Introduction
Arranging to deal in financial services is a critical aspect of compliance for Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL) holders. Under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), this concept encompasses a range of activities that facilitate transactions involving financial products, ensuring that those engaged in such arrangements are appropriately licensed and adhere to regulatory standards.
This guide aims to clarify what it means to arrange for a person to deal in financial products, highlighting the legal framework, key definitions, and the implications of non-compliance. Understanding these elements is essential for financial service providers to operate within the law and protect consumers effectively.
Defining Arranging in Financial Services
The Broad Concept of Arranging
Arranging in financial services is a comprehensive concept under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), encompassing various activities that facilitate dealings in financial products. Specifically, section 766C(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) defines a person as dealing in a financial product if they are “arranging for” another person to engage in activities such as applying for, acquiring, or disposing of a financial product.
Although the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) does not provide an explicit definition of “arranging,” it generally refers to making preparations or taking actions that lead to a financial transaction. This includes:
- Negotiating Terms: Engaging in discussions to establish the conditions of a financial product.
- Facilitating Communications Between Parties: Acting as an intermediary to ensure effective communication between involved parties.
- Managing the Logistics of a Financial Deal: Overseeing the practical aspects to ensure the transaction proceeds smoothly.
The courts have interpreted “arranging” broadly, indicating that any significant involvement in the transaction process could qualify as arranging. For example, a service provider that assists clients in navigating the complexities of acquiring a financial product may be considered as arranging if their involvement is crucial to the transaction’s success. This broad interpretation highlights the importance for businesses and individuals operating without an AFSL to understand how their actions may fall under the definition of arranging.
Key Activities Constituting Arranging
Under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), several specific activities are classified as arranging. These include:
Facilitating Transactions: Direct contributions to the completion of a financial transaction, such as coordinating between buyers and sellers or assisting with the necessary paperwork.
Providing Payment Services: Managing bank accounts to receive funds or processing payments for financial products. For instance, a company offering banking services that enable clients to pay for financial products may be engaging in arranging.
Negotiating Terms: Acting on behalf of another party to negotiate the terms of a financial product. The crucial factor is whether the negotiator’s involvement is essential for the transaction to occur.
Collecting and Transmitting Funds: Acting as an intermediary to collect money from a client and transmit it to a financial product issuer. This role is critical in ensuring that funds reach the issuer, thereby qualifying as arranging.
Providing Unique Access: Offering exclusive access to a platform or service that allows clients to deal in financial products. For example, a finfluencer promoting a unique link to a trading platform may be considered arranging if they benefit from the transactions that take place through that link.
For example, an online financial influencer who promotes a unique link on their social media profile to a trading platform and receives compensation for each transaction made through that link is likely engaging in arranging. This is because their actions directly facilitate the transaction between the consumer and the financial product issuer, thus constituting a financial service under the law.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) also warns that individuals or entities engaging in arranging without the necessary licensing may face significant penalties, including fines and potential imprisonment, reinforcing the importance of compliance with the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and ASIC regulations.
Get Your Free Initial Consultation
Consult with one of our experienced AFSL Lawyers today.
Case Study: ASIC v One Tech Media Ltd
Background of the Case
In the case of Australian Securities and Investments Commission v One Tech Media Ltd [2020] FCA 46 (ASIC v One tech Media Ltd), the Federal Court of Australia addressed significant issues regarding financial services regulation. ASIC alleged that One Tech Media Ltd and its associates, including Allianz Metro Pty Ltd, conducted a financial services business in Australia without holding an AFSL. The allegations centred on their involvement in offering binary options trading to retail clients through various online platforms.
The court examined multiple breaches of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), including:
- Carrying on a financial services business without an AFSL.
- Arranging for the issue of binary options without the necessary licensing.
- Issuing financial products without providing required product disclosure statements.
- Engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct.
Lessons Learned from the Case
The case of ASIC v One tech Media Ltd serves as a crucial reference point for AFSL holders and businesses engaged in financial services. Here are some key takeaways that can help ensure compliance and mitigate risks:
- Understanding the Scope of “Arranging”
The court’s broad interpretation of “arranging” highlights that any involvement in facilitating transactions can be classified as dealing in a financial product. AFSL holders must recognise that even administrative or back-office functions, such as managing customer funds or facilitating payments, may require an AFSL if they are integral to the transaction. - Importance of Licensing
The ruling reinforces the necessity of holding an appropriate AFSL when conducting financial services. Businesses must ensure they are licensed for all activities that could be construed as dealing in financial products, including arranging transactions for clients. - Compliance with Disclosure Requirements
The case emphasised the obligation to provide necessary product disclosure statements when issuing financial products. AFSL holders should maintain strict compliance with disclosure requirements to avoid misleading or deceptive conduct claims. - Monitoring Third-Party Services
Businesses that engage third-party service providers, such as payment processors or marketing affiliates, should closely monitor these relationships. Ensuring that these providers also comply with licensing requirements is essential to avoid liability for unlicensed activities. - Awareness of Regulatory Guidance
ASIC’s Regulatory Guide 36 provides essential insights into the interpretation of financial services laws. AFSL holders should familiarise themselves with this guidance to understand their obligations and the potential implications of their activities. - Risk of Misleading Conduct
The court found that misleading or deceptive conduct was present in this case. Businesses must exercise caution in their communications and marketing strategies to ensure that they do not unintentionally mislead clients, as this can lead to significant legal repercussions. - Training and Compliance Programs
Establishing robust training and compliance programs is vital for ensuring that all employees understand their obligations under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Regular training can help mitigate risks associated with non-compliance and promote a culture of adherence to regulatory standards.
Speak with an AFSL Lawyer Today
Request a Consultation to Get Started.
Issues to Consider When Arranging Financial Services
Compliance with Licensing Requirements
Holding an AFSL, either by applying for an AFSL yourself or by purchasing an existing AFSL, is essential when engaging in arranging activities related to financial services. According to section 911A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), any person or entity carrying on a financial services business in Australia must possess a valid AFSL. This requirement includes activities classified as “arranging” for another person to deal in financial products, as outlined in section 766C(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
Failure to comply with licensing requirements can lead to significant penalties, including:
- Fines: Substantial monetary penalties may be imposed on individuals or entities that violate licensing regulations.
- Potential Imprisonment: Serious breaches can result in imprisonment for responsible parties.
Take the aforementioned case of ASIC v One tech Media Ltd as an example, the court found that One Tech was conducting a financial services business without an AFSL by arranging the issuance of binary options. This case highlights the importance of ensuring that all activities involving financial products are appropriately licensed.
Risks of Misleading or Deceptive Conduct
Engaging in arranging activities without transparency can lead to misleading or deceptive conduct, which is prohibited under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). ASIC emphasises that any statements made in relation to financial products must be truthful and not likely to mislead consumers.
Misleading conduct can occur in situations such as:
- Unsubstantiated Claims: Making claims about financial products that cannot be substantiated with evidence.
- Failure to Disclose Risks: Not adequately informing consumers about the potential risks associated with financial products.
Referring to the previously referred hypothetical scenario of an online financial influencer promoting a financial product to their social media followers using a unique link that benefits the influencer financially, they must ensure that their communications do not mislead their audience about the product’s potential returns or risks. ASIC’s guidance stresses the need for clarity and honesty in all dealings, as misleading conduct can result in severe legal consequences, including regulatory action and reputational damage.
Conclusion
Understanding the concept of arranging to deal in financial services is crucial for compliance with the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). This concept encompasses a range of activities that facilitate transactions involving financial products, and engaging in these activities without the appropriate AFSL can lead to significant legal consequences.
If you are involved in financial services, it is essential to ensure that your activities align with the requirements set forth by ASIC and the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). For expert guidance on navigating these regulations including obtaining an AFSL and ensuring regulatory compliance, book a free initial consultation with AFSL House’s experienced AFSL lawyers today.
Frequently Asked Questions
Arranging to deal in financial services refers to the process by which a person facilitates or brings into effect a transaction involving financial products. Under section 766C(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), arranging for a person to engage in activities such as applying for, acquiring, or disposing of a financial product constitutes dealing in that product. This broad interpretation means that even actions that seem administrative can fall under this definition if they are integral to the transaction.
Yes, a license is generally required to arrange financial products. According to section 911A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), anyone carrying on a financial services business in Australia must hold an AFSL. This includes activities classified as “arranging” under section 766C(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Engaging in arranging without the necessary license can lead to significant penalties.
Arranging includes facilitating transactions, providing payment services, negotiating terms, collecting/transmitting funds, and providing unique access. Performing these without an AFSL can have legal consequences.
ASIC oversees arranging activities under the financial services laws. ASIC’s Regulatory Guide 36 provides guidance on what constitutes arranging and emphasises that individuals or entities engaging in such activities must comply with licensing requirements. ASIC monitors compliance and can take enforcement action against those operating without the necessary licenses.
Operating without an AFSL while engaging in arranging activities can lead to serious legal repercussions. These may include hefty fines, potential imprisonment, and restrictions on conducting financial services. For instance, in the case of ASIC v One Tech Media Ltd, the court found that conducting a financial services business without an AFSL constituted a breach of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
Yes, arranging can occur without direct involvement in the transaction itself. For example, if a person provides a unique link to a trading platform that facilitates transactions for others, they may be considered to be arranging, even if they do not execute the transactions themselves. The key factor is the degree of involvement and whether their actions significantly contribute to the transaction.
To ensure compliance, individuals and entities should obtain an AFSL, understand ASIC’s Regulatory Guide 36, implement compliance systems, and seek legal advice from specialised AFSL lawyers.
If you are uncertain about whether your activities constitute arranging or if you need an AFSL, it is advisable to consult with experienced lawyers who specialise in Australian financial services. They can provide guidance tailored to your specific circumstances and help clarify your obligations under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).