Displaying items by tag: best interest

(New York)

The fiduciary rule has been dead for about six months now—much to the delight of most advisors. However, in what we feel was an inevitable development, the rule is starting to make a comeback. With the new SEC best interest rule getting a lot of negative feedback from all sides, it seemed very likely that states would take matters into their own hands and development states-level fiduciary rules. That is exactly what is happening. New Jersey is now working on a fiduciary rule of its own and it seems likely many other states will follow suit. If that transpires, advisors could face a patchwork of national rules that would make compliance a nightmare.

FINSUM: This was inevitable. States feel like the SEC’s rule is not as rigorous in its protections as the DOL rule was, and thus they feel they need to take matters into their own hands.

(Washington)

Brokers pay attention—a major loophole in the SEC’s best interest rule has just become apparent. One of the industry’s big complaints about the BI rule has been that it seeks to govern the use of the “advisor” title. Well, until now it seems that everyone had missed a key loophole in the rule. When the SEC drafted it, it allowed for dually-registered advisors/B-Ds to call themselves advisors even when they are carrying on brokerage business. 61% of registered reps work at dually-registered firms, meaning this aspect of the rule is mostly a moot point for the majority of advisors. According to Michael Kitces, famed advisor and wealth management commentator, “The rule literally doesn’t apply to most advisers”.

FINSUM: This is one of those bombshell realizations that seems to happen when a new rule is 1,000+ pages long—you miss things.

(Washington)

Advisors, don’t hold your breath. Despite widespread criticism from basically every side of the equation, it appears unlikely the SEC is going to do much to correct the major flaws in its current Best Interest Rule. Barbara Roper of the CFA, says that she is “not at all confident” the SEC will make any meaningful changes to the rule “to better protect investors”, pointing out that the SEC had every chance to improve on the DOL rule, but didn’t. “It’s hard to believe that they are going to have a sudden conversion and fix the problems now”, she says.

FINSUM: Brokers, consumer protection groups, and clients all hate this rule (and don’t understand it), and it doesn’t make sense to anybody. Hopefully Roper is wrong and they will change the rule, but we worry they may not.

(Washington)

The SEC’s best interest rule has been giving brokers headaches almost since the demise of the DOL rule. Many groups have commented on the rule’s failing, including its governance on the use of titles and its deeply confusing attempt at delineating between brokers and advisors. However, one of those gripes now seems to have played out in practice, as early results from the SEC’s testing of its Customer Relationship Summary form (CRS) has essentially failed. According to the chief of the firm hired to do the study for the SEC, “Overall, participants had difficulty throughout the proposed CRS with sorting out the similarities and differences between the broker/dealer services and investment advisor services, and integrating this information across sections”.

FINSUM: This supports exactly what everyone in the industry has been saying—the rule is totally confusing and does nothing to help consumers. The SEC is going to have to do a major rewrite.

(Washington)

Any advisor will know that the SEC’s new Regulation Best Interest has been under serious fire for the last couple of months. While it initially had a relatively warm reception from industry, brokers have railed against it more recently. Now, state attorney generals are mounting a furious push. The AGs of 17 states have come together to denounce the rule and demand a revision that mirrors the standard laid out in the old DOL rule. Specifically, the groups wants Reg BI to hold broker-dealers to the same standard as RIAs.

FINSUM: The SEC probably won’t do anything about this now, but this sets the stage for a major legal challenge before the rule may actually be implemented.