Why only IFA commissions is banned when the Fund managers are also not able to perform since last 4-5 yrs. All the schemes of mutual funds are lagging behind. We are at the receiving end when we face the investors. Investors are ready to pay reasonable commissions or fund management fee only when the funds perform well which can be cross cheked by the Fund performance for the last 5 yrs.This ia a universal theory. A period of 5 yrs is enough to deliver good returns .

Fin ministry should first think the outcome of any decisions before implementing it.If they want only HNI money then this concept is really good.But the best long term noney are those small investment of Rs 10k,20k.etc.Now nobody is caring for that.I suggest to have more commission for small amounts and decrease with the increase in amount.This will reduce churning from banks.

Sir, pl don't be over joyed, hardly things will change.don't jump the gun,PM or FM cannot change the present situation over-night.PM's adviser Mr.Koushik Basu has said things may change when new Govt.comes to power & not now,till then cool.

I am agree with 5 point agenda

entry load should be introduced, banks should not be allowed to sell MF, and insurance ,amc fee should be reduced , why fund managers will be paid healthy amount when investors are not earning by his management.

I guess small distributors are carried for a ride by influential large sized distributors,without acknowledging the ground reality-MF industry has become a ELITE class business which has nothing to do for small investors,i am sure MF industry is axing its on graveyard-sooner or later it is going to die(it is already half dead)if top level people keep on doing non sense things -08866381360

It is disappointing to see that industry people meeting with FinMin have argued to increase expanse ratio but they say that re-introduction of entry load was not on their agenda.it is very very dusgusting.this only shows GREED of amc's who without performing well want to enjoy all luxuries and that to year on year?entry load was one time expanse for investors but expanse ratio is a recurring expanse ,which means if markets remain stagnant for a year,still the investor will keep on loosing 2.25% from his hard earned money,and fund managers will keep on enjoying all perks and high salaries without doing anything new-is this fair in the eyes of SEBI?does it shows SEBI really working in the favour of investors?if SEBI really want to favour investors it should re-introduce entry load and reduce expanse ratio so that investors loose less money annually with recurring exapnse ratio which he pays unknowingly to AMC's.

If Industry's growth is the target distributors should be remunerated adequately in line with the existing cost of living. Otherwise no new distributors will come into the field and retail participation in MF investment will be growing downwards from the current level. Those who distribute now may be continuing but when they quit or die no new fellows fill the gap and everyone can sing a "DEATH SONG" to the industry.

MF industry should be given respect it deserves. Celebrities should be allowed to be used for ads.... Increase Trail, the BEST way to incentivise the IFA. Ban Upfront for same Folio switches. These changes will galvanise the Mutual Fund industry.

I believe the Regulator is complicating the whole process, here are my suggestions: 1. As rightly said, any fund with more than 50% exposure is considered as equity fund 2. RGESS is over-hyped, its just another blend fund, any existing fund can be designated under this name 3. Expense ratio based on the slabs is perfectly fine 4. There is no harm in bringing back the entry load of 2% (aren't we paying exit load while we buy any product from the grocery store?); Indians do not have the culture of paying on face, rather they are ok with hidden charges (pity though) or else educate through media (which is audacious one). Mr. Bhave has done more damage than good to the whole community, things should have been done with consultation... Do not allow banks to sell Mutual Funds & Insurance, they are the main culprits. 5. If no front end charges in MFs, then the same rule should be applicable to Life Insurance companies.. why differentiate both.. as the end user is still the same?

GOOD MOVE. Banks should not be allowed to distribute MF products. T RAMKUMAR 9380674527

Abhi Entry Load lagane ki jaroorat nahi he, Fund House apne fund ka perfomance pehle dikaye kyuki client ka fund badega to hamari bhi income badegi.

It is a good & welcome solution of planning to introduce Entry Load. But there should be a cap on entry load to avoid churning. For example if SEBI Considers an entry load of 1 - 1.5%,IT should consider ceiling subject to a maximum of Rs.3000 - 5000/-. Or it can say there will not be any entry load for investment beyond Rs.10 lakhs. Investment over this amount will be paid only Trail commission and no upfront brokerage or a fixed upfront only. As per AMFI Data & SEBI Data, Banks are the channel has done the higher churning. So SEBI & AMFI Consider even Banning the Banks from distributing MF Products. The Fact is even today MFs are introducing/designing High Revenue products like NLD, Dual Advantage Funds, Capital Protection funds, etc. By doing this AMCs are also will start concentrating on other alternate channels and also try to expand the base. Hence, there should be ceiling on the Entry Load and Banks should not be allowed to Distribute MF Products.

No entry load,higher expense limit,commission model on increasing trail commission with holding period, no upfront commission ,utilisation of exit load for commission purpose.

2% entry load, without any commission why we work for them, we too have expenses of service to the client.

i sincerely request for the 2% entry load, as it gives respect and diginity for our service, the fee service never has respect. people think without any commission why we work for them, we too have expenses of service to the client.

Swayam Jago Tabhi Desh Jagega. A Good advisor never ask for upfront, because 95% good upfront paying MF's are now running at discount. See data for last 10 years. If you want to earn, then recommend good MF's so that trail would be multiple higher then Entry Load or Transaction Fee that you charge. Jai Hind Jai Bharat

I am one of the ARNs who evinced keen interest in mobilising FUNDS initially. However, with the abolishing of entry loads, it turned out to be an exercise in vain to mobilise funds. Though, the SEBI sermonised that the IMFAs should collect fee from the investors, it is ALWAYS difficult to ask for a few hundred rupees from the investors. They would only believe that after all, the advisor was interested in palming off schemes to skim some money out of the investors and the advise would lose sheen out of it. I strongly urge that the entry load should be re-introduced at should be fixed at 2% for all investments. Failing which, the investments would never be marketed by the advisors. After all, every one has to earn his bread. S/VENKATA RAMANI 0 94440 18103

I am one of the ARNs who evinced keen interest in mobilising FUNDS initially. However, with the abolishing of entry loads, it turned out to be an exercise in vain to mobilise funds. Though, the SEBI sermonised that the IMFAs should collect fee from the investors, it is ALWAYS difficult to ask for a few hundred rupees from the investors. They would only believe that after all, the advisor was interested in palming off schemes to skim some money out of the investors and the advise would lose sheen out of it. I strongly urge that the entry load should be re-introduced at should be fixed at 2% for all investments. Failing which, the investments would never be marketed by the advisors. After all, every one has to earn his bread. S/VENKATA RAMANI 0 94440 18103

Dear sir, please go through the implementing the upfront brokerage and trial fees to be more for the well wise of the distributors welfare and investors interest are also protected.

It seems to me upto Rs-50000 SIP if possible allow as per earlier system without KYC , so that rural area will be more beneffited

SEBI to look after use of Common KRA Form for all the Three KRA's (except name of KRA) and Common All type of Forms like Common Application Form, SIP Form, Change of Bank Details etc. Here Common means Form should compulsory be same in format, language, etc. except name of fund in all respect. Aslo Same procedures to be followed by all AMC's for redemption, revival, claim etc. It is very important for the growth of industry. Also SEBI will act speedly to stop charging of exit load also. As fund's are already charging expenses on all investments yearly. Whereas SEBI is thinking of implementation of Entry Load again, which will impact negative on the MF industry. Also One time transaction charges will also be stopped as the advisors' are not disclosing charges to the investor, which is a loss of industry in long run. I hope all the good advisor's will support this by posting comments on this site or by telling directly to SEBI to implement all the things I mentioned above.

for children scheme amc to amc norms are differ. death claim procedure amc to amc differ.change of bank details also amc to amc differ.procedure should same for all amc.common application form idea is good

due to high inflation a small IFA cannot survive without entryload. nobody give charge in small town & rural area. plz support for comission without entryload. entryload should be in hidden format. single form in all formality should essential by the SEBI.

(1) One Common Application Form. (2) Exit Load 1% for 1 Year, 0.50% for 2 Year, 0.25% for 3 year. (3) Commission on self application.

Too many cooks spoil the broth. too many many NEW schems when the Sensex is up, spoilt/burnt investors savings. All regulations will be of no good, unless regid marked to market schems are allowed. As for removal of entry load, it has benefited more to sincere advisors as the AUM has increased,doubled,and investors willing to pay charges.

Good Move. A common application form. This will be reduse our cost of expenses.

Individual Financial Advisor is a pillar of MF Industries. Kindly look them? Big house is already make money but small IFA can"t. INDIAN ECONOMIC GROWTH & MF INDUSTRIES GROWTH IS POSSIBLE WHEN IFA ARE ON RELAX AND STABLE.

It is good move by the Govt to finally listen to the problem of MF Industry.I hope that All AMC should raise point with concensus instead of only Large AMC 's putting their view point with the arrogance.

sir, completely agree with you also suggest that for stop churning put brokerage recovery in case of churning it should be only .10% remian recover in 6month,.20% remain recoverup to 1year, .30% for second year also sebi can do punishment for same

Well written hope it falls on the right ears.

Good move. Entry load should be there. This step will be benefited to advisors, MF industry and indian economy.

Agree with the proposed 5 point agenda..but have one question re:The single cheque system. You write "Clearly, for those distributors who wish to charge or who believe they have an ability to charge fees, there is a strong case to allow them to do so within a single cheque system - based on an amount specified in the application form itself.......my question is, how will this amount be credited to the distributor? Who will be responsible for doing so? will this not result in more paper work?

I am partially agreed with Stan Dsouza.Entry load should be revived if Govt really want penetration of mutual fund industries in suburb & rural areas.

If our government is really serious to spread the equity culture to the rural area, then there should be different incentives for the rural IFAs. Because it is very difficult to sell mutual fund products in rural areas without upfront. To get one Rs. 500 SIP I have to visit at least three times to the client’s house, which is 3 to 4 km (some cases 5 – 10 km) away from my house. True, in the long run trial commission will compensate all our efforts. But, 50% of my clients redeem their investment after 5 years, which they consider long term. And one bear market like 2008 will be enough to bring down the AUM to 50%. So without upfront commission it is impossible to spread the equity culture to the villages, and turn their investment habit from insurance to equity. I also request SEBI and AMFI please allow NRIs to invest under MICRO SIPs and increase the limit of MICRO SIP to one lac from Rs. 50000.

DO NOT BRING ENTRY LOAD BECK,BUT DO GOOD PERCENTAGE OF TRAIL SO IT HELPS DISTRIBUTOR FOR LONGLIFE BUSINESS.

Good Move, Hope in coming future few more initiatives are taken to protect MF Industry, Common application across industry will cut down expenses a lot

Right move, this will not only help to advisors but also to MF industry and ultimately indian economy. Go Ahead!!!!!

The suggestions are very good for revival of the mutual fund industry. Any compensation model to the distributors, whether it is higher upfront and trail or variable entry load should be aligned with the interest of the investors. Then only industry will be sustain in the longer run. The concept of variable entry load theoretically looks good. But practically it is difficult to implement with the interest of the investors. Instead of that, regulators should allow the AMC ‘s to increase the expensive ratio and the same pay to the distributors in the form of higher trail commission. It should be minimum of 1% across the fund houses. Most of the time advisers are advising to their clients, i.e., Invest with the long term view to get good returns from the equity over the period of time. Same applicable to advisory business also. In my view higher trail commission will solve most of the problems in the industry. It is a win win situation to all the stake holders.

Why not You talk about thousands of small IFA's; What you paying them for survival rather than just using them for name of industry. I think without being honest for IFA's who actually work for retail investment growth in MF at ground level; every move will be failed. Thanks

Businesses grow on two or either of the two factor volumes or margins,SEBI & FIN Min has to develop an mechanism thru which either of these two is taken care of.5 pts agenda is gud & we hope if not all then atleast few of them gets implemented for the GOOD HEALTH of Industry.i wish this optimism translates into actions & hence long due growth for ALL OF US.

WE WANT ENTRY LOAD , WE WANT ENTRY LOAD, WE WANT ENTRY LOAD THATS ALL

The entry load should come back, poor distributors were giving so much service just for samll amount opf 2.25%, single check and all these are not acceptable.

Not thinking any thing "ANTI INVESTOR" is not enough. we need to focus towards something "PRO-INVESTOR"

My suggesion is that the market regulator SEBI, can very well dissolve AMFI and scrap it. Because AMFI is keen only on getting fees from ARN holders and not interested in resolving the greivance of the industry. I can very well say that this pathetic situation has come to the industry because of AMFI. RGESS can be diversified into mutual funds instead of investor directly investing in equities, which has lot of formalities.The same can be made applicable to debt funds, which will bring lot of retail investor under mutual fund. Another suggesion is that bringing back 54EA & EB for capital gains which will be alternative for 54EC

I agree with the above five points. One more suggesion add introduse A common application form. This will be reduse our cost of expenses.

I feel the main concern in our Industry is bitter experiance of existing investors. That need to be tackled on top priority. Whatever we do for generating revenue for participants , will fail again and again if we cannot convert bitter experiance of investor into better experiance. As regards exit load the view should be rational. Penalise the early and frequent exits and incentivise the longer stay. All exit loads need to be credited back in fund corpus. The upward revision in expense ratio need to be considered , to enable AMCs to cover marketing expenses also. Investor should be charged transaction charges for reimbursement to Advisor only to the extent to cover cost of transaction and cost of initial Advisory. 1% subject to maximum Rs5000 per transaction looks rational. For servicing and maintanance advisor is already getting Trail Fee that should have upward revision This can be ideal situation for all concerned and it will not leave any charm for churning also.

At least 2% upfront should be granted

we are not ifa begger give us the commission on our work upfront & more on trial basis, 2nd 0n equity fund or debt fund apply same tax tretment efforts are made on both ,if not then debt funds may become tax free after 3 yr( divedend make tax free )also gave tax rebate as bank 5 yr fd ,equity fund defination chage to 35% to 100% as per market (dynamic) safe the investor money .most important also make fund manger $fund house answerable cut & limit the expenses &salaries becuse they make us shamed ,switch between funds allowed no & tax it is neceesary to see performance & no commission on it same follo any fund debt .equity, if between funds of other fund houses kya baat , change of funds in sip,stp. sip,stp in debt funds. no exist load more than 6m to 1 yr only entry load 2 to 3%

CFP karne ki liye 13000/- fee kya jaruri hai, kya ise kam nahin kiya ja sakta hai ? education har samasya ka hal hai,kya gov.active financial advisors ke liye koi suvidha de sakti hai ?

kya central gov.financial advisor ke bachchon ko unke education fee me concession de sakti hai ? kyoki hame to 6pay commision mila nahin lekin gehu ke sath ghun ko pisa ja raha hai. aur kya family helth ko lekar koi suvidha pradan ki ja sakti hai ?

Why not we work on variable entry load in the prescribed format of charges according to the service quality Option (A) Only courier services – picking the forms from investor and processing the same with RTA. Charges- 0.50% of the fund Option (B) Need analysis and risk association based advice including services in option A – 1% of total fund Option (c) Advice with long term goal based recommendation with record keeping and monitoring tools including option A an B – 2.5% of fund investment. Opting for option B and C an advisor must be having CFA/CFP/CA/ MBA finance or minimum five years of experience in capital market. Opting for option “C” An advisor must be qualifying the requirement for option B, with a website facilitating investment history, transaction history and goal tracking tools for investor. The selection of different services in option A,B,C should be printed on the common format of application form with a signature space for the investor.

THANKS TO ALL WHO THINK ABOUT BETTERMENT OF MF INDUSTRY,HOPE ALL DISCUSS POSSITIVE ABOUT BEETER RETURN OF CLIENT& COMMISSION OF ARN HOLDER.

Yes, its a good moove taken by PRIME MINISTER and definetly a good turn for mf industry ALL THE BEST TO ALL TOP AMC PERSONS. Expecting good result from AMFI/SEBI/AMCS and finally from FINANCE MINISTRY

Strongly believe this advanced strategy. Must work upon.

Earlier method of charging entry load was the best with clubbing it in the NAV. Every thing was going fine and no body had any complaint to make. AS regards churning of funds, the investors investing in Mutual Fund are educated people and no advisor can fool them all the time. He will suspect the wrong doing if the funds are churned unnecessarily. It is said that you can fool all the people for some time and some people all the time. But, not all the people all the time. Please pursue for restoration of entry load and upfront fees. The upfront fees can be reduced to 1.5% to 2% from earlier 2.25%.

It is good initiative from Mr Singh (FM ) but as reliable body like AMFI,SEBI,Wealth forum,IFA Asso,& FM,one thing to do that to attract investor or attract young advisor like us,my self 27 years want truly advisory,we makes difficulty like petrol expense etc so have some regular income in beginning of business it is more important.

Indeed a Good opportunity to show case unanimity and devise workable solution. Keeping in mind all stake holders interest, better to stick to higher Trail commission and lower upfront and flexibility to use exit load to compensate distributors and incresed expense ratio in line with inflationary trends.

1) From 1/8/09 Entry load was banned(2.25%), from this 1/8/2012, Entry Load should be restarted (1%). Those who want to go 'DIRECT' let them go without Agent - as simple as that 2) Atleast Common Transaction Form should be designed at AMFI level.(Right now Cams have the form designed by them, but no such form designed by Karvy for their client AMC) 3)A Common Nomination Form and Common 'Multiple Bank Addition Form' should be there. Other such Request forms for Claims etc should be Common. (Without AMC names and AMC logo) which can be used for any AMC. AMFI has lot of money as Investor Education Fund.A Small % of this should be used for such Common Stationary and directly couriered to registered IFAs, CAMS and Karvy. Wastage will also be minimum. 4)Govt should direct AMFI 2 make serious efforts towards MF Utility. 5) Commission on self business be allowed

THE 5 POINTS ARE APPRICIABLE,MORE AWARENESS CAMPAIGNS FOR MUTUAL FUND INVESTMENT FROM THE FINANCE MINISTRY WILL HELP DEVELOP THE CONFIDENCE OF RETAIL INVESTOR. DISTRIBUTOR INTEREST TO BE TAKEN CARE BY THE GOVERNMENT BY CHANGE IN THE POLICY WILL HELP IN MOBILISING THE RETAIL INVESTOR TO TAKE PART IN EQUITY INVESTMENT WHICH IS THE ONLY ROOT TO BEAT INFLATION BY SMALL INVESTMENTS THROUGH MF.

Realy , Very well thought sugesstions. and it is a very welcome move after PM tookover finance portfolio. Lets hope something concrete comeout of this meeting

The ARN holder has to move from client to client irrespective of their distances & as such petrol expenses are large.Even for one investment he has to visit two to three times & then if client is convinced he invest in mutual funds.out of 10 visits the percentage of success is hardly 10%.So his petrol expences per investor goes high.Then ARN holder has to give services through the investment horison.The upfront commission paid at present after sevice tax deduction is so less that even petrol expences are recoverd hardly.Then how an ARN holder should run his family?At least 2% of investments amount should be given to the ARN holder.Nobody gives Advisory fees.Rather when we talk of advisory fees the client refuses our appointment for next visit.I shall be obliged if this problem is brought to the notice of competent Authority to revive the Mutual Fund Industry. Ranchhod Singh Pawar ARN_71843

HOWEVER WHAT EVER YOU HAVE GIVEN ARE VALID SUGGESTIONS. IF PM IMPLEMENTS ATLEAST 3 OF THESE THEN WE CAN HOPE FOR A BRIGHT FUTURE.REGARDS, SRINIVASAN - WWW.MODELEXAM.IN

I agree

Good that all this is resolved and new ideas are implimented before the AMFI and SEBI representatives come and meet 600+ IFA's at Mutual Fund Round Table Conference at bhubaneswar, Odisha on 4th and 5th Aug 2012. We all look forward for New begining and a growing MF industry. Jai Ho!

NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. LET IT BE 5 POINT AGENDA OR 10 POINT AGENDA, MF INDUSTRY WILL NOT CHANGE.IT IS GOING TO DIE SOON

Also address the issue of reducing the transaction cost for distributor and amc. IDFC has m-trasact... why can't this be done across all amcs. Technology exists but it is not made available to investor. We carry appln form to client and leave laptop at home. this will go long way in reducing the trasaction cost, delays and rejections etc. I m hopeful the meeting will be fruitful. We won't get better opportunity. I shall mark the day in my diary for years to come.

Dear Wealthforum , lets hope and work for MF revival but at the same time lets not repeat the mistakes that were done in the past, the points of increased exit load and variable entry load r not at all in the interest of investors , the NDs and banks will definitely find out ways from this to exploit the investors. rather increasing the expense ratio will be a best solution . the only challenge today is stop churning and bringing invt. for long term. Short term earnings will only create mis selling and undue churning. Bringing Rajiv Gandhi scheme under MF will really be a booster to the industry.

1) Entry load is neither unethical nor illegal and most certainly not 'anti - investor ' . Those investors who are averse to paying the entry load, can avail of the 'direct' investment route made available to them long time back. 2. For a change, how about protecting the RIGHTS of agents / advisers? & who shall stand for the legitimate rights of the MF distributors? 3. How about educating the investors regarding paying fair compensation to the advisers? 4. How much compensation will be adequate& fair? & who is to decide this quantum? 5. & if it is really about 'empowering' investors, then how about giving them the right to determine the fund management fees too. i.e. by collecting these fund management fees by way of separate cheque from the unit holders.

The suggestion given above are logical but will they be implemented. History shows that whatever reform or policy change happens in the name of the investor (though it may not benefit him) is never reverted. Secondly, one of the most important criteria is not looked at. The most vital and most irrtating aspect is the Registrar part where the Advisor is at the mercy of the Registrar and AMC do not or want to pull them up for the benefit of the advisor. the other issue is to provide cheaper alternatives to IFA or quality advisors a platform (like MF Utility proposes) so that there is little cost in transacting. That itself will push the volumes up and reduce the drag on the system. Lastly, the most important reform pending is to make CFP mandatory within a time period (2-3 years for advising). There is enough evidence in the world to see that professionalsiation of the profession benefits all including the investor. Hope my views are heard which has not been heard in many years. Ram

Excellent piece if suggestions. Hope it will be accpted by all concerned

In short - A good revenue structure towords IFA is needed to mobilise the product in the view of Carreer perspective. Trail benifit should be increase and alike other products - a norms should be there that MF investment can be done only through registered distributors.

IT SHOULD BE ONE SPEECH OF 10 AMC'S THAT COULD REVIVE THE MF INDUSTRY. TRAIL MUST GREATER THAN UPFRONT AND ELSS LOCK PERIOD 5 YEARS. _____________________________________________________________________

every service has an expense and it cannot be at anyone's behest-- here., the investor. the govt also charges service tax., we pay income tax etc so why not entry loads be reintroduced., we should get commission like before and it ws not exhorbitant. commission canbe reduced but it is almost not there now. this is not fair to us

IT SHOULD BE ONE SPEECH OF 10 AMC'S THAT COULD REVIVE THE MF INDUSTRY. TRAIL MUST GREATER THAN UPFRONT AND ELSS LOCK PERIOD 5 YEARS.

good idea

INSTEAD OF ENTRY LOAD THERE MUST BE EXIT LOAD IN SLABS IN EQUITY FUNDS. I.E. FOR FIRST SIX MONTHS 3%. ONE YEAR 1.50% 18MONTH 1% AFTER 18 MONTHS NIL. IT WILL REMUNARATE TO DISTRIBUTORS AS WELL TO INVESTORS. ALSO A INCREASE OF ABOUT 0.50% IN EXPENSE RATIO WILL COMPANSATE THE AMC.

Very well represented. I hope this time we don't waste the opportunity.

Five points considered by Wealth Forum to be put before such a High Power Authority are very comprehensive and may be accepted without directly harm to investor and provides lot of scope to AMC to pay attractive remuneration to their Distributors and increase the business volume.

to do for better

I feel, this is all because of President's Election, to be held in next couple of days

Moreover, a reasonable number of advisors(may not be a majority) are getting accustomed to/ already taking their fee, with a separate cheque.We need to take that in to consideration too.

I agree with Mr CHILUKURI K R L RAO,that increase trail commission for long term(longivity of asset) investment,otherwise again malprctice ,unnecessary switchings,will prevail. No need to impose entryload

Besides, the above points,uniform application form/transaction slip across all fund houses/schemes is the need to simplify mutual fund investments.

Very good suggestions, let us hope for the best.

Moreover, a reasonable number of advisors(may not be a majority) are getting accustomed to/ already taking their fee, with a separate cheque.We need to take that in to consideration too.

Dear Wealthforum, Points 1,2 and 3 are bang on. As long as the intent to churn/cheat is there, whatever mechanism we put in, with entry load in any form, there will be churn. The best way would be, increasing the trail to 1% or more (with longevity of assets), make it mandatory and constant across the industry. In the 5 th point, as long as the mechanism (single cheque) that we want to put in, do not restrict the amount an advisor can charge, it is a fair system. It gives the advisor a chance to charge for whatever he is worth. But, we know that unscrupulous elements can take advantage of such a freedom and it may give rise to scams (with a great loss of credibility for the industry), as in most cases, applications are not filled by the investor and not even in their presence. I believe the best way would be to keep the current system of separate cheques intact.

Its great Initiative from new FM.As there is Crisis of Inflows and more dependence on FIIs, in order to resolve this we need domestic flows and MF and Insurance money is play a vital role for mobilizing domestic long term capital that can stabilize the markets. Its a wellcome move and very optimistic about outcome of the 2nd july meeting.

This is a good step by finance ministry. And the 5 points mentioned above will help the industry in future.

The 5 points seems tobe in line with Industry wishes a stress should be made that RGEFS should happen only through Mutual Fund investments.

FinMin should impose minimum 5 yrs lock-in period for investment in ELSS mutual fund schemes instead of 3 years.

Good step by PM Manamoan Singh. Also the 5 points mentioned above would definitely bring positive changes in the industry.

At least, the initiative by PM give some eyeopener to SEBI/AMFI/FIN MINISTRY OFFICIALS. Let us pray for a good decision to be taken for the benefit of investor as well as for distributor community.

ALL THE ISSUED HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THIS VERY COMREHENSIVE, THERE IS ANOTHER ISSUE WHICH HAS BEEN BEHIND BANISHING ENTRY LOAD AND THAT WAS CHURNING. NOW THAT AMCS HAVE STARTED PAYING TRAIL ON MONTHLY BASIS, THE PAYMENT OF UPFRONT IS NOT OF MUCH USE, IF UPFRONT IS RESTRICTED & TRAIL ENHANCED THIS WILL FORCE IFAS TO STOP CHURNING AS TRAIL WILL BE MORE LUCRATIVE THIS IS MY PERSONAL VIEW GOOOOD LUCK

Very, very well said Wealth Forum.Cannot be told better. I am with you all the way. Let's all join & present a united voice.