Displaying items by tag: titles

(New York)

An update to the SEC’s FAQs page has made something abundantly obvious—the title of “advisor” or “adviser” is about to get a lot more contentious. As part of its new Reg BI package, the SEC is bringing in additional rules around the use of titles. Regarding “advisor”, which is completely ubiquitous, the new rules are pretty clear: you cannot call yourself an “advisor” or “adviser” unless you are registered as an investment advisor. Another important note on this, according to Barron’s, “Broker-dealers that are affiliated with RIAs are generally prohibited from using the terms”.

FINSUM: This is a huge disruption to the lingua franca of the industry, but a big boon to investment advisors. Makes us wonder how much the public will actually care.

(New York)

Advisors (or advisers) look out, your titles are poised to be taken away by the SEC. While much of the focus on the new SEC best interest rule has understandably been centered around its pseudo-fiduciary components, there is actually a major fight brewing over the SEC’s new rules which restrict the use of certain titles. In particular, it wants to bar brokers from using the word “advisor” and potentially “financial planner” as well. The idea is to only associate the word “advisor” with a fiduciary to make it clearer to consumers. Industry interest groups are already railing against the proposal.

FINSUM: We find this a complicated issue. We understand the fiduciary motivation here, but advisors have been using that title for a long time and, for better or worse, are known that way by the public. Further, a fee structure does not, in our view, change whether someone is an advisor (in the general sense of the word).