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 (22,062)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (3)
  • Moore on the Market (485)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (827)
  • Wink's Articles (373)
  • Wink's Inside Story (283)
  • Wink's Press Releases (127)
  • Blog Archives

  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • 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
  • Examiner Funding Denied, Fiduciary Rule Delayed

    June 26, 2014 by Cyril Tuohy

    For advocates of raising the standards of conduct for financial advisors, spring has been a cruel season indeed, but for opponents of the blanket fiduciary standards the delays this year feel very much like last year.

    Last week, a House panel stripped the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of $300 million in funds the agency had requested to hire more examiners to police financial advisors.

    The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government approved the SEC budget at $1.4 billion. The SEC had requested $1.7 billion for fiscal year 2015 beginning Oct. 1. The $1.4 billion is $50 million more than the current year.

    In congressional testimony earlier this year, SEC Chair Mary Jo White said the $1.7 billion request would have allowed the SEC to hire 639 more people in “critical, core areas.”

    Included in the 639 new hires would have been 316 examiners for the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, about 240 of which would be dedicated to examining financial advisors.

    More examiners are sorely needed, White said. She added that in fiscal year 2013, the SEC examined only 9 percent of the 11,000 registered investment advisors (RIAs).

    “The number of SEC-registered advisors has increased by more than 40 percent over the last decade, while the assets under management by these advisors have increased more than two-fold, to almost $55 trillion,” White said.

    The SEC has eight examiners per $1 trillion in investment advisor assets under management, down from 19 in 2004, she added.

    The full appropriations committee in the Republican-controlled House is aiming to complete the 2015 fiscal year spending document by early July, according to media reports, and that’s when the partisan budget battles really get started.

    In the Democrat-controlled Senate, lawmakers consider the Obama administration’s budget requests separately from the House. The Senate could decide to vote to fund the SEC request in its entirety, and that would lead to bargaining between both chambers.

    The yearly back-and-forth budget showdowns are part of doing business in the nation’s capital. And so are the legislative delays.

    In late May, advocates of stiffer rules under governing the fiduciary duty of financial advisors learned they would have to wait until next January at the earliest year before the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) proposes its fiduciary rule.

    The rule, according to a blog post by Jon Vogler, senior analyst of retirement research with Invesco Consulting, “designates anyone who renders investment advice to a plan for a fee as a fiduciary and expands the definition of what constitutes ‘investment advice,’ thereby including more people under the fiduciary designation.”

    Advocates of broker/dealers and investment advisors meeting the fiduciary standard say the rules will help protect employees from financial advisors who face conflicts of interest.

    Advisors face conflicts when they earn commissions on the products they sell. By law, the investment products need be merely “suitable” for investors, even if they are not necessarily in the best interest of those investors.

    Some financial advisor groups have said that if the DOL imposed on advisors a fiduciary standard instead of a suitability standard, the cost of doing business would rise as brokers and advisors would have to meet standards required of RIAs.

    The higher standard would make life more expensive and force advisors to drop clients, leaving many middle market investors without advice.

    Industry trade groups such as the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (NAIFA) say the suitability threshold for advisors allows them to offer advice at an affordable price, which is better than no investment advice at all.

    Other groups representing financial advisors say the fiduciary standard is the only way to ensure that clients are properly served.

    The DOL fiduciary rule originally was proposed in 2010. After delays, it was pushed back yet again last summer. Now it has been delayed once more.

    Separate from the DOL, the SEC also is considering imposing a uniform fiduciary-duty standard on retail financial advisors. The SEC proposal stemmed from a 2011 study that recommended a common fiduciary standard on retail advisors.

    No action has been taken on the issue by the SEC so far this year.

    A bill sponsored by Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., would avoid “dueling” standards from the DOL and the SEC “by preventing the DOL from issuing changes to the fiduciary definition until 60 days after the SEC issues a final rule related to the standards of conduct of broker-dealers,” Vogler writes.

    That means the SEC would first have to pass its standards of conduct before the DOL could come up with its definition.

    The bill, H.R. 2374, also known as the Retail Investor Protection Act, was passed by the House last October, but still needs approval of the Senate and the president’s signature to become law.

    is a writer based in Pennsylvania. He has covered the financial services industry for more than 15 years. Cyril may be reached at cyril.tuohy@innfeedback.com.

     

    Originally Posted at InsuranceNewsNet on June 26, 2014 by Cyril Tuohy.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency