The FSA is open to the possibility of spreading adviser remuneration transparency across the board but doesn't believe it would be a popular move.
Peter Smith, head of investments policy at the FSA, made the comment while discussing the regulator's Pure Protection consultation paper 10/8, part of its latest Retail Distribution Review (RDR) proposals.
Smith believes that it could help provide a sensible solution, especially for those writing business across the whole financial spectrum.
"I recognise that some individuals are selling mortgages, protection, and investments at the same time (and sometimes even in the same conversation) so do think full disclosure across the industry is right," he says.
"I think you can make a case for it but we have to decide whether that disclosure is helpful to the consumer and if this solution is the right one for everybody.
"There are going to be those markets that will probably wonder what all the fuss is about, and some people will be saying ‘why are you doing this?' I just don't think it would be well received in the market," he adds.
Smith also addressed the FSA's suggestion that adviser firms may wish to simply declare all protection payments, maintaining that this was not likely to be forced on IFAs, but be an option for them.
"I think that's for each firm to choose," he says.
"I think if its easier for them to have it on across all their business then that would make sense to us."
Finally, regarding the concern about adviser professionalism, and particularly qualification levels, Smith confirmed the elements that may be read across to pure protection were still being considered, but that a decision would not arrive soon.
