Ivan good point. Yes QLD is the haven of property schemes. Its too unregulated. SMSF spruiking is prohibited already but not everone gets the message. ONLY an adviser with an AFSL can advise on a SMSF. If a broker, a RE agent, accountant or a developer mentions "SMSF" ASIC would take offence. The suggestion a SMSF can be used is financial product advice. ALWAYS.
If the adviser is in the supply chain involving a property sale its conflicted remuneration. And even if they have an AFSL it doesnt mean its good advice. best inteerst tests should apply but thats just a financial planner concept. And its proposed to be watered down. If their advice is "you should buy" and doesnt consider other options its probably just a bad statement of advice and a lure. If they are part of the scheme to sell its not worth the paper its written on. Its possibly as good as a Storm Financial advice stmt. ASIC have even described it as "misleading & deceptive conduct". Sadly the proposed watering down of FOFA won't address this precisely.
I dont sell, advise or even introduce any client to SMSF property. Just as I dont audit SMSFs. My decision was to be independent of those two processes and I stand by it. Happy to discuss any SMSF stategies involving property knowing I have zero conflict and receive NOTHING from any property decision. The only income I receive is the invoice I hand my client. I would argue any SMSF contemplating property should ask all their advisers the question "Do you receive any fee, commission or income ?" Then decide if their advice is sound.
I have refused to give an advice certificate to many SMSFs....It very time consuming and high risk to say "I recommend"...when I just see warning signs. Why should I sign off on someone else's poor advice ??
Sadly there are also some SMSF adminstration services that are baiting with what seems like cheap service fees that end up with a sell, sell, sell. Caveat Emptor.
