If you work anywhere near financial advice, you’ll know the feeling.

You open your inbox, skim a few FCA updates, and immediately wonder whether you should make a coffee first… or lie down.

Regulation rarely arrives in one neat package. It tends to come in waves. A blog here, a consultation there, a press release about something that initially feels unrelated, until you realise it probably isn’t.

Over the past couple of weeks there have been a few developments worth keeping on the radar. None of them radically change how advice works overnight, but together they say quite a lot about the direction the regulator is heading.

And, as paraplanners, advisers and advice teams, that direction matters.

 

Targeted support: a new middle ground

One of the more interesting announcements is that firms can now apply for permission to provide targeted support.

This is part of the FCA’s ongoing work to address the so-called “advice gap”. The reality is that millions of people need some level of guidance but won’t necessarily engage with full regulated advice.

Targeted support sits somewhere in the middle. Not generic guidance. Not full personal advice either. Instead, it allows firms to provide suggestions based on specific customer characteristics, without needing the full advice process.

On paper, that sounds sensible. In practice, it raises some fairly big questions.

Where exactly is the line between targeted support and advice?

How much data do you need before making a suggestion?

And perhaps most importantly, how do you evidence that what you’ve done still delivers good outcomes?

From a paraplanning perspective, this will likely create more conversations internally. If firms start offering targeted support models, someone still needs to think carefully about the logic behind those recommendations and how they are documented.

Consumer Duty hasn’t gone anywhere, and the regulator will expect firms to evidence the reasoning behind their approach.

So although this initiative is designed to broaden access to help, it won’t necessarily make life simpler from a governance point of view.

 

The influencer fines (yes, really)

Another headline that caught a lot of attention recently was the FCA fining several social media influencers for promoting financial products without proper authorisation.

For most regulated advice firms, this might feel like it belongs to a completely different world. We’re used to compliance approvals, clear financial promotions processes, and careful wording.

But this story highlights something bigger.

Financial promotions rules apply regardless of platform. Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, LinkedIn… the regulator doesn’t really care where the content appears. The same standards apply.

In a strange way, it’s a reminder of how structured the advice profession actually is.

Most advice firms have robust sign-off processes for marketing, promotions, and client communications. It can feel frustrating sometimes when wording gets debated endlessly, but the alternative is the Wild West.

And that rarely ends well.

 

Fair value still means what it says

The FCA also published a blog clarifying what it means when it talks about fair value.

If you’ve spent any time dealing with Consumer Duty implementation, you’ll know this phrase has become a regular part of the industry vocabulary.

But the FCA’s message was essentially this: fair value isn’t just about price.

It’s about the overall relationship between cost and benefit.

That includes things like:

• product design • charges and fees • customer support • distribution channels • and whether the product actually meets the needs of the target market

For advisers and paraplanners, this isn’t entirely new thinking. Suitability assessments have always required a holistic view.

But the FCA is clearly reinforcing that firms need to demonstrate how value is delivered, not simply assume it.

Which, in practical terms, means documentation matters. The reasoning behind recommendations matters. The audit trail matters.

In other words, the same things that good advice teams have been quietly focusing on for years.

 

Credit file gaps and borrower visibility

One slightly less discussed update relates to proposals aimed at closing gaps in borrowers’ credit files.

The FCA is exploring ways to improve how information about consumer borrowing is reported and shared between credit reference agencies.

At first glance, this might feel more relevant to lenders than advisers.

But for anyone involved in holistic financial planning, it’s a reminder of how important accurate client data really is.

When advisers assess affordability, debt management, or mortgage strategy, they rely on the information available.

If that information is incomplete, the advice framework becomes harder to build with confidence.

Better credit reporting might sound technical, but the real goal is simple. More accurate data leads to better decisions.

 

What this all says about the direction of travel

None of these developments, taken individually, will transform advice firms overnight.

But collectively they point to a theme that has been consistent for a while now.

The regulator wants three things:

Better outcomes Clearer accountability Stronger evidence

Not necessarily more paperwork. Just better reasoning behind decisions.

For paraplanners and advice teams, that actually aligns quite closely with the work we already do.

A large part of paraplanning has always been about translating client objectives, technical analysis, and regulatory requirements into something coherent and defensible.

In other words, making sure the logic holds together.

Sometimes regulation gets framed as an obstacle. And yes, it can occasionally feel that way.

But when you strip it back, most of the FCA’s direction of travel is simply asking firms to prove that the advice they deliver genuinely serves the client.

Which, if we’re honest, is exactly what most people in this profession were trying to do anyway.