Displaying items by tag: disclosure

(Washington)

The Department of Labor has just proposed a new rule for advisors. We know what you are thinking—“oh boy, another DOL rule”. However, this new one might be quite a positive development. The new rule concerns disclosure. Specifically, it is a new proposal to allow retirement plan sponsors to make disclosures electronically. It would actually make electronic disclosure the default method. The proposal also includes additional protections for participants, including standards for the websites where disclosures are made.

FINSUM: This seems on the surface like a good idea, as it saves time, money, and hassle. Industry commentators have so far been supportive of the idea, but there has not been an in-depth review yet.

(Washington)

RIAs were shocked and stunned by the SEC’s new Best Interest rule. The reason why comes down to one word. By substituting an “and” for an “or”, the SEC basically dissolved the necessity for fiduciary duty of RIAs. Fiduciary duty until now was defined by advisors having to avoid all conflicts of interest AND make a full disclosure of all material conflicts of interest. Now the rule will have an “or” instead of an and, meaning RIAs could abide by the rule simply through disclosure, eliminating a key tenet of fiduciary duty. One industry insider commented bluntly, “It guts the RIA industry”, continuing “RIAs are not fiduciaries anymore”.

FINSUM: This is a big deal for the RIA business because it means a whole slew of new advisors can call themselves RIAs but not meet the standard and reputation that has been cultivated over decades.

(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)

The wealth management industry will likely find itself pleased this week, as many may sense victory in the long battle against the DOL’s fiduciary rule. The SEC has now released its own proposal for a new fiduciary rule, and the rule looks favorable. The new rule would place less onerous restrictions on brokers and advisors. It will not ban any single conflict of interest, but would place a responsibility to disclose certain conflicts of interest to clients and take steps to mitigate their effects. The rule does not contain a specific provision allowing clients to sue their brokers for misbehavior. The SEC would also disallow the use of blurred titles, such as “financial advisor”. The SEC approved the rule by a 4-1 vote and it will now have an official comment period.

FINSUM: The one dissenting vote blasted the rule as a continuation of the status quo. To be honest, the proposal sounds quite favorable to the industry, with many saying it is not really a fiduciary rule (it doesn’t seem to be), and we were not expecting such a mild outcome. We think Congress will likely come down hard on the SEC. This is far from a done deal.

(Washington)

Many advisors are hoping the SEC will dive headlong into the fiduciary rule debate and quickly put in place a new fiduciary standard of their own. SEC chairman Jay Clayton has said it is a priority, and hopes got a big boost this week as the SEC is holding a pubic meeting to discuss the specifics of forming a new rule. However, those hoping for a quick resolution will be sorely disappointed, as there are still many steps, and many potential pitfalls, before the rule could become a reality. In particular, the DOL could still challenge its court loss, and many lawsuits could hold up the implementation of any SEC-proposed rule.

FINSUM: When you really take a look at the procedure and the legal risks, the timeline to actually get a new rule in place seems very far away indeed.