wealthforumtv

When ARN holder open a mutual fund Account in his sole name he should be entitled to receive brokerages

I am agree with you point. As if we investing under other ARN then they will receive the commission, similarly if we invest under our ARN then we should get the commission as simple as it is. SEBI should consider this and do needful for paying on self investment.

I have not understood the logic why MF distributors cannot get brokerage of their own investments. In case of all other investment like FDs, LIC, Mediclaim, it is given.

Why SEBI not giving mutual fund commission for its own investment, what will do with the same amount

I am a Senior Citizen and I have planned to get Income from My Own Saving through MF Investment which is not allowed .This is totally Injustice with me. I have cleared and passed NISM Examination recently to get better Income but sorry that I am not entitled to get Commission on My Own Investment used in MF . Yes, I agree, MF distributor should get commission on his own MF Investments.

When the expenses are being on the funds the distributor invested in the scheme and therefore he/she should get the commission.This is injustice with the distributors.

ARN HOLDER SHOULD RECEIVE COMMISSION ON HIS OWN AUM

I just want to tell you about http://34300.in.ua

i agree

NJ India Invest Pvt Ltd. - No commission to partners on their/Self/Own Investment. Ifast - If anyone has information please share. Fundsindia - If anyone has information please share. Prudent - If anyone has information please share. Etc...

Nice Article. Adding 2 more points to this article. <1> Distributor will not get commission on his investment. <2> Sub-broker will not get commission on his investment - Let me elaborate this point. Many ND take advantage of this NON - Exiting rule to trouble the ARN holders. Some ND''s share the commission. Some ND''s don''t share the commission. Lets Make the list who gives commission and who don''t give commission. Please the your experience with NDs regarding the commission on OWN Investment.

absolutely right, i am 100% with you.

I agree.

I agree.

Distributors should be paid equivalent brokerage as in case of other investors on own investments as in all financial products. This rule is neither helping distributors nor AMC.

FULLY AGREE. Earlier also I raised this issue. Distributor gets Commission on Life Insurance, Fixed Deposits, Bonds, Mediclaim Policy of done in his own name, then WHY DENY IN MUTUAL FUND. Further this rules was prevalent when Entry Load was there. It is not now. Further the AMC charges Recurring Expenses, then why deny brokerage. (under Regular Plan). Distributor invests huge money on software, but UNFORTUNATELY HE CAN NOT USE IT FOR HIS OWN INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT. Sincere Request to SEBI and AMFI to discard this rule. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.

agreed

I agree why should go for direct.If I go direct then how can i oppose my client not to go for direct.If all other product give commission on own investment then why not in mutual fund?

very useful

It is really a great hurdle that the Distributors cant invest in regular plans. If allowed then it is very useful to show their confidence in industry by investing themselves in the schemes which they feel will give good returns.

Well it doesn''t always work against us. Though the fact that I can''t claim the brokerage on my own investment pinches me, I am ok when I see lot of SMEs itching to take their own arn to invest their money but they don''t as they get no material benefit out of it. Hence the rule is working in favour too.

I agree with this.i donot understand the logic.

yes i too agree this, investing our own income is not a crime. instead showing others port folio reports we can present our own mf statement to our investors.

As per AMFI rules the distributor can not paqss on his commission earned to investor,When The distributor is investor also he can not claim commission as that will also amounts to passing on commission to investor.

Totally agree with the suggestion. Distributors should get commission on their own Investment. Its ridiculous. On the contrary they should be given some extra incentives for investing, as that creates a positive initiative for the clients.

This is really injustice with the IFA. The the current scenario where there is harsh competition of business, the commission is going low. How can the distributor survive who''s family is totally depend on his commission income. If distributor is investing in MF that means he can confidently represent his statement before his client. But if he don''t get commission on his own fund then it is the most HOPELESS thing. What the thing I never understand about MF Industry is that where ever Industry wants cost cutting they have only one thing for that. That is distributors. Actual think is that they don''t want to survive distributors. They really what to make us Suicide.

Now a days investors are well educated & it is a myth that he will get influenced by distributors investment.More over distributor will invest his own money only in good schemes rather in less remunerative schemes to influence the investor.Denying commission to distributor''s own investment is not justified.

I fully agree with the suggestion and would support this move to extend commission to the Distributor of MF in the best interest of the concerned AMCs as well as for the Distributor himself. It is right step for the Distributor to prove and explain to prospecting investors to get convinced. I don''t find any fault in such investment because the Distributors may be also the investors.

No doubt it is serious flaw,and this discrepancy must be removed.

Yes, I agree, MF distributor should get commision on his own MF Investments.

distributer must get benifit eighter getting comission or nav discount for his own investment

i find no justification for denying commission / brokerage to IFAs. as this investment fulfills all requirements. i think AMCs are keeping quite on this issue as it saves them the money they would have to pay otherwise.some national distributor have denied commission on bonds purchased by IFAs.

It''s very true. Distributor must get commission on his own investment in MF. Regulatory must think over it.

Distributor have the eligibility to get the brokerage for his own investement. So please do the needful for that. Your earliast action in this matter will be highly appreciated

There is no logic/justification barring commission to IFA on his own investment while Insurance , Post Office and Fixed Deposits Agents are getting the commission on their own investment. IFA having multiple ARN Nos in the name of their family members are managing the investment by inter changing the investment and getting the commission as well saving the tax but Individual ARN holder is the great sufferer. AMFI/SEBI should review the rules and consider it favorably.

when brokers of lic general insurance cos etc get commission for their own investment,it is not fair to avoid commission for own investment in mfs

Yes it is necessary to raise our voice against the partiality in commission between mutual fund and insurance distributor for our own investment.

U R RIGHT.

I am investing directly under MF schemes without commissions and brokerages. With this statement, I can inspire confidence and goodwill amidst my customers who are aware due to IT knowledge sharing. The SIP isRs.1000 per month and minimum sum of Rs.5000/ for the CE schemes of few AMCs.

yes u r right. it injustice to mf Distributors.

Yeas it is an in justice to the IFA community. It should be changed immediately.

This is a partiality shown to distributors of MF. It should be rectified.

YES , I BELIEVE THE CURRENT PRACTICE IS NOT RIGHT . I RAISE MY VOICE IN SUPPORT OF YOUR MOVEMENT..... MANY THANKS

When Insurance companies are paying commissions to the distributors on own investments why can''t we get commission on our own investments. This issue to be clarified by SEBI.

It is high time that SEBI or AMFI or any other body who want to bring out certain changes in rules/regulations which affect the conduct of doing business for AMCs, Distributors and Investors should first thoroughly discuss the issue in open forum, get feedback, explain their logic behind the change of rules, take every stakeholder into confidence, make indepth study with regard to the impact it will have on each stakeholder. There is no need for rushing through the change in rules without fully knowing its impact. Hope they realise that they are not GOD to think that they know all and that they know best. Last few years we all have experienced the arbitrariness of rules and regulations. The "No Commission for Distributors investment" has no logic, if at all it may be "Twisted Logic" We want regulatory body to have practical approach, open to ideas for enhancing "investing experience" for Investor, Distributor and AMCs.

Veri right. Dual standards are applied in many cases

Yes,it must be implemented immediately. IFA communties are also investor like others with his own CODE or some other IFA S CODE eligible to get commission.

sir u have just snatched d words from our mouth. indeed there is no sense in such provision in sebi code of conduct. this rule should b abolished immediately & all witheld brokerage should b issued with suitable returns like that of best performing equity scheme presuming d broker had mqde same as investment.

Commission or no commission, the biggest problem is we ask our clients to invest through us and we are forced to buy in direct mode ,problem no 1 is we cant show our investments as an example to them.2 is to check our own investments we have to go to client portal of the registrars or we have to invest in another code and more than comm it builds confidence on us in the client

I totally agree with this issue and should support this issue gather all india support from the Ifa community and all india associations should moot the matter at all forums

I agree

Commission or no commission, the biggest problem is we ask our clients to invest thru us and we are forced to buy in direct mode ,problem no 1 is we cant show our investments as an example to them.2 is to check our own investments we have to go to client portal of the registrars. more than comm it builds confidence on us in the client

This is a really right. Why distributer do not get commission On own investment.

Dear All, At the out set, I, V. Srinivasan Prop. PESETA ENTERPRISES, thank you for taking initiatives. Yes absolutely correct, VOICE. Strongly object the discretionary methods of approach on benefits of financial products/services sold. Its rightly pointed out that distributor can be an excellent example investing on his own money, as a guide to the investors. Keep Simple Soft and Successful framework for distributors. With best WISHES SRINIVASAN V. Prop.: PESETA ENTERPRISES ARN-4487(E019914).

fully agree

Agree

Yes i am agree with u people. commissiom should be paid to distributor on his own invested money.

I am fully agree with you. It should be payable commission to distributor at his own investment.

YES I totally agree with you. In fact most of our client also ask us whether we our selves have invested in the schemes we suggest them It definitely does prove our own faith and conviction about mutual funds scheme if we invest in them ourselves. Should we show our investors our own investment made in direct plans?

This is a good question because we investors feel that we are not able to get the Benefit for the investments made in our Name. so will also will make good investments if we are entitle to the brokerage and it will also give boost to equity market and Mutual Funds and at the same time we can also convince our Customers by telling about the funds performance with value added proof

I totally agree with you. In fact most of our client also ask us whether we our selves have invested in the schemes we suggest them It definitely does prove our own faith and conviction about mutual funds scheme if we invest in them ourselves. Should we show our investors our own investment made in direct plans?

Mostly, all institues - including Banks / companies offer higher rates to employee''s deposits.. Manufactures offer higher discounts to employees.. IFAs are indirectly sales employees-- Authorities shall think again ...

I totally agree that distributor should get commission on his own investments.

If we invest under our own code we could at least monitor the investments instead of having to maintain a manual record

I also fully agree and support with you. We should get commission form our own investment to Mutual Fund Scheme.

dear sir, truely right sir,i think we got this commition ......insurance secotor given...fd given,so why not mutual fund.???? regards,Sunil K Shah,Ahmedabad

I am fully agree with you.I agree with this point and fully support. It should be payable commission to distributor at his own investment.

It should be payable commission to distributor at his own investment.

WHEN OTHER AVENUES OF INVESTMENTS ARE ALLOWING COMMISSION ON OWN INVESTMENTS WHY NOT MF.IT IS ILLOGICAL FOR NOT ALLOWING COMMISSION ON OWN INVESTMENTS.IT HAS TO BEQUICKLY CORRECTED.

this is bad to the distributer who could not get commision on his/her investment.

I agree with this point and fully support. We should really put up the matter with SEBI finance ministry.

I am very much with you.In fact I feel every IFA will conform to the thought.It definitely does prove our own faith and conviction about mutual funds scheme if we invest in them ourselves.And truly ,if all other institutions are paying commissions on our own investments ,I don''t see why Mutual Funds can''t pay us the commissions as you have rightly pointed out.Surely we all should unite and raise our voice against this anomaly.Just tell me what needs to be done next to achieve our common goal.Regards Arun

Discussion have no impact or result unless we strongly write to ministry of finance or talk to media againest SEBI. SEBI NEVER work for development of INDIA.

Yes this is true. In anycase he will try and his self investment with some other friend and will enjoy it. Then why the authorities concerned will look into this and reconsider it

I fully agree with this view. Business/Profession is a separate entity.As an individual if a distributor invests in a MF scheme why should he/she be denied the commission. What is the rationale behind this is difficult to understand.

I am fully agree with you. if we can manage others fund why not self money. we should get commission of our own investment.

I support your stand.

Autocrats wearing White Collars sitting in the AC cabins and making policies have never got into the grind to earn their meals. And AMCs are acting like bafoons [Unlike Insurance Companies who out-rightly refused any diktat from the Regulator] and AMCs currently are just keeping busy creating Content to sell funds On-line, as they know the day is not far away when there will be no Mutual Fund agents. And all this is done in the name of ''''Stopping Mis-selling''''. Ask these Autocrates and Bafoons, that if the On-Line Direct Fund Buying yields better Returns, then Mutual Fund sales on a Distributor ARN is not a Mis-selling ? The Mis-selling in Mutual Funds was largely driven by the Banks and some HNIs leading Franchisee based selling, that too in order to achieve ambitious targets. So instead of stopping Banks to sell Mutual Funds, and Franchisees the rules implemented were all wrong, as it impacted the smaller individual ARN holder. I can only wish them a Wisdom.

If there is provison for an investor to invest money with Direct option, then whay should not an IFA get commission on his own investment? SEBI should think on this point of view.

MUTUAL FUND DISTRIBUTOR FRATERNITY IS ALWAYS AT RECEIVING END . IF DISTRIBUTOR GETS BROKERAGES FOR HIS OWN INVESTMENTS IN OTHER FINANCIAL PRODUCTS LIKE FD , LIC ETC THEN WHY NOT FROM MF INDUSTRY ? THIS INDICATES THERE IS NO COORDINATION IN THE DIFFERENT REGULATORS. IF REGULATOR OR INDUSTRY BUREAUCRATS WANTS TO GROW MF INDUSTRY & MORE PARTICIPATION IN MF INVESTMENTS , THIS RULE MUST BE REMOVED . DISTRIBUTORS OWN INVESTMENTS CAN BE A MAJOR PIE OF INDUSTRY & CAN INCREASE INDUSTRY TOTAL AUM . MY SUGGESTION TO INDUSTRY IS THAT , IF AT ALL YOU WANT TO APPLY THIS RULE , IT SHOULD BE APPLICABLE TO NEXT LEVEL OF DISTRIBUTORS I.E. FOR "FUND MANAGER & TEAM " WHO ARE INVOLVED IN ACTUAL EQUITY STOCK PICKING & ASSET ALLOCATION.

Initially we have recd. commission on own Investment. it should be start again. Why AMFI & SEBI against ARN agents?

This is what I have been cherishing ever since I have become Mutual Fund Distributor.

EVERY ORGANISATION INCLUDING THE DEPT OF SMALL SAVINGS (GOVT OF INDIA), LIC AND GEN INSURERS MAKE PAYMENT OF COMMISSION FOR THE INVESTMENTS DONE BY THE DISTRIBUTOR FOR HIMSELF. THERE IS NO REASON WHY SEBI/ AMFI ARE AGAINST THIS PROCEDURE. HIGH TIME THEY IMPLEMENT PAYMENT OF BROKERAGE TO DISTRIBUTORS ON OWN INVESTMENTS.

I fully support the suggestion and all distributors should get the commission on their own investments. I do understand the logic behind this type of laws preventing rightful commission on own investments. Age old laws irrelevant to present situations must be dropped down.

I am fully agree with your views.

Friends,We think that we are living in a democratic country but actually not.In this country all the decisions are taken by a group of people called elite people (mostly bureaucrat) who actually have never taken any pain as we do to distribute these products.I do not know what is the basis of this decision whenever it has been taken,whoever has taken but we have to follow the same. I would like all of us shall urge modi govt to repeal this law as his govt is doing with many old laws.

I agree that, If distributor get commission against his own investments he will be in better position to explain his prospectives.

Yes you have raised a very valid question. MF distributors are deprived of AUM and brokerage on their own investments. Looking deeply to the matter I find no definitive reason as to why commission is not paid. We are in a distribution business. Some time investors wants to know being a distributor how much you invest for yourself. I appeal to the appropriate authorities to look into the matter seriously.

Why are MF distributors are always on the receiving end vis a vis distributors of other products. We urge AMFI to take up the matter so that we get commission on our own investments as in other financial products viz insurance & FDs.

Very well said. They should think of it. At least after obtaining certain amount of business, it should be allowed.

It is ridiculous on part of SEBI & AMFI, not to allow brokerage for investments made by Distributor and also increase his AUM. What is the harm in this?

Its easy to earn brokerage in own investment. if Two IFA same investment objective then invest same amount /fund in interchage ARN No.

Yes you have raised a very valid question. MF distributors are deprived of AUM and brokerage on their own investments. Looking deeply to the matter I find no definitive reason as to why commission is not paid. We are in a distribution business of such a product which if we need, we have to buy it from another distributor at his distribution price( to avoid confusion of commission being generated in the distributor,s ARN). What a funny law. I appeal to the appropriate authorities to look into the matter seriously.

As the distributor is concern, he is providing his/ her client the service of family planner and give awareness about the mutual funds,only on whole population more than 65% r unaware of mutual funds ie no knowledge has been yet to most of the indian population.There will always be given the commission whether placiing his/ her investment and also from the clients.This is to promote the mutual funds AMC.In indian culture still ,no client easily walk to the distributor to purchase the mutual funds. Still now the distributor has to convence or forced people to purchase mutual funds.People are lack of knowedlge about mutual funds.

I think SEBI and AMFI will think matter with open mind regarding the self investment of the Distributor.If a Distributor want to save on ELSS scheme,then he will not get commission,But why? Distributor has to study the scheme performance of different AMC. I thin it will be helpful to convince the Investor that the Distributor himself invest in the MF.

I also agree with you.

I also agree with all of you that we should get commission of our own investment in MF product when we are getting commission in insurance & fixed deposits or other financial products than what''s wrong in MF. When we shows to our client that we also invested in schemes it boost their confidence & convince easily. Sebi has to think for it nothing wrong to give commission to their own investment of IFA

I invest lot of my own Money in MF every year. Commission to agents is a must

I fully agree.

I also agree with you. The Distributor must invest in various schemes , then only he can approach the prospective investors to invest in the schemes. first the distributor must invest in the scheme & show the investors regarding the own investment-immediately they may convinced and invest in the scheme-So own investment also eligible to get commission. AUM should increase and commission should paid.

I also agree with you. AUM should increase and commission should paid.

I want to earning brokarage in my own investment. what is the prosidure?

Yes. we should get the commision of our own investment.

yes you are absolutely correct.

I agree with you

I feel is an injustice

I do agree the points raised. I have substantial investment in various Schemes of Mutual Funds having a confidence and conviction towards Mutual fund investment and returns of them. I am of the opinion that MF Distributors must get commission on his own investment.

The Distributor must invest in various schemes , then only he can approach the prospective investors to invest in the scheme. For eg. SBI New Fund Offer (banking & financial sectors)first the distributor must invest in the scheme & show the investors regarding the own investment-immediately they may convinced and invest in the scheme-So own investment also eligible to get commission.(Investment upto 50000 rupees.

Dear Sir, I agree with your comments. Since as other investors, if Distributors disclose his investments within the time frame as notified by Scheme detais he also get EXIT LOAD. Then there is no such question of Distributors commission on OWN INVESWTMENT.

I have been urging this to the MF industry for a long time now. AMCs have just been telling me that it was a "ancient" practice which they were just adhering to. They have, without proof, been even citing that the US MF industry too doesn''t allow Distributors to invest in MF Schemes in their own name (as the First Holder). The bar today which prohibits a MF Distributor from putting his/her own money in his own name in the MF Schemes that he is often found selling to his clients (there have also been allegations that Distributors indulge in mis-selling schemes) often forces him to think that the AMCs perhaps consider Distributor''s money as ill-gotten, tainted or perhaps even havala money! Is that so? Then why deploy us to canvass for your schemes? Or why else the restriction on putting his/her own money in Schemes which could act as proof of his confidence in the MF Scheme/s he is trying to sell to his clients? In this competitive age where the trend is towards ''Direct'' investment, it is high time that the MF industry recognized our (Distributors'') money to be as clean as that of our clients'' and allowed us to invest in schemes in our own name (as a First Holder) and earn some extra commission from his own investments.

YES, an distributer is likely to be entitiles to get commison on his investment.

This is valid point and I have been discussing this issue for long time since I have been a MF investor ever since SBI MF , Canara MF & Pioneer ITI came on the scene - but have been getting a standard reply of " no ". But he could jolly well do the same investment through some other advisor or distributor with some arrangement !!! That doesn''t speak well nor is it ethical. But I cannot understand the reason behind such rule prohibiting the commission on his own investment - especially that doesn''t get him any extra benefit or preferential treatment over and above the applicable commission. Will the Industry think over this issue with an open mind ??

I 100% agree with you that we as a MF Advisor should very much get the Commissions on our Own Investments in MF and you rightly said we can show to our client our portfolio and build a confidence among them that if we can invest and earn out of the product and it would be more convening to them. Secondly, even though we know that ELSS Gives more returns than any other products we are not able to invest in them as we do not get any thing out of that investment and we loose the gains that we should get out of them rather than putting our money into some other low return products. I strongly support your mission of getting commissions to us on our own investment in MF. Regards Rajendra Adya

Yes it is quite convincing that distributor also must be provided with commission in his own investment like insurance & other avenues. It will enhance not only distributor''s AUM but also with this more awareness and more penetration can be made in public for which AMFI & SEBI are working hard for the involvement of retail investor.

yes,i agree with u.their should be commission on our own investments

I agree with your above statement.In post offices they pay commiission on your own investment.

Distributors own investments show his/her conviction for procuring more business. There is no logic for depriving the distributor. His business and personal investments are two different entities. This needs to remedied immediately.

Distributor of Mutual Funds should get Commission on his own investments in schemes of Mutual schemes. SEBI should fix the criteria ,i.e. minimum customer or minimum AUM

It is right. There should be commission on his own investment in mutual funds schemes. I agree with you.

I support the concern raised by Mr Viraf.

i strongly support this idea.kindly avoid discrimination in agent community in financial all are equal. This rule proves the smart sense that regulators have and that they are biased towards this industry. When v invest we are our own advisors and investors. One one hand we get no payout but on the other hand we are charged the same fund management charge. so the regulators only think of how to kill the distributor and get their salary increments on saying that they care for investors. rather regulators should ask amcs to pay a fixed stipend to distributors as they slog a lot to get money into this industry. What a Thankless lot of regulators and AMFI and AMCs

As LIC agent I am getting my commission on my own policies. All these years I am confused and disturbed over this arbitrary condition. we are eligible for commission on our own investments too.otherwise we are eligible for extra Unit or apply LOWER NAV on our investment replacing to our commission that we are left because of wrong rules

YES , THIS IS WRIGHT

We get commission wherever we make our own investments. viz., Insurance, Postal savings, Bonds, Shares IPOs, Company Deposits etc. It is only in Mutual Funds, we are not paid on our own investments. SEBI has meddled too much with everything in Mutual Funds with too much of suspicion ! .This sort of negative approach has kept the retail segment away from growth. Charity should begin at home - Similarly, the investment should start from Distributors before recommending to others.

You''re right Mr. Viraf. I strongly support your argument.

i strongly support this idea.kindly avoid discrimination in agent community in financial all are equal.

I entirely agree with all of you and wonder on this issue for last 15 yrs...

That is absolutely correct , i have to invest somewhere else because we get brokerage , it has become our habit which is not a bad one, as we get for our labour & they re denying it.

Very good question. We invest our own funds in different mf scheme for saw our return to our client. So, client convince for investment in mf scheme. When we invest as a distributor, we gate NAV as retail investor, then MF co. give us commission, otherwise Co. give us NAV as par direct plan. We loss commission as well as NAV loss. I purchase my ULIS plan form LIC NOMURA mf. I purchase ULIS plan from my friend, then he get commission. What does it means? If I want commission, then put my business in other ARN? SEBI has to remove this close otherwise give us direct plan NAV in our ARN code. Then we get benefit of our investment in our AUM create.

u r right. i agree with your opnion, we should get comission and we can project to client also.

As LIC agent I am getting my commission on my own policies. All these years I am confused and disturbed over this arbitrary condition. we are eligible for commission on our own investments too

Yes the decision is very good and should be taken soon.I will definitely invest my whole brokerage in Mutual fund only.

This rule proves the smart sense that regulators have and that they are biased towards this industry. When v invest we are our own advisors and investors. One one hand we get no payout but on the other hand we are charged the same fund management charge. so the regulators only think of how to kill the distributor and get their salary increments on saying that they care for investors. rather regulators should ask amcs to pay a fixed stipend to distributors as they slog a lot to get money into this industry. What a Thankless lot of regulators and AMFI and AMCs

In my view the commission should not be passed on to the clients.when distributor and the client are same person the allowing commission to the distributor will also just like passing on commission to other client.

Those people who sitting behind very intelligent to make policies like this. They want to prove himself smart guys

This is because people wearing White Collars sitting in the AC cabins and making policies have not got the grind to earn their meals. And the AMCs [Unlike Insurance Companies] are just busy creating Content to sell funds On-line, anticipating the eviction on the Agent community. All this is done in the name of ''Stopping Mis-selling'', which was largely done by the Banks in order to achieve ambitious targets. So instead of stopping Banks to sell Mutual Funds, the rules implemented were all wrong. I can only wish them a Wisdom.

I fully support above. Why should the person who is convincing others to invest and get commission should not commission when he invests for himself is important question. Everything is transparent and so agent should get the commission.

I am very disappoint when I make mine own investment in tax saver on another code.

every distributor should get comission on its own investment as it contributes Rs. 11000/- Per month i.e. 121000/- yly Regulator should take action on it

why not to link salaries of sebi officials linked to performances .if mutual funds are related to market then why sebi mutual fund officials get fixed pay. it must be earned by showing performances , and if not claw back and penalty must go through process of KNOW YOUR REGULATOR KYR and disclose all money earned and investment made in mutual funds and switches

It is right to invest their investments in mfs isgood.It developed confidence in investors.

I fully agree with this and this anomaly should be corrected.

It is right to invest their investments in mfs isgood.It developed confidence in investors.

It is a time to raised the question that why distr. not get comm. on his own investment, while other type of investment except mutual funds distr. received comm. on his investment. Here neither given comm nor given any bonus like extra allocation as sbilife gives the extra units on the allocation to his employee, they may taken the policy from an agent. so that if AMC not give comm to dstr on his investment ,than may be allocated that units same to comm.amt. Otherwise it is injustice to the distributors.

every distributor should get comission on its own investment as it contributes Rs. 11000/- Per month i.e. 121000/- yly

A distributor is an investor also. Payment of brokerage on his own investment will encourage him to invest in the MFs and there by improve his quality of advice since before investing his own funds he will be more cautious.

Yes.Mr.Viraf. I also with you.We must raise our voice.

Insurance companies are paying agents on their own policies for decades, even before IRDA came as regulator. They too continued this practice finding nothing wrong in it. UTI was paying commission on own investments of agents, in US 64 and MIP schemes untill 1996/97. They stopped after private AMCs came in market. SEBI decided to discontinue it for the reasons best known to them. There was no consultative paper circulated seeking views. No discussions. No onafide reasons sighted. I am opinion that there is nothing illegle, un ethical, hazardous in paying commissions in these cases. SEBI has introduced a ridiculous practice og one agent investing under other agent''s code. With UTI Chairman as SEBI Chairman I hope such ridiculous practices will be immediately discontinued.

no commission payto own investment

SINCE COMMISSION IS NOT PAID AT OWN INVESTMENT SOME AGENTS HAS EXCHANGED THEIR INVESTEMENS, TO GET COMMISSION

I fully agree with above views.

There should not be any restriction on commission to distributor on own investments also, but we are as it is fighting for our brokerage for business garnered. God save distributor community in this country.

Its really sad that such an issue has been raised at all. MF business cannot be compared to Insurance at all. If there are malpractises there does not mean it should be replicated in MF''s too. Its a pure case of conflict of interest. Why should one get commission on personal investments. Then one can start propreitory business why do advisory? This indicates one is not here for advising but to make money out of everything. This is an irrelevant topic for this forum. There are much bigger and broader issue that need to be addressed.

Yes the rule is that the distributor does not get commission on his own investment This is highly unjustified as he gets on his lic investments as the agent. However even today it If I am not wrong, a distributor is permitted to put his own investments in his own code without getting the commission...

Dear sir thanks to keep the issue befor forum i hope that govt. think about it it must be allow to get commission on own investment by broker

I fully agree with the views of Mr Viraf. Distributers should get the brokerage on their own investments.

I strongly agree that an IFA should get brokerage on own investment. SEBI & amfi should rethink about it to encourage the IFA and distribution of MF also.

Regulator must take action against it.

It is pure dictatorship attitude. Regulator is not honest enough to let us earn commision on our own investments,

definitely... The distributors shd get the fruit of what they sow... They can also show their own investments n gain confidence of the clients..

This is gross in justice to the Distributor. In all other mode of investments, distributor is getting commission on his own named investment. In fact due to this anomaly, one major investor of this chain is discouraged. If the distributor make his/her own investment in the scheme, that brings out the Best propaganda for that scheme. Investors are getting convinced without much selling. This anomaly should be removed ASAP

Thanks for bringing this issue. Sometimes I have to search for other avenues for investment even though I am confident on MF. Pl consider in the interest of MF.

Why this was not considered when Direct Investment option was introduced? Distributors invest through their fellow distributor. Is it necessary? This subject is long overdue and needs immediate attention of all. Much harm has already been done to IFAs at least such small issues be resolved now.

I strongly agree that an IFA should get brokerage on own investment. SEBI & amfi should rethink about it to encourage the IFA and distribution of MF also.

Yes. I fully agree with your view, Sir. This discrimination should end.

how to invest own

I Agree.

At any rate , an advisors own investments are only a small portion of ones total AUM. infact the commission on that part is like peanuts! Why are we not focussing on getting full trail model for ever. Fair and regular trail of around 1% and above? Similarly focuss on preventing loss of commission due to lapsed codes by planning poper succession plan?

It seems to me authority will think about it .

I 100% agree to this view. It is sheer discriminatory and anachronistic in the present juncture of reforms

we the MF Distributors are treated like 2nd class citizens ...... time has come,to make a single platform of the distributors to raise our voices against all this injustice and all........

I am with u

I agree with Sripad. ... His logic is perfect.... i am of the opinion that SEBI should allow ARN on Direct investment.... This way distributors get their due share indirectly and at the same time their investments reflect in their total AUM.... also this move will help in servicing pure advisory clients on a fee only platform.. In such cases the ARN will enable distributors to access the investment information from the AMCs and the RTAs...

I totally agree that even advisors should get commission on their own investments.This will encourage even advisors to take mf route for their own investments with little earnings from that.Now as per sebi guidelines commission structures are also under their radar.so we advisors should get together n voice our opinion thus encouraging new advisors to take up advisory field which is becoming less lucrative.

I am agree with the distributors, why all these bindings for the MF distributors only?

Yes I agree with You why we can''t get commission on our investment. & why this rule only in M. F. & not for other financial product.

I agree 100 % with Mr Viraf. This restrictions should immediately be withdrawn by SEBI. There is no logic that Distributor cannot invest in MF, which he is selling to his investors. URGENT review requested.

I fully agree that commission should be given to the advisor for self investment, I also suggest some additional incentive should also be provided as it shows our own confidence in the scheme. If upfront is not possible it may be distributed in form of trail (Regular trail+ Upfront) or as suggested may be given in the form of liquid scheme. we should raise our voice to get commission of self investment t the competent authorities.

Yes. Brokerage /commission can be paid to the distributor on his own investments. Rightly said LIC & other companies are paying on own investments. Why not Mutual funds. I strongly suggest own investments on the distributor can be permitted by AMFI. This we suggested in IFA Galaxy and other distributor associations also.

yes i agree with you. like other products and also being a equity broker if we trade in our demat we get commission. then why not in MF.

trust me, it is good for all of us. Else one fine day your brokers and banks will start approaching HNI''s and will sell them agency. Like the LI market is even the MF would be flooded with ARN''s only to manage personal wealth or under the influence of a financial organization...

I agree with your comment and I also think that why not the distributor be paid brokerage on his own investment whearas LIC agents are being paid commission on their own life policies.

i am also surprise that other financial instruments gives commissions on own investment, why mutual fund not to do so.

I fully agree with you Virafji. This illogical rule is just for the sake of it, there is no reason worth the name behind it. There is no ethical dilemma for anybody, if this archaic rule is abolished. I also treat myself as my client and there is no reason why I; as a distributor should not get brokerage on my investments. Just see what distributors do to avoid such a irksome and irrational rule. Someone has to invest in his wife''s name, if she is a housewife, another has to enter into a mutual agreement with a fellow distributor to invest similar amounts under one-another''s ARN code. I personally invest in my mother''s name, but still I have to in ELSS in my own name to get 80C tax breaks. If one invests into direct mode, how can he or she ask their clients not to go for direct mode. No doubt, that if we go for direct mode, we save 60-70 odd paisa per Rs. 100 of investments. But this is not the issue. I; as a distributor; definitely like that my investments should reflect under my ARN an increase my AUM. I have my own website and given IDs to all of my clients. Today, even if I die, my clients need not have to bother about their investments, because they can get their investment details at the click of a button. But, due to this archaic rule by SEBI, I can''t avail this facility for myself. Are SEBI, AMCs and AMFI signalling to us that either we should stop investing into mutual fund or go for direct mode? Why this warning is not given for direct mode that " ''self-medication'' is perfect recipe for disaster. INVESTORS BEWARE".

I am fully agree, this point is very much valid. When all other financial instruments have the structure, why can''t in Mutual fund investment. It is rightly mentioned that clients'' confidence increase when we say we also have investment in same scheme.

Yes, Why can''t we get commission on our own investment in mutual funds? SEBI should consider this. It will give immense confident & trust with the customers when we share our own portfolio planning & returns.

It is good initiative to raise our voice. It will certainly be helpful to the MF industries by increasing of thair AUM also as well as Advisors. Further there is no any negative financial effect on the industies.

On many previous occasions, this issue was raised but no concerned Authority could quote logical and valid reasons for non-payment of commission to IFAs/Distributors on their own investments in MF schemes. I feel each and every Distributor should raise his voice and request the concerned authorities to do away with this isolated and wrong practice and issue guidelines to AMCs for payment of commissions to MF Distributors on their own investments.

I support this. If commission is available on other financial products then why not on mutual fund advisor on his/her investment.

I agree with you. I doesn''t matter whether distributer himself is investing in particular scheme or has recommended his client to invest. In my case i mostly recommend the scheme i have already invested OR find the Scheme most suitable. I wish that our concern will be heard with consideration

hello sir I am anjaiah siddi from warangal dist talangana comments given by viraf mumbai is very much genuine and justified i dont what is wrong in doing business by IFA in his own ARN he will set an example to others SEBI should allow IFA own investments in his own ARN

I completely agree with your views Mr. Viraf. We should be allowed to invest our own funds on our own ARN. So that we can show our own investments to the investors. This can surely help to gain their confidence. And since the investments done in regular mode are liable for more expense ratio unlike direct mode, companies should have no problem in paying commissions out of these expenses. Now for those who put an argument here that we should invest in direct mode, how can we convince other people to invest through us by investing our own fund in direct mode? And I have experienced the direct mode investments and it is really pathetic tracking the fund performance in direct mode and I really consider our investors lucky and can understand the value & convenience we provide them as against direct mode. If people like us can not manage the funds through direct mode, it will be really difficult for layman investors to manage the funds in direct mode.

Friends, Disagree with you on this. There is clear conflict of interest. Consider this if all the corporates/HNI take ARN codes and start investing in their own codes. This is to restrict this type of behaviour. But having said that distributors can invest in direct schemes so that they benefit from lower charges.

I completely agree with your views Mr. Viraf. We should be allowed to invest our own funds on our own ARN. So that we can show our own investments to the investors. This can surely help to gain their confidence. And since the investments done in regular mode are liable for more expense ratio unlike direct mode, companies should have no problem in paying commissions out of these expenses. Now for those who put an argument here that we should invest in direct mode, how can we convince other people to invest through us by investing our own fund in direct mode? And I have experienced the direct mode investments and it is really pathetic tracking the fund performance in direct mode and I really consider our investors lucky and can understand the value & convenience we provide them as against direct mode. If people like us can not manage the funds through direct mode, it will be really difficult for layman investors to manage the funds in direct mode.

I fully agree with idea of getting commission on our own investments in MF schemes

THIS IS REALLY VERY MUCH INJUSTICE ON MUTUAL FUND ADVISORS, THAT HE CAN NOT INVEST FOR HIS OWN IN UNDER HIS ARN CODE. ALL THE RESTRICTIONS ARE IMPLEMENTED ON MUTUAL FUND ADVISORS ONLY. BECAUSE WE ARE FOOL. WE ARE NOT UNITED TO RAISE THE VOICE LIKE LIC AGENTS LOBBY.

I wholeheartedly support. A distributor must get commision as well as effect to his AUM on his own investment. From AMC point of view,this is just lIke any other i vestment. More over it shows the prospective investor his belief in the scheme.

Yes.we can park our commissions in LIQUID funds.SEBI Should definitely consider