Mark Neale: 'Putting a levy on advice is difficult'

Chief executive talks about FAMR and the levy review

Nicola Brittain
clock • 4 min read

Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) chief executive Mark Neale talks to Professional Adviser about the pros and cons of introducing a risk-based levy, an adviser levy and other alternatives to the current system proposed by the regulator.

The FSCS was set up in 2001 following the Labour Party's reform of financial markets. Covering deposits, insurance, mortgages and investment advice among other things, it is one of the few levies in the world that compensates customers for failings across all aspects of the financial services industry, said Neale.   And although research indicates that advisers recognise the levy increases trust in their services, there have been a number of reports indicating that high charges, and volatility in the levy has had a detrimental impact on the sector, with small advisory firms suffering ...

To continue reading this article...

Join Professional Adviser for free

  • Unlimited access to real-time news, industry insights and market intelligence
  • Stay ahead of the curve with spotlights on emerging trends and technologies
  • Receive breaking news stories straight to your inbox in the daily newsletters
  • Make smart business decisions with the latest developments in regulation, investing retirement and protection
  • Members-only access to the editor’s weekly Friday commentary
  • Be the first to hear about our events and awards programmes

Join

 

Already a Professional Adviser member?

Login

More on Investment

Partner Insight: Beyond 60/40

Partner Insight: Beyond 60/40

Invesco
clock 25 March 2024 • 5 min read
'Fundamental shift': Why transparent investing really matters

'Fundamental shift': Why transparent investing really matters

‘There needs to be a concerted shift towards greater openness’

Simon Camilleri
clock 18 March 2024 • 4 min read
Partner Insight: Passive and active — the case for both

Partner Insight: Passive and active — the case for both

Invesco
clock 18 March 2024 • 4 min read