Commerce Minister Paul Goldsmith has rejected a request from David Ross' burned investors to look into the country's claw-back regime as the first court case looms against those paid out by the fraudster.
Wellington-based Ross Asset Management cost investors around $115 million when it folded in November 2012.
Investors are likely to get only a fraction of this money back.
Ross ran the country's largest ever Ponzi scheme and was sentenced to 10 years and 10 months' jail in 2013 after admitting fraud and other charges.
The firm's liquidators, John Fisk and David Bridgman, have taken High Court action against three investors who received a payout before the collapse in an attempt to claw back money.
The first of these test cases, where millions of dollars are believed to be at stake, is due to be heard in Wellington this March.
Last year, investor spokesperson Bruce Tichbon wrote to Commerce Minister Paul Goldsmith about aspects of New Zealand's claw-back regime and asking for an inquiry to be launched.
Goldsmith said in his response that the courts were the appropriate forum for dealing with the issues raised.
While Tichbon and other members of the Ross Asset Management investor group had asked Goldsmith why New Zealand did not have a fidelity fund that could be paid out to those who lose money, the minister said such a system could incentivise risk taking.
"A fidelity fund for financial markets may sound like an appealing solution to combat losses," Goldsmith said.
"However there are some issues that would need to be carefully weighed-up if New Zealand were to consider introducing a fidelity fund. These issues include matters such as if the scheme is funded via a levy on financial market participants, as increased costs may be passed on to investors through higher management fees. Also, a fidelity fund to guard against financial loss may incentivise investors and providers to take greater investment risks with less caution," the minister said.
The liquidators' test case involves claims filed under the Companies Act over allegedly voidable transactions, which could reverse payouts from two years prior to RAM's collapse if it is proven the company was insolvent at the time.
Another aspect of the recovery action is under the Property Law Act, which has the ability to look at transactions up to six years' old.
Goldsmith said in his letter to Tichbon that he was awaiting the outcome of the case with interest.
Ross investors, who paid tax on what turned out to be fictitious returns, have been told they will only receive a fraction of money back and are launching a legal challenge over this, Radio New Zealand has reported.