---
title: "Draft or review a target-market determination under Part 7.8A"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/financial-services-regulation/draft-or-review-a-target-market-determination-for-a-financial-product/commonwealth"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A28-T1-R7-CTH"
practice_area: "Financial Services Regulation (AFSL/ASIC/credit)"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["CTH"]
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# Draft or review a target-market determination under Part 7.8A

> Produce a first-draft TMD from the product terms and distribution channels, or compare an existing TMD to ASIC RG 274.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/financial-services-regulation/draft-or-review-a-target-market-determination-for-a-financial-product/commonwealth  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Financial Services Regulation (AFSL/ASIC/credit)](https://ailawframework.com/practice/financial-services-regulation.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | Produce a first-draft TMD from the product terms and distribution channels, or compare an existing TMD to ASIC RG 274. |
| What the lawyer must review | Reject an 'everyone' market Make review triggers product-specific and distribution conditions workable and enforceable Apply RG 274 as issued 10 September 2024 Decide yourself whether the product design fits |
| Written for | Commonwealth |
| Applies to | [Draft or review a target-market determination for a financial product](https://ailawframework.com/practice/financial-services-regulation/draft-or-review-a-target-market-determination-for-a-financial-product.md) |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer-led judgement**

The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes preparing preliminary structure or wording and identifying points for review. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.
- Restriction: The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
2. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*