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
  • DOL Rolls Over in Thrivent Suit, Asks for Stay

    July 17, 2017 by Emile Hallez

    The Department of Labor took a step back from its defense late last week in a lawsuit brought by Thrivent Financial, going as far as suggesting summary judgment in the plaintiff’s favor.

    The development follows the DOL’s recent announcement in a similar lawsuit that it does not intend to enforce a provision in the fiduciary rule’s accompanying Best Interest Contract Exemption that would prohibit arbitration agreements. Such agreements could help firms that use the BIC exemption avoid class-action litigation, because individual plaintiffs would have to file suits independently against brokers, rather than as a class represented by a few.

    “First, because the Department of Labor no longer defends the one regulatory provision challenged in this action—the application of Best Interest Contract Exemption to arbitration agreements—the Department withdraws its cross-motion for summary judgment,” a DOL attorney wrote in a letter to U.S. District Court Judge Susan Nelson. “Second, the Department renews its request for a stay of litigation…. The Department no longer defends the arbitration-restricting condition, and therefore does not intend to enforce the provision. And unless plaintiff amends its contracts to include the limitation, no mechanism for private enforcement of the provision is apparent.”

    Supporting the argument for a stay is that the DOL is reviewing the rule at the behest of President Donald Trump. The agency is currently collecting public comments through July 21 regarding whether numerous provisions of the rule, including those affecting arbitration agreements, should go into effect on Jan. 1, 2018, as scheduled.

    Further, if the judge opts to not freeze proceedings on Thrivent’s pending motion, the DOL would support a judgment order pertaining to the arbitration agreements issue, the agency stated.

    Meanwhile, the AARP and other supporters of the fiduciary rule recently weighed in. The lobbying group, along with Better Markets, the Consumer Federation of America and others, sent a letter to Judge Nelson, urging the her to not consider a nationwide injunction on the class-action lawsuit component of the BIC exemption.

    Earlier this month, the DOL indicated in a letter to the courts that although it will continue defending the rule as a whole, it will not do so for the component of the BIC exemption that prohibits brokers from entering into arbitration agreements with investors. That issue is at the heart of Thrivent’s lawsuit against the DOL.

    “Because of the government’s late-breaking change in position, this court confronts an unusual situation: there is no longer any disagreement between the parties, and no party to this litigation is defending the important class-action provision that the plaintiffs have challenged here,” the groups stated in a friend-of-the-court brief.

    The DOL seeks comments about that provision, and whether it should be scrapped entirely or revised, the letter noted.

    “Requiring the agency to formally modify or reaffirm its rule through the proper administrative channels—instead of through the back door of non-adversarial litigation—is the prudent course of action,” the groups wrote.

    “Under the circumstances, it would be inappropriate to entertain the plaintiffs’ request for a nationwide injunction.”

    Originally Posted at Life Annuity Specialist on July 17, 2017 by Emile Hallez.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency