Wealth Management
(Washington)
Brokers pay attention—a major loophole in the SEC’s best interest rule has just become apparent. One of the industry’s big complaints about the BI rule has been that it seeks to govern the use of the “advisor” title. Well, until now it seems that everyone had missed a key loophole in the rule. When the SEC drafted it, it allowed for dually-registered advisors/B-Ds to call themselves advisors even when they are carrying on brokerage business. 61% of registered reps work at dually-registered firms, meaning this aspect of the rule is mostly a moot point for the majority of advisors. According to Michael Kitces, famed advisor and wealth management commentator, “The rule literally doesn’t apply to most advisers”.
FINSUM: This is one of those bombshell realizations that seems to happen when a new rule is 1,000+ pages long—you miss things.
(New York)
At the end of August, the IRS closed the door on the numerous high-tax states that were trying to classify their residents’ taxes as charitable gifts so as to make them deductible. That moved slammed the door of options shut for New York and New Jersey residents. However, the IRS didn’t close the door to other workarounds, and Connecticut apparently has a favorable model that specifically applies to pass-through entities. The workaround allows full deduction to the previous tax level for users through an income credit system on taxes paid.
FINSUM: One wonders if the IRS will just move on to shutting these programs down or whether this is a model that other states can build on.
(Washington)
Advisors, don’t hold your breath. Despite widespread criticism from basically every side of the equation, it appears unlikely the SEC is going to do much to correct the major flaws in its current Best Interest Rule. Barbara Roper of the CFA, says that she is “not at all confident” the SEC will make any meaningful changes to the rule “to better protect investors”, pointing out that the SEC had every chance to improve on the DOL rule, but didn’t. “It’s hard to believe that they are going to have a sudden conversion and fix the problems now”, she says.
FINSUM: Brokers, consumer protection groups, and clients all hate this rule (and don’t understand it), and it doesn’t make sense to anybody. Hopefully Roper is wrong and they will change the rule, but we worry they may not.
More...
(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.
(New York)
Advisors need to prepare themselves for a nasty eventuality that looks like a near certainty when the market next crashes. According to a top wealth management lawyer, there are likely to be a great deal of lawsuits filed by clients against their advisors whenever the next big crash comes. The lawsuits will be focused on claims of reverse churning, or that advisors put client money in fee-baseds account in order to collect fees without offering significant advice or trading. Since switching clients into fee-based accounts (versus commission-based accounts) has been a very common practice over the last several years, the atmosphere is ripe for a massive wave of lawsuits.
FINSUM: This article is worryingly insightful. The big switch to fee-based accounts, which preceded but also corresponded to the DOL rule, might have set up advisors for some major legal headaches in the next downturn.
(New York)
Fidelity is doubling down on its recent move to offer completely free index funds with no investment minimums. The money manager will launch a pair of new free index funds, one focused on large caps, and the other on the “extended market” (or small and midcaps), in late September. The new free funds are part of Fidelity’s strategy to compete vigorously on pricing to bring in new clients, and then try to earn money from them spending on other services.
FINSUM: Fidelity is almost using these funds as loss leaders in order to drum up other business. This may work for them because they have such a large product suite, but for less diversified managers, it poses a serious challenge.