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 Would Allow Commissions

    April 17, 2015 by Arthur D. Postal, arthur.postal@innfeedback.com

    WASHINGTON – The proposed new fiduciary standard allays concerns that agents and advisors can still charge commissions on sale of products into retirement accounts, according to officials at the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors, as well as an industry lawyer.

    The proposal being introduced this week by the Department of Labor (DOL) also expands the definition of fiduciary to include a wider range of advisors and insurance agents if they are paid for advice related to a sale in a tax-advantaged retirement account.

    Under the rule, agents and advisors would have to sign an agreement that provides a “best interest contract exemption” by specifically committing the agent to act in the best interest of the client. Before rule was released, many observers in the financial and insurance industry thought the focus on “conflicted” advice and payments might lead to a crackdown on commissions.

    “Fiduciaries must provide impartial advice in their clients’ best interests – and cannot accept payments creating a conflict of interest – unless they satisfy one of two, possibly three, exemptions,” said Juli Y. McNeely, NAIFA president.

    She said the exemptions are “lengthy and will require careful reading,” but that, in general, the advisor and the client would be required to enter into a written contract that has specific provisions.

    These will include that all advice be in the best interests of the client, “that conflicts be clearly disclosed, and that procedures be in place to encourage advisors to make recommendations in the client’s best interests,” McNeely said.

    “There are new enforcement provisions that also need analysis to determine if the end result will be that consumers have less access or choice in engaging financial professionals to help them plan for retirement.”

    C. Fred Reish, a partner at Drinker Biddle & Reath in Los Angeles, agrees that the best interest contract exemption “is the key” to the proposed rule. Reish said that the definition of fiduciary is broader than the 2011 version of the regulation, meaning that more advisors will be fiduciaries. “The keys will be the exceptions and the exemptions,” Reish said.

    As explained by Labor Secretary Thomas E. Perez on Tuesday, the best interest contract exemption will allow firms to continue to set their own compensation practices so long as they, among other things, “commit to putting their client’s best interest first and disclose any conflicts that may prevent them from doing so.”

    He characterized the rule as containing “streamlined, flexible ways to comply” with the Obama administration’s goal of “putting their client’s best interest first,” saying the contract provision

    allows “advisors to enter into a new and enforceable best interest contract before they can receive any payments that might bias their advice.

    “It’s a straightforward agreement so you know you’ll get advice on investing your retirement savings that puts your interests first,” Perez said.

    The proposal also includes a new exemption for principal transactions andasks for comment on a new “low-fee exemption” that would allow firms to accept conflicted payments when recommending the lowest-fee products in a given product class, with even fewer requirements than the best interest contract exemption.

    This contract will commit the broker and advisor standard requires the advisor and the company to act with the “care, skill, prudence, and diligence that a prudent person would exercise based on the current circumstances,” according to a fact sheet of the proposal, which will be published for comment within the next few days, Perez said.

    In addition, both the firm and the advisor must avoid misleading statements about fees and conflicts of interest, the fact sheet said. “These are well-established standards in the law, simplifying compliance,’ the proposal will say.

    Another provision of the proposed rule commits the broker and advisor to adopting policies and procedures designed to mitigate conflicts of interest.

    “Specifically, the firm must warrant that it has identified material conflicts of interest and compensation structures that would encourage individual advisors to make recommendations that are not in clients’ best interests and has adopted measures to mitigate any harmful impact on savers from those conflicts of interest,” the proposal says. Under the exemption, advisors will be able to continue receiving common types of compensation.

    The enforcement provisions McNeely cited will allow the client to take action to hold an advisor accountable if the client believes the advisor or agent isn’t putting their client’s interest first.

    The fact sheet explaining the proposed rule said this consumer protection is “especially important for advice regarding IRA investments because otherwise neither DOL nor the saver who is harmed can hold the advisor accountable for the losses the saver suffered.”

    The DOL said the rule will propose that the best interest contract exemption require that individual disputes be handled through arbitration but must give clients the right to bring class action lawsuits in court if a group of people are harmed.

    “This feature of the best interest contract exemption is modeled on the rules under the Financial Institutions Regulatory Authority (FINRA),” the fact sheet released by the DOL said.

    Moreover, the proposal will say that the Internal Revenue Service can impose an excise tax on transactions based on conflicted advice that is not eligible for one of the many proposed exemptions. The fact sheet says that this is consistent with current law, which gives the IRS the authority to impose an excise tax. Current law can also require correction of such transactions involving plan sponsors, plan participants and beneficiaries, and IRA owners, the fact sheet says.

    Originally Posted at InsuranceNewsNet on April 15, 2015 by Arthur D. Postal, arthur.postal@innfeedback.com.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency