The bill amends the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 and the Financial Markets Authority Act 2011 to centralise and sharpen FMA oversight, modernise public inspection of registries and records, and change the legal treatment of climate statements. It introduces a mandatory FMA approval pathway for transactions that would give a person significant influence over licensed market‑service providers or authorised bodies and for significant transactions and amalgamations, while providing reporting obligations for overseas licensees and bodies.
Separately, the bill updates definitions and record‑keeping rules to permit electronic and cross‑border registers (with notification duties), adds on‑site inspection and compulsory questioning powers to the FMA Act, and carves out certain liability for unsubstantiated‑representation claims in respect of climate statements prepared in accordance with applicable climate standards or a specified exemption. The package shifts enforcement posture (more ex‑ante clearance and oversight, more published reasoning for notices) and recalibrates which entities must prepare climate and financial reports by changing thresholds and procedural requirements.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires FMA approval (or timely notification for overseas entities) before taking effect on changes that would produce significant influence, enter into a significant transaction, or result in amalgamation of a licensee or authorised body. It also modernises inspection and register rules to allow internet inspection and cross‑jurisdictional record locations, and expands FMA investigatory tools with on‑site inspection and compelled answers. Separately, it limits the reach of the unsubstantiated‑representations prohibition for climate statements that follow applicable climate standards or covered exemptions.
Who It Affects
Directly affected are holders of market services licences and authorised bodies, their investors, prospective acquirers and controllers, overseas firms in the New Zealand market, listed issuers and FMC reporting entities required to keep public registers, and entities that prepare climate‑related disclosures and their assurance providers. The FMA and Reserve Bank are involved operationally in approvals and consultations.
Why It Matters
The approvals regime puts the FMA into a gatekeeping role over changes in ownership/control and large corporate transactions affecting market services — potentially slowing or conditioning deals but giving regulators earlier control to protect market integrity. Digitalisation of registers modernises public access but raises cross‑border recordkeeping questions. The climate carve‑out shifts legal risk away from a broad misrepresentation prohibition toward compliance with defined climate standards and exemptions, changing where assurance and legal focus will fall.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill does three things that materially change how market participants will interact with regulators and the public: it creates an FMA pre‑approval regime for changes of control and material transactions; it modernises how registers and records are kept and inspected; and it narrows the unsubstantiated‑representations prohibition for climate statements that comply with specified standards or exemptions.
On control and transactions, the bill adds a new subpart that requires a person to obtain FMA approval before giving effect to a transaction that would give them significant influence over a licensee or authorised body, and requires licensees/authorised bodies to obtain FMA approval before entering into significant transactions or amalgamating. The regime defines “significant influence” by reference to powers over voting rights or director appointments and allows the FMA to impose conditions, consult the Reserve Bank for regulated entities, and arrange independent reports.
For overseas licensees and authorised bodies, the bill provides a notice requirement rather than pre‑approval; those entities must notify the FMA within a set period after becoming aware of a change in significant influence or after an amalgamation.On registers and records, the bill removes the old paper‑first presumption: interests registers and registers of regulated products may be electronic, maintained overseas where regulations permit, and must be available for inspection either at a notified place in New Zealand or on a relevant internet site maintained by or on behalf of the issuer. Issuers and listed issuers must notify the FMA of where registers are available and of changes within a short window after establishment or change.
For accounting and CRD records, the bill permits inspection via internet sites or electronic delivery on request.On climate and disclosure, the bill inserts an explicit rule that the general prohibition against unsubstantiated representations does not apply to climate statements prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with applicable climate standards or under a Part 9 exemption. It also pares back several Part 7A requirements: raising thresholds for some “large” entity tests, removing certain director‑signature formalities, repealing and consolidating some climate reporting provisions, and reallocating which offences and director defences apply.
Throughout the Act, the bill increases transparency by requiring the FMA to publish reasons whenever it issues notices, grants exemptions, or makes declarations, and to treat many such instruments as secondary legislation with attendant publication requirements.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Significant influence is defined by the bill as the power to exercise (or control) 25% or more of voting rights or the power to appoint 50% or more of directors (either alone or together with specified persons).
An overseas licensee or authorised body must give written notice to the FMA within 20 working days after it becomes aware that a person has obtained significant influence, and must notify the FMA within 20 working days of an amalgamation taking effect.
The FMA must give notice of its approval decision to applicants within 20 working days after receiving all the information it reasonably requires and any reports it arranges; approvals may be unconditional or subject to conditions (including licence‑condition variations that take effect only if the change happens).
Issuers and listed issuers must notify the FMA—within 10 working days after a register is established or after relevant changes—of the physical place and/or the URL where a register is available for inspection; registers must be available at reasonable internet times or at a notified place in New Zealand. , The FMA gains a new on‑site inspection power: it may enter a participant’s business premises (excluding dwellinghouses and marae) without prior notice, require employees/directors/agents to answer questions and supply documents, and continue exercising those powers without obtaining a search warrant if it finds evidence of a contravention.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Broader FMC product definition and new overseas‑person terms
The bill replaces the former ‘financial advice product’ term with an expanded ‘FMC product’, explicitly listing examples (financial products, DIMS facilities, contracts of insurance, consumer credit contracts) and permitting regulations to declare other items FMC products. It also adds definitions for overseas person/overseas licensee/overseas authorised body and clarifies that price includes indirect consideration. Practically, this broadens the statutory perimeter for duties and disclosure obligations and makes it easier for regulations to bring additional products into the FMC regime.
Unsubstantiated‑representations prohibition carved out for compliant climate statements
Section 26A says section 23’s prohibition on unsubstantiated representations does not apply to climate statements that are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with applicable climate standards or under a Part 9 exemption. The provision applies whether the climate statements are required by Part 7A or voluntarily prepared, and it cross‑references the Financial Reporting Act where necessary for entities that are not formal climate reporting entities. This shifts the legal test for misrepresentation away from broad advertising‑style claims to conformity with specified standards or an exemption regime.
FMA approval required for changes of control, significant transactions, and amalgamations
The new subpart requires pre‑approval by the FMA for transactions that would produce significant influence, for entering significant transactions, and for amalgamations involving licensees or authorised bodies, with a parallel notification regime for overseas licensees/bodies. The subpart sets out definitions, requires applicants to provide information (and to cooperate with any external report the FMA commissions), requires the FMA to consider whether statutory licensing requirements will continue to be met, allows conditions (including licence condition changes) to be imposed, and mandates consultation with the Reserve Bank for regulated entities. Notably, failure to obtain approval does not invalidate the underlying change but may attract civil liability under the Act’s enforcement subparts.
Digital inspection, cross‑jurisdictional hosting, and notification duties
The bill removes some antiquated inspection procedures and replaces them with a digital‑first model: registers may be inspected on a notified internet site or at a notified place in New Zealand, and relevant internet sites must be maintained by or on behalf of the issuer (or have a prominent link). Issuers and listed issuers must notify the FMA of the inspection place/URL and of changes within 10 working days. The amendments also expand the locations where registers and interests registers may be physically kept (including Australia and other jurisdictions prescribed by regulation) and make electronic registers an explicit option.
New powers to enter business premises, compel answers, and continue without a search warrant
The Financial Markets Authority Act gains an express, purpose‑driven on‑site inspection power permitting entry to ‘relevant places’ (business premises, excluding dwellinghouses and marae) to assess compliance, verify information, and examine business operations. The FMA may require employees, directors, or agents to answer questions and supply documents during the inspection. If the FMA uncovers evidence of a contravention during an inspection, it may continue its inspection activities without first obtaining a search warrant. The bill limits exercise to reasonable times and manner but removes a prior notice requirement.
Narrowing of reporting duties, higher size thresholds, and procedural streamlining
The bill adjusts the climate‑related disclosure regime in several ways: it raises some size thresholds for listed issuers and New Zealand business thresholds (for example, replacing a $60 million test with a higher figure to be set in the text — see five‑thing specifics for numerical triggers), removes some director‑signature formalities for climate statements, repeals selected Part 7A sections and examples, amends assurance references to a consolidated section, and creates a regulation pathway to adjust monetary thresholds by Order in Council subject to consultation and a three‑year limit on increases. Collectively, these changes narrow the number of entities captured and simplify certain procedural requirements.
FMA must publish reasons and several instruments treated as secondary legislation
Across multiple amendments, whenever the FMA issues notices, grants exemptions, makes declarations, or specifies frameworks, the bill requires the FMA to publish its reasons explaining why the notice/exemption/declaration is appropriate. The bill also declares many of those instruments to be secondary legislation, which imports the Legislation Act’s requirements for publication and enhances transparency and parliamentary scrutiny of routine FMA regulatory instruments.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Finance across all five countries.
Explore Finance in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Climate reporting entities and entities voluntarily preparing climate statements — the bill removes the automatic application of the unsubstantiated‑representations prohibition to climate statements that comply with applicable climate standards or a granted exemption, reducing exposure to broad misrepresentation claims if they follow specified standards.
- Issuers and listed issuers — clearer, electronic inspection routes and permission to host registers in prescribed overseas jurisdictions can reduce physical administrative burden and modernise investor access; the notice regime creates a predictable, short‑window administrative step.
- The FMA and Reserve Bank — the FMA gains an explicit gatekeeping role over control changes and large transactions and greater investigatory tools (on‑site inspection and compelled answers); the Reserve Bank receives a formal consultative role for regulated entities, improving regulatory coordination.
- Managers of schemes with separate funds — the bill creates a narrow pathway under which registered schemes consisting only of separate funds may not be required to prepare scheme financial statements, reducing duplicate reporting for certain fund structures.
- Some restricted schemes using a sole corporate trustee — section 131A partially disapplies an independence requirement in circumstances where a licensed independent trustee also sits as director of a sole corporate trustee for other restricted schemes, reducing governance friction for those structures.
Who Bears the Cost
- Licensees and authorised bodies and prospective acquirers — new pre‑approval obligations, the possibility of conditions, and the need to supply information (including to an FMA‑commissioned report writer) increase transaction costs and timelines for ownership changes, M&A, and amalgamations.
- Overseas licensees and overseas authorised bodies — they must meet new notification duties and face the administrative and potential civil liability consequences of failing to notify; cross‑border business may require new governance procedures to capture and report changes.
- Issuers and listed issuers — maintaining and securing internet‑accessible registers, complying with 10‑working‑day notification windows, and adapting to cross‑jurisdictional storage rules impose IT, legal, and operational costs.
- Assurance practitioners and in‑house compliance teams for climate reporting entities — although the misrepresentation exposure narrows, reliance on ‘applicable climate standards’ shifts risk onto those who prepare and assure statements, likely increasing assurance and legal advice demand.
- The FMA and Reserve Bank — the new approval and inspection functions and publication duties increase resourcing and process burdens, including responsibility for arranging independent reports and managing decision timetables.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between regulatory foresight and market fluidity: the bill strengthens ex‑ante regulatory control and investigative reach to protect market integrity and transparency, but in doing so it creates transaction friction, concentrates legal uncertainty around climate statements on a standards test, and shifts operational burdens (and litigation risk) onto firms and assurance providers — a trade‑off between preventing harm and preserving commercial agility.
The bill creates meaningful trade‑offs that implementation will have to manage. First, the pre‑approval regime gives regulators early control over changes in ownership and major transactions involving market‑service providers, but it does so at the price of added friction and potential delay for legitimate commercial transactions.
The statute softens that friction somewhat by providing that transactions done without approval are not invalidated, but it converts the failure to obtain approval into a regulatory and civil‑liability risk — a less transparent and potentially retrospective enforcement posture that could chill deals. The practical effect will depend on how the FMA applies the ‘satisfied that’ licensing tests in practice and how onerous any imposed conditions are.
Second, carving the unsubstantiated‑representations prohibition away from climate statements if they comply with ‘applicable climate standards’ reduces exposure to advertising‑style claims but concentrates litigation and regulatory scrutiny on what those standards are and what “in all material respects” means. The bill leans on existing standards and a exemptions framework, but those standards can differ across jurisdictions and evolve quickly; firms and advisers will face hard questions about which standard they followed, whether adaptations for non‑reporting entities were appropriate, and whether assurance was sufficient.
That risk shift may increase demand for high‑quality assurance, but it also introduces legal uncertainty during the transition.
Third, opening registers to electronic inspection and permitting storage in prescribed overseas jurisdictions modernises access but raises practical compliance and data‑governance questions: regulators and market participants will need clear rules on retention, cross‑border discovery, tax and balance‑date alignment issues, and how to reconcile local accounting/regulatory constraints (for example, where a foreign subsidiary cannot change its balance date). Finally, the FMA’s new on‑site powers (including continuing an inspection without a search warrant after discovering evidence) are operationally powerful but legally sensitive; excluding dwellings and marae recognises cultural and privacy boundaries, but the potential for intrusive inspections will require careful guidelines and resource commitments to avoid overreach.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.