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
  • Judge rules against fiduciary foes, puts onus back on Trump

    February 14, 2017 by Andrew Welsch, Tobias Salinger

    A federal judge denied a lawsuit brought by industry trade groups seeking to overturn the fiduciary rule, putting the onus on the Trump administration to make any changes to the regulation.

    The decision came just hours after the Department of Labor asked the judge to hold off on a ruling so that it could comply with President Trump’s recent memo instructing the department to review and possibly rescind the regulation.

    The lawsuit was filed in a Dallas federal court in June by several industry trade groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, SIFMA and FSI.

    The groups have long opposed the Labor Department’s rule, preferring that the SEC take the lead on crafting a fiduciary standard for investment advice. The plaintiffs argued that the rule would have “harmful consequences for retirement savers” and small businesses.

    In addition, the trade groups said the Labor Department regulation curtailed their members’ freedom of speech.

    Chief Judge Barbara Lynn found their arguments “unpersuasive.”

    “At worst, the only speech the rules even arguably regulate is misleading advice,” Lynn wrote in her 81-page ruling.

    Lynn also rejected the trade groups’ other arguments, such as claims that the Labor Department exceeded the authority it has to regulate retirement assets under ERISA, a 1974 law.

    “Plaintiffs argue the fiduciary rule exceeds the coverage of ERISA because it imposes fiduciary status on those who earn a commission merely for selling a product, regardless of whether advice is given. Actually, the fiduciary rule plainly does not make one a fiduciary for selling a product without a recommendation,” Lynn wrote.

    THE FIGHT ISN’T OVER

    Even with a ruling in the fiduciary rule’s favor, its fate is still uncertain.

    Trump has instructed the Labor Department to conduct a review of the rule and rescind it if they find it conflicts with some of his policy goals.

    Lynn’s ruling heartened fiduciary advocates, who have loudly criticized Trump’s moves to possibly roll back the regulation.

    “Huge win!” said Micah Hauptman, financial services counsel at the Consumer Federation of America.

    Hauptman said in a statement the ruling proved that the Labor Department was “on solid footing” when it promulgated the rule.

    “The judge’s opinion demolishes all of the arguments that the industry litigants have made against this rule. It’s clear that the DoL did a rigorous economic analysis that proved the need for the rule. The decision also exposes all the industry’s sky-is-falling claims as having no merit,” Hauptman said.

    His colleague, Barbara Roper, director of investor protection, added that the judge’s ruling also underlines how unfounded the Trump administration’s attacks on the regulation are.

    At worst, the only speech the rules even arguably regulate is misleading advice,” Chief Judge Barbara Lynn wrote in a ruling in favor of the fiduciary regulation.

    DEFIANT

    Despite this setback, the trade groups remained defiant.

    “We continue to believe that the Department of Labor exceeded its authority, and we will pursue all of our available options to see that this rule is rescinded,” they said in a joint statement. They added that Trump’s “recent directive to the department, reflecting well-founded, ongoing and significant concerns about the rule, is a welcome development.”

    Trump’s action sparked a backlash from fiduciary advocates and Democratic lawmakers in Congress, who criticized the president’s decision as removing a key investor protection.

    Meanwhile, a number of top executives say they plan on retaining most of the changes they have been implementing in advance of April 10, when the rule goes into effect.

    Originally Posted at Financial Planning on February 8, 2017 by Andrew Welsch, Tobias Salinger.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency