Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 341

Three overlooked points on the LIC/LIT fee battle

The articles have been flying back and forth over whether financial advisers can accept commissions for selling LICs/LITs to their clients. If you haven’t been following this so far, Graham Hand wrote a well-rounded article recently, with Jonathan Shapiro and Christopher Joye also leading the charge in The Australian Financial Review.

I’m not going to rehash the main points here but want to bring three additional points to the discussion.

1. Financial advisers shouldn’t be keeping any commissions

Whilst some are arguing that LIC/LIT commissions must go, they are supporting the continuance of commissions for other listed product types. There’s no decent argument for this. If any commission is viewed as biasing an adviser’s decision, they must pass the commission to their client or refuse it outright. Saying that an adviser has a conflict if the commission relates to a LIC/LIT but doesn’t if it relates to a hybrid or equity investment is nonsensical.

For those struggling with the concept of selling hybrids or equities on their merits and without an adviser commission, look to the institutional debt markets. These have long functioned without the need for commissions. If the bond is considered poor value it receives little interest, but if it is good value, it is many times oversubscribed. There’s no reason that hybrids and equities can’t be distributed in the same fashion.

2. Brokers can keep commissions, subject to disclosure

Those dealing with clients need to choose whether they are sales people (brokers) or financial advisers. Whilst a financial adviser needs to adopt a best interest/fiduciary duty position and consider the wider client position, I don’t see that a broker should be subject to the same restrictions. A broker should however, be clearly disclosing that they are a broker being paid for the sales they make. This could be as simple as a verbal statement such as;

“I am a salesperson not a financial adviser which means that I earn commissions by selling products and services to you. The products and services I am selling may not be in your best interest and you may want to seek independent financial advice before agreeing to purchase.”

Some might argue that this is overkill and retail investors are smart enough to know who is a broker and who is an independent adviser. I think the Royal Commission showed that not only were clients confused about the distinction but many so called ‘advisers’ were as well.

3. LICs/LITs are an appropriate structure for illiquid investments

Some of the arguments against LICs/LITs come from a viewpoint that open-ended managed funds are the best solution for retail investors as they always offer a quick exit at close to the net tangible asset (NTA) calculation. This is fair for the most liquid sectors such as large cap equities or vanilla investment grade bonds.

However, for more illiquid assets such as sub-investment grade debt, private equity, some hedge funds and direct property, history is littered with examples of funds that ran out of cash and locked their investors in. If the assets take substantially longer to sell than the redemption period on the fund, investors and managers are playing with fire.

Given this, unlisted closed ended funds (e.g. direct property syndicates, private equity funds), individual mandates or LICs/LITs are the most appropriate vehicles for illiquid assets. As many retail investors insist on having some form of liquidity, a listed fund is likely to be their best avenue to access these sectors.

Critics of listed funds often point to the higher fees (from listing and governance costs) for these funds compared to their unlisted equivalents. This isn’t always true, with fees running at over 1% per annum for retail investors on some open-ended unlisted funds. It also ignores that higher fees could be more than offset by higher returns as listed funds do not have to hold large cash positions to offset the risk of a run on the fund that open-ended unlisted funds face.

 

Jonathan Rochford, CFA, is Portfolio Manager for Narrow Road Capital. This article is for educational purposes and is not a substitute for professional and tailored financial advice. This article expresses the views of the author at a point in time, which may change in the future with no obligation on Narrow Road Capital or the author to publicly update these views.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Authorities reveal disquiet over LIC fees

LIC/LIT stamping fees survey results

Just for Josh: Survey on attitudes to LIC fees

5 Comments
Aussie HIFIRE
January 23, 2020

With regards to the first point, bonds may be sold to the institutional market without commissions, but they are certainly not sold for free. The investment bank may not receive a "commission" but they will certainly receive a fee for marketing and distributing the bond which will be divided up between various departments. Sure it may not be called a commission, but it's still money changing hands and functions in much the same way.

Graham
January 23, 2020

Hi Steve, I see a difference between financial advisers and brokers on this point.

Advisers usually take an annual fee for the services they provide, and it should cover everything, including directing clients into LICs. Brokers don't usually take an annual fee but are paid for each transaction, and the client should know this. Brokers make a living by selling investments, advisers provide holistic advice.

Steve Darke
January 23, 2020

1. Financial advisers shouldn’t be keeping any commissions

Absolutely agree on this point. Why this was left out of FOFA is ridiculous. Professional advisers don't accept commissions of any kind, period.

2. Brokers can keep commissions, subject to disclosure

Not sure about this one. When a broker rings up to flog a product, they are viewed (rightly or wrongly) as giving advice. "Hey, it's Bill here, I've got this great little investment that's just perfect for you, we think it'll go a long way and I think you should put fifty grand into it". Sounds like advice to me. Not really any different from an adviser who is also giving advice and shouldn't be influenced by commissions.

Mark Beardow
January 23, 2020

Hi Steve....I think there is a role for "brokers" or "salespeople"; the issue with Bill's sales patter is that it's misleading and deceptive.

Gen Y
January 23, 2020

I agree, re your second point... the clients of brokers are going to see this as a recommendation, unless there is strong controls around what the broker can say. Unless the regulator can enforce this (eg call recording), then I think it is too risky to continue. Leave the broker flogging to the so called sophisticated investors.


 

Leave a Comment:

     
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you caught in the ‘retirement trap’?

Our retirement savings system is supposed to encourage financial independence but there is a ‘Retirement Trap’ due to the reduction of age pension entitlements as assets and income rise.

The power of letting winners run

Handling extreme winners is a complex task. Conventional wisdom such as “you never go broke taking a profit” often leaves a lot of money on the table as strong growth stocks continue to run.

Tony Togher on why cash isn’t just cash

An active manager of cash and fixed interest funds can achieve higher returns than the cash rate through a selection of other securities while managing both liquidity and income for clients.

NAB hybrid: one says buy, one says sell, you decide

Differences of opinion make a market, and hybrid specialists disagree on the likelihood that NAB will call one of its hybrids early. It makes a major difference to the expected return on NABHA.

Watch your SMSF’s annual return this year

The best way to preserve your SMSF’s favoured status is to make sure the fund’s annual return reaches the ATO on time. There are new rules this year that every SMSF trustee should know.

Worshipping at the altar of alternative assets

Investors worried about an overvalued sharemarket and low interest rates on term deposits and bonds are focusing on alternatives. What are they and how are they used by leading asset allocators?

Latest Updates

Interviews

Kunal Kapoor on different paths to investor success

The Morningstar CEO on democratising investing, why saving in your youth is crucial, and why most investors care more about paying off their debts than comparing their results against benchmarks.

Economy

What is the likely effect of COVID-19 on the Australian economy?

Our close links to China mean the impact of the virus could tip the local economy into recession and certain sectors such as resources, education and travel will be harder hit than others.

Investment strategies

Do sin stocks really give your portfolio the edge?

Should sin stocks, those companies who engage in activities that are considered unethical or immoral, be excluded from a portfolio, or would this compromise potential performance?

Insurance

Poor pricing of life insurance products and the impact on Australians

The use of discounted pricing by insurers to attract new business is unsustainable and leaves existing policyholders on higher premiums for what is essentially the same product.

Retirement

Spotting signs of trouble in a retirement portfolio

Do you risk paying a lot of tax in accumulation phase? Or, if you're in retirement phase, do you face the risk of outliving your asset pool? Two key things to consider in the low-rate world of today.

Sponsors

Alliances