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 (22,038)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (3)
  • Moore on the Market (482)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (826)
  • Wink's Articles (373)
  • Wink's Inside Story (282)
  • 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
  • 3 Questions Answered About the DOL’s “Conflict of Interest Rule”

    February 24, 2016 by Ebix, Exchange

     

    Image courtesy of the U.S. Department of Labor

    Image courtesy of the U.S. Department of Labor

    Over the last year you’ve probably been hearing a lot about the Department of Labor’s proposed fiduciary rule, affectionately known as the “Conflict of Interest Rule”. And it’s no wonder considering the impact it will have on the insurance and financial industries.

    The 900 page proposal isn’t necessarily something you’d want to sit down with after a long day at work and dig into. So let’s break it down.

    First of all, who is most affected by this ruling? Well, if you’re part of the financial or insurance industries, you’ll most likely feel the heat. The ruling would have a direct impact on insurance agents, brokers, and advisors, as well as their partners (i.e. insurance companies).

    What is the proposal actually trying to do? Let me answer this one on a high level. When you boil it down, the regulation will create a substantial change in the way retirement plan and IRA advisors will be compensated on the annuity and insurance products they recommend.

    Under the current PTE 84-24 regulation, Insurance Advisors get commissions on annuity contracts, whether or not they’re considered “securities” under securities law.  If the DOL gets its way, their changes will:

    • Exclude compensation from revenue sharing payments, administrative fees, marketing payments, or payments from parties other than the insurance company or its affiliates.
    • Insurance Advisors will need to follow “Impartial Conduct Standards” which require recommendations given do not favor the interests, financial or other, of the Insurance Advisor, insurance company, or its affiliates.
    • Insurance products that are treated as securities under federal securities law will no longer be considered for exemption nor will revenue sharing and administrative or marketing payments.
    • Re-define fiduciary and fiduciary investment advice (as if it wasn’t complicated enough).
    • Add the “Best Interest Contract Exemption” (BICE).

    The good news, BICE will allow for some things to remain an exemption. The bad news, we’ve heard it’s chock-full of new and challenging conditions that must be met first. Including the requirement that the Insurance Advisor and the insurance company enter into a provision laden contract with the IRA owner before any investment recommendations can be made. The contract must include a clear definition of an advisor’s role as a fiduciary, the commissions they are making on the annuity recommendation, and whether or not their advice creates a conflict of interest.

    With all of these changes and new information, keep in mind: To escape a prohibited transaction (PT) from selling insurance products to plans and participants, an Insurance Advisor will have to meet the requirements of PTE 84-24.  In order to avoid a PT from selling insurance products to an IRA, the Insurance Advisor will have to comply with PTE 84-24 for the sale of fixed annuity contracts and BICE for the sale of variable annuity contracts (securities).

    DOL Fiduciary Rule Conflict of Interest RulePresident Barak Obama publicly endorsed the proposal early last year on the heels of a report released by the White House Council of Economic Advisers, saying “Today’s proposal updates the rules to crack down on these conflicts of interest in retirement advice that are costing working and middle-class families billions of dollars every year.”

    However, the financial industry staunchly disagrees with Mr. Obama’s belief that the proposal will benefit middle-class Americans. In fact, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association released two reports which claim the White House used faulty economic analysis in their report and failed to take into account existing investor protections.

    Opponents assert that this rule will actually hurt working and middle-class Americans. The regulation will create a significant rise in regulatory and liability costs for brokers, which will cause the cost of advice to increasing so much that it becomes too expensive for people with smaller financial accounts to afford.

    Despite the push back, the regulation was sent to the Office of Management and Budget on January 28th. The OMB has 90 days to review the economic consequences of the proposed rule before they sign off on it. Once it’s approved, the DOL will publicly release the final rule, expected to occur as early as March or April of this year, allowing the financial industry 8 months to implement.

     So what does all of this mean for the future of the insurance industry? Bryan Eshelbrenner, Ebix’s Director of Product Management for SmartOffice, describes the industry’s new profile, as he sees it, if the regulation is passed:

    “The [DOL’s proposed regulation] and an economic downturn will drive the adoption of hybrid businesses that will rely on broker-dealer sponsorship for a portion of their business. Robo-Advisors will force wealth managers to adopt more sophisticated business models.  But this has the potential to ultimately make the industry better by creating investors that would have previously been shut out of the market. The multi-disciplinary firms will drive the single-focus firms almost completely out of business over time and you’ll see Best Practice Workflows created, refined, and proven by independent industry analysis, spanning multiple technology platforms become commonplace.”

    But the fight carries on; through petitions in Washington, letters to the DOL and members of Congress, and an out pouring of dissatisfaction across industry websites, blogs, and message boards. Missouri Congresswoman Ann Wagner has written a bill to stop the rule. Congresswoman Wagner recently spoke out about the rule in a statement, “The Department of Labor has ignored Congress, thumbed its nose at the thousands of Americans who have expressed concerns about the impact this rule will have on family savings and jobs, and has charged blindly forward with this executive overreach. This fight is far from over.”

    If you’d like more information on this regulation, visit https://www.dol.gov/ebsa/regs/conflictsofinterest.html.

    Originally Posted at Ebix Blog on February 15, 2016 by Ebix, Exchange.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency