Wealth Management
(New York)
Advisors pay attention. For the last two years, many firms, large and small, have been been moving their clients into fee-based accounts. This mostly started as a response to the fiduciary rule, but had the side benefit of driving more revenue for advisors. However, a new lawsuit against Edward Jones says that doing say may violate reverse churning rules. The case could expose all firms that have undertaken the same practice. Consumer Federation of America head Barbara Roper commented that “We have heard persistent reports that this is happening at a number of firms, and I have heard that from sources I consider reliable”.
FINSUM: This is a tough situation for firms. On the one hand you are being subjected to new rules and guidance saying fee-based accounts are better and safer, but because you are moving to such a model (many big brokers almost did away with commission based accounts), you are being subjected to claims of reverse churning. What a mess.
(New York)
One of the big developments in the wealth management industry right now is the big increase in recruitment spending by large independent broker-dealers. Even as wirehouses are cutting back on spending, big independents like LPL, Commonwealth, and Raymond James, are spending big on new talent. The payouts are usually being given in the form of forgivable loans. The spending on such payouts has been large, with LPL increasing its budgets for such items to $159.9m in 2017, 17% higher than the year prior.
FINSUM: So while wirehouses have been cutting back, independents have been heating up.
(Washington)
The fiduciary rule has suffered many blows over the last several months, none stronger than in the 5th circuit court in March. However, despite all the doom and gloom over the rule, there is still a good chance it will hold up. The 5th circuit court was the first circuit court to come in against the rule, which paves the way for the Supreme Court to hear the case (impossible to predict the outcome there). Furthermore, the courts may let an outside party step in and take up the DOL’s right of appeal on the recent 5th circuit court ruling, all of which means the rule is far from gone.
FINSUM: We do not think fiduciary rule advocates are going to give up this easily, especially because there is still a lot of legal recourse available to them.
More...
(Washington)
The back and forth over the fiduciary rule has been long, expensive, confusing, and bureaucratic. However, those opposed to the implementation of the rule should rejoice, as it appears it will die on April 30th. Legally, the DOL has until April 30th to seek a review of the Fifth Circuit Court’s vacating of the rule. If it does not do so by then the court’s ruling will go into effect on May 7th and the rule would dissolve. The DOL also has until June 13th to ask the Supreme Court to hear the case.
FINSUM: The DOL has already dropped a case in Washington D.C. because it was concerned the court there would uphold the rule. There seems to be a very low likelihood that they are going to challenge the Fifth Circuit Court’s ruling. The rule may very well dissolve on May 7th, but expect some drama before then as advocates make a final push.
(New York)
No, the headline above is not a joke, though it may look like one to some. While it is easy to joke about people leaving millions to their dogs, the reality is that setting aside a portion of inheritance to take care of a pet is increasingly common, and advisors need to be aware. 44% of pet owners have some financial plan in their will for the care of pets, with the structure usually being that money would go to a designated caregiver. One advisor in Boca Raton who handles pet planning says “If you care about them and you want to make sure they’re taken care of, you have to have a contingency plan for them or else they end up at the Humane Society”.
FINSUM: 44% is a huge number, but it does make a lot of sense. Pets are valued family members and it seems irresponsible to many to leave them without care.
(New York)
Despite the fact that the DOL says it will no longer enforce the fiduciary rule in any capacity, those in the industry say that firms should not abandon their fiduciary rule compliance. The reason why is that despite all the momentum against the rule, it is still not officially gone. That means the DOL could change course and decide to enforce the rule at any time, giving no comfort about getting rid of fiduciary rule compliance for firms.
FINSUM: So our view is that the whole fiduciary rule playing field is more uncertain after this court ruling. The SEC could still be dissuaded from proposing a new rule, and the current rule could still hold up in court, with both possibilities completely changing the picture.