Advisers campaigned hard for a clearer definition of what restricted advice actually entailed, given the original guidance from the regulator appeared to be advice firms could set the parameters of ‘restricted’ themselves.

It was not until 2014 that the Financial Conduct Authority issued a definitive factsheet outlining what ‘independent’ and ‘restricted’ advice actually means in practice, and what is expected of advisers using these labels.

Given the requirements placed on using the ‘independent’ label and the success of restricted businesses such as Hargreaves Lansdown, in 2016 is there still a stigma attached to the latter status?

Given the recent Financial Advice Market Review, could we see more independent advice firms move to restricted status?

Will the end client know any difference between independent and restricted advice in terms of the quality of service and suitability of the recommendation?

These and other topics are covered in this guide to independent versus restricted advice.

Contributors: Derek Bradley, former financial adviser and chief executive of adviser forum PanaceaAdviser; Keith Richards, chief executive of the Personal Finance Society; Chris Hannant, director general of the Association of Professional Financial Advisers; Steve Murray, chief executive of Standard Life’s 1825 advice business; Carl Lamb, managing director of Almary Green; Tim Sargisson, chief executive of Sandringham Financial Partners; Stephen Gazard, managing director at Bankhall; Richard Nuttall, head of compliance policy, and Liz Coyle, compliance policy manager for SimplyBiz Group; Gill Davidson, group regulatory director for Tenet; and the Financial Conduct Authority.