We would love to hear from you. Click on the ‘Contact Us’ link to the right and choose your favorite way to reach-out!

wscdsdc

media/speaking contact

Jamie Johnson

business contact

Victoria Peterson

Contact Us

855.ask.wink

Close [x]
pattern

Industry News

Categories

  • Industry Articles (17,774)
  • Industry Conferences (3)
  • Industry Job Openings (3)
  • Moore on the Market (207)
  • Negative Media (139)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (656)
  • Wink's Articles (265)
  • Wink's Inside Story (238)
  • Wink's Press Releases (99)
  • Blog Archives

  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • Fiduciary Rule’s Challengers Warn Judge of ‘Extraordinary Risk’ for Advice Industry

    September 1, 2016 by C. Ryan Barber

    A judge in Washington heard arguments for more than two hours Thursday on whether to block a U.S. Department of Labor rule that requires investment advisers to act in their clients’ best interests—a heightened standard designed to curb billions of dollars in fees in the retirement plans marketplace.

    U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss of the District of Columbia did not immediately rule on the National Association for Fixed Annuities’ request for a preliminary injunction. With similar challenges pending in Kansas and Texas, the hearing provided the first in-court glimpse into the debate over the Labor Department regulation.

    Numerous investment and consumer groups are closely following the cases, which challenge a final rule published in April. The broad new regulation, set up to combat excessive fees and conflicts of interest, expands the definition of “fiduciary” in relationships between advisers and their customers. The rule, set to take effect in part by April 2017, covers investment advice for employee benefits plans and individual retirement accounts.

    The National Association for Fixed Annuities, represented by the law firm Bryan Cave, contends the Labor Department ran against the will of Congress and abandoned the 40-year-old regulatory framework for retirement advice. In requesting a preliminary injunction, the annuities group argued regulators had no authority to extend fiduciary duties to individual retirement account transactions. NAFA’s membership includes insurance companies and individual insurance agents.

    Describing the rule as the “embodiment of overreach,” Bryan Cave partner Philip Bartz said the Labor Department’s new standard would effectively put certain insurance agents out of business. “It was a last-minute decision, it was clearly an afterthought. And the impact wasn’t thought through,” Bartz said in court.

    “I think it’s clear that there’s irreparable injury here,” he added.

    Moss directed many of his questions to a provision of the rule that allows investors to file a class action when they believe an adviser has not acted in their best interests. Bartz said the rule would make it impossible for insurance agents to comply both with the Labor Department’s standard and state regulations.

    “They’re going to get their butts sued off,” Bartz said. “We’re talking about extraordinary risk and extraordinary consequences if you do this wrong.”

    Bartz also criticized the Labor Department’s requirement that insurance agents’ compensation be “reasonable,” leaving the industry to speculate how to define that term. “The fact of the matter is that the Department of Labor refuses to say what unreasonable compensation is,” he said.

    U.S. Department of Justice lawyers Emily Newton and Galen Thorp argued the Labor Department needed to revisit the 40-year-old regulatory framework for retirement advice because the retirement plans market has grown more complex. Demand for retirement advice has also increased, they said.

    Thorp tried to assure Moss that the Labor Department based the fiduciary rule on “ample evidence.”

    “The evidence across the board,” Thorp said, showed that “whenever you have a professional adviser and an inexperienced client plus a conflict of interest, it ends badly for the consumer.”

    Three nonprofit public interest groups—Americans for Financial Reform, Better Markets Inc. and the Consumer Federation of America—on Wednesday backed the Labor Department’s analysis in support of the rule. The groups argued in an amicus briefthat billions of dollars in retirement savings are lost because of conflicts of interest.

    The groups defended the work that went into the fiduciary rule as “one of the most thorough, thoughtful, and accommodating rulemakings in history, spanning five years, including a nearly six-month comment period and four days of public hearings.”

    “If the court were to hold this extraordinary process inadequate, then future attempts by the DOL and many other agencies to adopt rules in the public interest will become easier targets for litigation, based fundamentally on nothing more than the regulated industry’s self-serving, unfounded, and ultimately irrelevant claims of harm to their bottom line,” wrote Better Markets president and chief executive Dennis Kelleher, a former litigation partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.

    AARP Inc. also backed the Labor Department rule. The group argued in July that the retirement system’s move from defined benefit plans to IRAs and 401(k) plans has created a need for protection from conflicts of interest.

    An injunction to block the rule would “perpetuate the myth that all investment advisors are already required to give retirement investors advice in their best interest,” AARP Foundation Litigation lawyers wrote in an amicus brief.

    “In short,” AARP’s lawyers argued, “conflicted advice resulting in higher fees and expenses can have a huge impact on the amount of retirement income; indeed, it could cost retirement investors billions of dollars each year.”

    Hearings are set in Kansas and in Texas, where the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a lead plaintiff, in the coming months. U.S. district judges are not bound by decisions in other federal trial courts. Still, trial judges can—and have recently—issued nationwide injunctions to block regulatory initiatives.

    The fiduciary rule litigation is playing out in three separate federal appellate circuits, giving rise to the potential for a divide among courts as the cases are fought beyond the trial level.

    Contact C. Ryan Barber at cbarber@alm.com. On Twitter: @cryanbarber

     

    Originally Posted at Law.com on August 25, 2016 by C. Ryan Barber.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency