Yes, it probably is. Previous versions of the regulator thought the same. So much easier to have fewer, bigger companies. Let the banks, for instance, have more freedom to provide advice. They’ll have their own compliance departments to keep an eye on things, they thought, so half a dozen visits would enable us to keep an eye on thousands of advisers at once. What could possibly go wrong? Think we all know the answer to that one. The answer? Don’t try to micromanage thousands of good guys. Just make sure you spot the 1-2% of bad apples.
“Advisers fearful of further compliance and regulation”
We know, of course we know, that regulation is, or at least should be a ‘good thing’. If those who need or should seek advice can be confident that they’ll be told the right thing, that someone has looked at those ’too good to be true’ investments before they’re allowed to take your money; or, in the case of a Woodford, while they’re raking it in to make sure it’s going where it’s supposed to.
