Why regulators are cracking down on finfluencers

As one of Asia's most popular financial bloggers, Singapore-based Dawn Cher loves connecting with her 34,000-odd followers via social media platforms.

The 30-something content creator, who started posting 12 years ago, can now proudly reflect on her role in educating people on budget, investment and wealth-management topics while drawing from her own personal experiences.

“I was in uncharted territory back then because it was not common in Asia to talk about finances or even your salary,” Cher says. “Today it is different and I would like to think the reach of my posts contributed to more financial transparency.”

Cher is conscious that she is not a licensed financial adviser, and so treads a fine line between providing financial education and advice. Although platforms such as TikTok, Instagram and YouTube have enabled many to carve out niches as finfluencers, the trend has created concerns that consumers can be exposed to misleading, inaccurate or inappropriate financial content.

Amid a global regulatory crackdown on unqualified or unethical influencers, Cher tries to stick to two golden rules with her content.

First, she resists the temptation to tell her audience what assets they should buy and sell. Second, she focuses on educating her followers — whether it is about exchange-traded funds (ETFs) or cash-investment strategies — in a way that leaves viewers to make their own choices.

“You have to be educating people how to be smarter about their finances without giving specific financial advice,” Cher says.

To stay on track, she engages in regular discussions with compliance teams in licensed financial institutions and was in consultation with the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) on rules and protocols.

This follows MAS’s ruling that Singaporean content creators must be regulated under the Finance Advisers Act 2001 (SG) if they are giving financial advice, as well as guidelines on promotional or sponsored content.

Cher welcomes clearer guidelines, saying they can help her manage the expectations of followers and distinguish her from less-responsible finfluencers.

A global approach

Cher’s approach sits apart from unqualified finfluencers who post financial advice content on social media for profit without the licensing or regulatory obligations that govern professional advice. Without these guardrails, which typically include the need to assess a client’s full financial situation, this content can lead consumers to poor and potentially disastrous investment decisions.

In April 2026, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) joined in a second Global Week of Action Against Unlawful Finfluencers campaign, alongside regulators from 16 other regions including Hong Kong, India, Singapore and New Zealand.

The Australian regulator subsequently issued warnings to four influencers suspected of providing unlicensed advice or making misleading claims, including promises of guaranteed returns.

ASIC has also reviewed how licensed financial-services businesses are supervising finfluencers who are operating as authorised representatives, reminding them of their supervisory responsibilities.

ASIC commissioner Alan Kirkland says it is true that people can get useful financial information from social media, “but we have got really clear laws in Australia saying that if you are giving financial advice, you have got to be appropriately licensed or authorised,” he says.

 

"[Finfluencers] have to be educating people how to be smarter about their finances without giving specific financial advice."

 

Kirkland’s concerns come on the back of ASIC’s recent research from its financial information website, Moneysmart, which shows that 63 per cent of Gen Z Australians (currently aged 16 to 30) trust social media for financial information. More than half say they somewhat or completely trust financial information from finfluencers.

For its part, ASIC is constantly monitoring finfluencing activity on social media and acting on tip-offs from the from the public, as well as finance and accounting firms, about potentially unethical finfluencers.

Kirkland believes the scope of the international crackdown across regulators from the Asia-Pacific region, North America, Europe, the UK, South America and the Middle East is a possible game changer because in the past individual regulators have struggled to identify and punish finfluencers from outside their specific jurisdiction.

“The message is intended to be: wherever you may be in the world, you cannot escape the law,” Kirkland says.

In the past year, the global crackdown has resulted in a combination of arrests and criminal proceedings, issuance of cease-and-desist letters to influencers, and 650 social media take-down requests.

Regulatory breaches aside, some commentators argue that finfluencers have a legitimate role to play in educating and inspiring people to budget better, invest wisely and participate in financial markets.

Dr Akshaya Kamalnath, an associate professor at Australian National University Law School, argues that regulation should address the darker side of finfluencing without stifling its potential benefits. Social media can engage audiences in ways that traditional financial advice often cannot, she says. “It is more along the lines of, ‘This is fun and interesting, I am watching it’. The next step is, ‘OK, let me also do this’.”

Her research shows that finfluencing has had distinct effects in South Korea and India. In South Korea, it has helped mobilise a mature retail-investor base into shareholder activism and corporate governance. In India, it has primarily expanded financial education and inclusion, particularly through local-language content, although concerns remain about political influence.

Kamalnath also believes finfluencers can help overcome issues that have historically limited the influence of retail investors. By bringing people together around particular companies or investment ideas, they can encourage individuals to become shareholders for the first time, contributing to financial inclusion and education. In this sense, she contends that finfluencers are “democratising capital markets” and “reclaiming capitalism”.

While older generations may be sceptical about taking financial advice from social media, Kamalnath says younger people approach it differently as “they are digital natives”.

Cher agrees that finfluencers can have a legitimate social benefit in making financial education accessible, engaging and free. Traditional financial advice can be expensive and intimidating, particularly for younger people or those with relatively small amounts to invest.

She says responsible finfluencers can explain financial concepts in accessible language and encourage people to take greater control of their futures.

“It is actually the non-finance people who can make learning about finance easier,” Cher says.

Getting the balance right

So, how can consumers be protected without stifling financial literacy and innovation?

In assessing the risks of following financial influencers, ASIC itself notes that they can provide factual and useful information, provided they do not cross the line into recommendations or misleading representations. “We do acknowledge that it can sometimes be challenging for people to obtain financial advice,” Kirkland says.

One way that ASIC seeks to “step into the gap” between finfluencers and licensed financial advisers is through the provision of trusted information through Moneysmart. The regulator is also ramping up its own social media presence.

“We are increasingly engaging in short video content on platforms such as Instagram about common money topics in order to make sure people have got access to information they can trust.”

Phil Anderson, general manager of policy advocacy and standards at Financial Advice Association Australia (FAAA), says there is clearly a place for the dissemination of financial information by commentators on social media.

“To the extent that it helps educate people to understand finance and to think clearly about the financial decisions that they need to make, then it can play a positive role.

However, it is very easy for people to cross the line.”

Anderson says the FAAA “strongly discourages” people from making decisions based purely upon their interaction with finfluencers. “You do not know what their incentives are or what their motives are. That is not the basis on which to be making important decisions about financial products.”

However, if engagement with finfluencers encourages people to think more deeply about their own finances — such as understanding salary sacrificing into superannuation, accessing a superannuation pension after age 60, or learning about basic tax issues — then Anderson believes it can be advantageous. “There is a lot that people can gain from being exposed to information that is helpful and constructive.”

The education of consumers is key to making them aware of potential risks from finfluencers with “ulterior motives”, he continues, or those who are being remunerated in ways that are not clearly understood.

Citing the recent collapse of two large investment funds that cost roughly 11,000 Australian investors around A$1.1 billion in retirement savings, Anderson also advocates for broader financial literacy for the community so they can make better-informed financial decisions.

 

"To the extent that it helps educate people to understand finance and to think clearly about the financial decisions that they need to make, then [finfluencers] can play a positive role. However, it is very easy for people to cross the line."

 

“In many cases, people had 90 per cent of their superannuation in one investment option,” he says. “A lack of financial literacy was a big factor in customers not understanding that having 90 per cent of your money in one fund was an unacceptable risk.”

As governments and regulators ponder solutions to any negative impacts of financial influencers, Kamalnath says it is clear from India’s experience that simply banning finfluencers does not work. “There is no way you can. You might catch someone and target that one person, but you cannot know everything that is going on with social media.”

She favours Australia’s approach of building awareness among finfluencers that they will need an Australian financial services licence if their content crosses the line between education and advice. “It helps separate people who are actually doing good versus people who are wanting to engage in some sort of swindle.”

Kamalnath believes social media companies should also play their part in the education process — for example, implementing automatic pop-up warnings or education for online users whenever they engage with finfluencer content. “We need creative solutions,” she says.

Stay vigilant

As the rise of AI makes it even easier for bad actors to mobilise online, Kirkland says greater vigilance is required.

ASIC and other regulators are using technology to identify dubious influencers and other harmful online behaviour.

“Every day at ASIC, we are using AI to analyse all of the intelligence that is coming to us and identifying patterns or people that are popping up repeatedly, which might require us to take action,” Kirkland says.

As for Cher, she maintains that content creators are merely contributing to greater financial literacy and opening channels for people to get more sophisticated advice from licensed advisers. “We are the bridge between the finance professionals and the people on the street.”

 

_{Production credit
Banner image JuSun/E+ via Getty Images}