Yesterday, investment house M&G confirmed to FTAdviser it would not facilitate adviser charging and that advisers would instead have to arrange remuneration through their platform or direct with clients. It also predicted that other investment houses would follow suit.
According to Alasdair Buchanan, group head of communications at Royal London Group, many investment houses who function as fund supermarkets rather than wrap platforms will likewise refrain from implementing adviser charging.
He said: “The main products or services where there would be facilitation I would expect to be where there were personal pensions or wrap platforms because those are the areas where there is a clear advantage for the provider.
“That wouldn’t apply if the fund management house didn’t have a wrap platform and didn’t get involved with provision of pensions. If you are talking about a standalone asset manager they are very unlikely to be involved in that.”
FTAdviser spoke to several fund managers that have a platform offers, including Fidelity and Standard Life, both of which said facilitation of adviser charging will be incorporated into their services post-RDR.
Mr Buchanan added that in some cases there could actually be disadvantages to facilitating adviser charging: “With Isas and investment bonds there tends to be quite a disadvantage rather than a fee because you are reducing your Isa allowance by the charge, and a bond it’s seen as part of your five per cent withdrawal.”