Mr Lipkin admitted the issue of how to disclose implicit costs was a “real sticking point”, but said the framework would eventually incorporate whichever definition was decided on by regulators, despite the IA having its own view on the best method.
"This is a genuine consultation," he added. "The message from us is that it is essential for the industry not to impose a framework on clients and stakeholders."
Mr Godfrey added: "This disclosure code has been in gestation for a long time so my guess is it will command a broad range of support across the industry, consumer groups and regulators."
The breaking down of OCFs:
Fundhouse’s Rory Maguire said one issue he would take up with the IA was its disclosure of the components of the ongoing charges figure (OCF).
Mr Maguire said the draft disclosure code document did not do enough to separate out the components of the OCF, which he said was a problem because different firms bundle different charges into their OCFs.
He said: “Two funds may both have an AMC of 0.5 per cent, but one may have an OCF of 0.55 per cent and the other will have an OCF of 0.75 per cent.
“Part of the reason is that some managers charge for administration [within the OCF] and others do not.”
The IA’s Jonathan Lipkin said the cost disclosure code merely reflected the current definition of the OCF, but said it could be adapted depending on the outcome of the FCA’s market study, which will include an assessment of the relevance and use of the OCF.
