cost recovery estimate for FY26 coming in at $48.72 million for financial advisers.

ASIC released its Cost Recovery Implementation Statement for FY26 on Monday, showing the usual minimum licensee levy of $1500 plus $3037 per adviser.

This is a rise from the $2398 per adviser revised levy released last November (ASIC’s initial estimate this time last year was $2314).

Around $30 million will be allocated towards enforcement, supervision and surveillance with the rest focused on industry engagement, education, guidance, policy advice and other indirect costs.

Estimated costs for financial advice oversight
ExpenseFY26 estimate
Supervision and surveillance$6.348m
Enforcement$24.269m
Other regulatory activities 
Industry engagement$1.216m
Education$0.747m
Guidance$0.827m
Policy advice$0.362m
Indirect costs 
Commission, corporate legal support, strategy and communications$1.900m
Digital, data and technology$6.754m
Enabling services$2.950m
Property and accommodation services$2.893m
                           Total operating expenditure$48.267m
Allowance for capital expenditure$0.222m
Less costs funded by own-source revenueNil
Adjustment for prior year (under or over recovery)$0.235m
Total levy to recover costs$48.724m
Source: ASIC.

The profession has grappled with the rising costs of the levy over the past few years as the number of financial advisers declined in the aftermath of the Hayne royal commission andthe introduction of the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort levy  added thousands of dollars annually to the regulatory levy bills of advisers.

There were approximately 28,000 advisers on the ASIC Financial Advisers Register at the start of 2019, just before the final report from the royal commission was released.

As of last week, there were 15,023 advisers on the FAR according to weekly analysis done by Padua Wealth Data.

The revised FY24 levy came in at $2691 per adviser (plus $1500 flat fee); in FY23, the regulator projected a $3217 per-adviser levy, which was reduced to $2818 later that year.

The former Coalition government froze the ASIC levy in 2021 and 2022 due to rising enforcement costs and a shallower pool of advisers to sustainably fund the scheme, with a review of the Industry Funding Model taking place a year later.

ASIC estimated that advisers would need to pay a flat fee of $1500 plus $3138 per adviser in 2021, but the freeze put the levy at the same level as FY19.

The outcome of the Treasury-run review led to a return to the status quo for the funding model.

While the ASIC levy covers enforcement of registered advisers, it also covers enforcement of unlicensed financial advice which Treasury said in its IFM review was justified as advisers were beneficiaries of such action.

Earlier this year, the Financial Advice Association Australia argued advisers aren’t the only beneficiaries of action against unlicensed advice and the whole system should be paying for enforcement.

The unfreezing of the ASIC levy came simultaneously with the introduction of the CSLR levy, further compounding regulatory costs for advisers.

The CSLR released its revised FY27 levy estimate for financial advice earlier this month, with the financial advice subsector contributing $190.3 million of the $198.1 million total, surpassing the $20 million subsector cap.

Earlier estimates for FY27 indicated a total CSLR levy of $137.5 million, including $126.9 million solely for financial advice.

The FY26 levy was the first to exceed the subsector cap (by $47.3 million), leading to Minister for Financial Services Daniel Mulino applying the special levy across multiple sectors including financial advisers and APRA-regulated funds.

The FY25 levy was the first full year levy and the only one so far to not exceed the cap, coming in at $18.5 million.

, , ,

Leave a Comment

Requiring trustees and MISs to join CSLR is the only solution

Requiring trustees and MISs to join CSLR is the only solution

Levying financial advisers for the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort was always an arbitrary decision, and unsustainable. Given the rapidly increasing cost pressures, the government should include platform trustees and managed investment schemes in future special levies.

Sort content by