1. Would this proposal mean that Chartered Wealth Managers would be offered a simplified pathway to becoming Certified Financial Planner^CM Professionals?

IFP: No. The only route to becoming a CFP professional will remain the examination and case study route which is currently in place and is approved by the Financial Planning Standards Board.

2. How can it be credible for a CFP professional to suddenly become a Chartered Wealth Manager just by passing an online ethics test?

IFP: As a Chartered organisation the CISI is able to award the Chartered Wealth Manager title. The CISI has the power to grant more than one route to obtaining a title. Historically there were other qualification routes, but at the moment the only route is the Chartered Wealth Manager qualification.

What we are discussing here is the recognition of IFP members at the appropriate CISI membership level. If the proposed merger goes ahead then two assessment routes to being awarded the Chartered Wealth Manager title will be available, either the Certified Financial Planner professional assessment route, or the Chartered Wealth Manager qualification route. Both are difficult to achieve with a rigorous criteria to meet, and both would require the ‘integrity matters’ ethics test to be passed.

3. Why is the IFP Board recommending a merger with CISI rather than any other body?

IFP: Based on the criteria we developed it became very clear to us that the CISI was the preferred partner for the IFP as they would be able to deliver on all of our requirements. Once we started the conversation with CISI and discovered they had identified Financial Planning as a strategic need themselves the partnership conversations started in earnest.

In summarising a long and exhaustive process, the CISI became our preferred partner due to the strong brand and cultural fit, a commitment to and recognition of the importance of true Financial Planning, acceptability to FPSB in continuing the CFP certification licence, and a strong base for Financial Planning growth.

It became clear from our analysis that the IFP had a distinct choice; to choose to partner with a competitor already established in the marketplace, delivering ‘similar’ services to the same audience or to choose a complementary partner, one that understands the importance of CFP certification, who can broaden the audience for its services and who can open a network of new professionals for membership growth.

This is the route to a key goal for the board which is that more consumers would be able to gain access to comprehensive Financial Planning service delivered by appropriately qualified and skilled individuals and firms.

4. What is the role and position of the FPSB as regards the proposed merger with CISI?

IFP: The FPSB supports the IFP and we would of course engage them in any process such as this where we would have to reassure members that the FPSB would continue to support the delivery of CFP certification. The FPSB have fully supported the discussions with CISI.

We haven’t asked them if they would support a merger with any other party because we identified the CISI as the preferred partner and they agreed that the CISI offered great opportunities to grow Financial Planning.

5. Would it mean a greater focus on active investment strategies as opposed to passive?

IFP: IFP members are aligned around Financial Planning principles rather than investment specifics. The IFP itself has always been agnostic to which particular investment solution is followed by members and this would continue to be the case. While many IFP members include the use of passive investment strategies it must also be noted that according to the last survey we completed c.70% of members do use active investment solutions.

Therefore the IFP committee overseeing the Professional Forum will maintain a focus on Financial Planning, with investment decisions left to the firms and individual members themselves. The Financial Planning focused events, qualifications and designations will all continue in the same vein, including the IFP’s flagship Annual Conference and the well-established Paraplanner Conference.

One of the reasons that the CISI have a commitment to Financial Planning is that there is demand from their traditional members to build Financial Planning skills and capabilities and so we hope to be able to influence all existing members of the CISI and ensure that all viewpoints are heard.

6. Why does the IFP need to consider a merger? Can’t we just stay as we are?

IFP: The IFP Board strategy is led by the strategic mission which has always been to ‘grow the profession of Financial Planning in the UK for the benefit of consumers’. The strategic review completed in 2014 concluded that we needed to accelerate momentum from organic growth in order to deliver the mission.

With environmental changes including RDR and pensions freedoms, allowing more consumers access to real Financial Planning is more important than ever. The Board has looked for an option that delivers growth with integrity and believes that the merger with CISI provides the best opportunity available.

While the IFP is growing stronger financially and has record levels of P&L and cash reserves, these aren’t projected to be at the levels that allow for significant investment in growth for several years.

The reality is that a substantial proportion of the IFP’s income comes from exhibitors and sponsors, which means that developments such as the FCA’s inducements paper in 2014 can put a significant strain on finances. The IFP remains one of the best kept secrets in the industry and while many members have found us over the years, we can support many more but only if they get to hear about us.

7. How would the culture and focus on Financial Planning be developed under the proposed new structure of a CISI/IFP merger?

IFP: The Financial Planning community thrives on sharing ideas and networking. This would be maintained. Opportunities for networking at branch meetings and conferences would remain, plus there would be further opportunities to meet other professionals who are existing CISI members through the CISI’s other professional forums.

The IFP Board would drive the strategy of the IFP Financial Planning Forum ensuring the commitment to and focus on Financial Planning. With the greater resources that would be available from the new structure, there would be the opportunity for a stronger voice leading to raised awareness of the benefits of a comprehensive financial planning service.

8. Has the proposed merger been driven by financial considerations?

IFP: The IFP is in its strongest ever financial position, however we are still building reserves and are therefore not able to invest as much in growth as we would like.

IFP's current financial position was highlighted on 5 August 2015 when releasing positive financial results for 2014. It has P&L reserves of over £132,000 and reported a profit of over £40,000 which was in line with expectations.

It currently holds more cash than the £370,000 reported in the 2014 accounts. The only financial consideration has been to increase the resources available to invest in growth.