20th August 2025

Should Paraplanners Be More Formally Recognised by the FCA?

We recently ran an industry survey asking a simple but important question: Should paraplanners be more formally recognised by the FCA?

The findings reveal some striking differences in how paraplanners, advisers, compliance professionals, and business owners view the role of paraplanners when it comes to FCA recognition, regulatory oversight, and qualifications. 

Recognition - divided views 

The survey showed that in-house paraplanners are more open to the idea of recognition, with only 30% opposing it. By contrast, outsourced paraplanners were unanimous in their opposition, with 100% saying they did not support it. Advisers leaned the other way, with 56% supporting inclusion in the FCA Directory as a form of formal recognition. 

Oversight – benefit or burden?

When asked whether increased regulatory oversight would improve client outcomes, the split widened further.

• Outsourced paraplanners (100%) said oversight would add cost and complexity without improving outcomes.
• In-house paraplanners were less concerned, with 30% sharing that view.
• Business owners were much more cautious, with 57% in both in-house and outsourced contexts highlighting cost and complexity as the likely outcome.
• Advisers were divided: 44% believed oversight would significantly improve outcomes, while 56% warned it would increase costs and administration. 

Professional elevation 

For some, regulation could help raise the status of paraplanning as a profession in its own right. 70% of in-house paraplanners and 56% of advisers said formalisation would help elevate the role. But once again, outsourced paraplanners were unconvinced, with none seeing it as a route to professional recognition.

Qualifications – how far should standards go?

The question of qualifications also revealed differing expectations:

• 50% of in-house paraplanners said parity with advisers isn’t necessary, though 40% favoured full alignment.
• 57% of business owners and 50% of compliance professionals were in favour of parity.
• Advisers (56%) mostly supported a conditional approach: alignment should apply only if paraplanners are producing reports used in regulated advice.

What does this mean for the profession?

The survey suggests that advisers and in-house paraplanners lean towards a more structured and regulated role for paraplanners. In contrast, business owners and outsourced paraplanners (who are often business owners themselves) are more likely to resist, prioritising flexibility, cost control, and minimising administration.

Overall, nearly half of respondents (47%) believe paraplanners should be more formally recognised by the FCA. While opinions remain divided, this highlights a strong appetite for change among many in the profession. If the paraplanner profession wants to evolve and be seen at a more professional level, then it stands to reason that it should be more formally recognised.

Paraplanning, Business Development