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 (21,155)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (414)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (800)
  • Wink's Articles (353)
  • Wink's Inside Story (274)
  • Wink's Press Releases (123)
  • Blog Archives

  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • 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
  • September 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • Fiduciary rule may be neutered by new DoL proposal, critics say

    September 5, 2017 by Kenneth Corbin

    With its contentious fiduciary rule only partially in effect, the Department of Labor is pressing ahead with a new proposal to add exemptions to the regulation that business groups say could relieve compliance burdens but that critics contend will effectively neuter the rule.

    In its formal call for an 18-month delay of the best-interest contract exemption and other controversial parts of the rule this week, the Labor Department indicated that it is finalizing a proposal for a new exemption likely to focus on certain classes of mutual fund shares ― a central source of the conflicts the original fiduciary regulation was intended to address.

    In a Federal Register filing, the department announced that it “anticipates it will propose in the near future a new and more streamlined class exemption built in large part on recent innovations in the financial services industry.”

    This likely refers to so-called “clean shares” of mutual funds that would be free of the sales incentives and other features that can create conflicts of interest for brokers and advisors.

    n a July request for information, the Labor Department noted that some firms had begun developing clean shares as a potential “long-term solution to the problem of mitigating conflicts of interest with respect to mutual funds.”

    The department cited an SEC definition of clean shares as “a class of shares of a mutual fund without any front-end load, deferred sales charge, or other asset-based fee for sales or distributions.”

    ANOTHER EXEMPTION?
    How a clean shares exemption could fit in with the broader fiduciary rule remains unclear, but consumer advocates who have argued for legally binding provisions requiring retirement advisors to act in the their clients’ best interest are wary.

    “Our bottom line has always been there needs to be a legally enforceable best interest standard at all times, and firms need to rein in incentives that encourage and reward harmful advice,” says Micah Hauptman, financial services counsel at the Consumer Federation of America. “We don’t see why the agency would need to create another exemption when the BIC already accomplishes that.”

    A Labor Department spokesman declined to comment on what a clean shares exemption might look like, saying that “it would be premature to make any statements about the substance of any streamlined class exemption.”

    Hauptman suggests that the clean shares exemption could resemble the level-fee exemption included in the original rule, a provision that would allow many fee-only advisors to evade the contractual and disclosure provisions of the BIC.

    Susan Conrad, director of retirement plan advisors at Plancorp, a St. Louis-based RIA, sees a clean share exemption and, potentially, others as effectively superseding the BIC.

    “[T]he new avenue is to put in parallel exemptions,” Conrad says. “The idea is that if we can’t get the old ones off the books, we can just let them die on the vine ― because the new ones will cover every prohibited transaction the old ones did. The new, streamlined exemptions would just be the easier route for advisors.”

    DEFANGING REGULATIONS
    In the meantime, the department says that it has yet to complete the review of the fiduciary rule that President Trump ordered in February. Any potential changes that arise from that evaluation, or the proposal for a clean shares exemption, wouldn’t be able to take effect before the original applicability date of Jan. 1, 2018, the department said in its argument for the 18-month delay. That extra time would also allow the Labor Department to further engage with the SEC in a broader effort to harmonize fiduciary standards.

    While the department favors the 18-month timetable for pushing back the rule, it is also asking for comments on alternative ways to structure the delay, such as setting the applicability date 12 months following the conclusion of the reexamination that the White House ordered.

    The Labor Department spokesman says that the agency will collect and review the comments on the proposed delay, with a final decision likely to be made by year’s end.

    “We generally do not speculate on when decisions would be made on final rules, although we are sensitive to the need for a decision in this case in advance of the current transition period ending on January 1, 2018,” the spokesman says.

    Many of the business groups that have argued against the fiduciary rule hailed the proposed delay, saying they hoped it would produce a streamlined rule for best-interest retirement advice and allow for closer coordination with the SEC and other regulators.

    But advocates for the rule like Hauptman and Knut Rostad, president of the Institute for the Fiduciary Standard, see the delay as a sign that the process is cooked, with the inevitable result being a defanged fiduciary standard that strips away the strong enforcement provisions of the original rule.

    “I think how this plays out is that the BIC is watered down and weakened to the point of being ineffective, in a nutshell,” Rostad says. “I think the pathway is set and now they’ve given themselves more time to get to the goal line, which is removing any meaningful enforcement.”

    Originally Posted at Financial Planning on August 31, 2017 by Kenneth Corbin.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency