Fiduciary standard may be on hold, but it remains a hot-button issue

A panel discussion at TD Ameritrade Inc.'s fall regional conference on Tuesday drew heated discussions

Oct 24, 2012 @ 5:03 pm

By Dan Jamieson

Fiduciary, regulation
+ Zoom

While the development of a fiduciary standard for retail advisers and a possible self-regulatory organization for advisory firms may be on the back burner until after the elections, they still remain hot-button issues for advisers.

That was obvious Tuesday during a panel discussion at TD Ameritrade Inc.'s fall regional conference in Dana Point, Calif.

Attendees quickly began peppering panel members with questions and comments even before the moderator, InvestmentNews reporter Mark Schoeff, opened up the discussion for questions.

Kevin Carroll, associate general counsel at the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, and Barbara Roper, head of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America, butted heads early on in describing how a fiduciary standard might be applied when giving personalized investment advice under the Dodd-Frank financial reform law.

The brokerage industry, represented by SIFMA, wants specific rules. Mr. Carroll said the law allows parallel rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, which governs advisers, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which covers brokers.

“Maybe you can have specific rules under the '34 Act” for brokers, he said, and a principles-based regime for advisers, both requiring a fiduciary standard of some sort when giving advice to investors.

Ms. Roper disagreed. “A fiduciary duty is inherently principles-based,” she said. “You can't define it down to a set of rules.”

Echoing Ms. Roper, one of the attendees warned of advisers' being hit with the “ungodly” amount of rules now covering broker-dealers.

David Tittsworth, executive director of the Investment Adviser Association, offered only slight reassurance in predicting that a single fiduciary standard likely would encompass both hard rules and broader principles of conduct.

On the issue of an adviser SRO, Mr. Carroll repeated SIFMA's support for the idea, noting that such a regulator would not necessarily have to be the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc.

“Our view is that an SRO … will be a more cost-efficient solution” than the other option being debated, which is having the SEC charge user fees to pay for more examiners, he said.

“I think [the issue] will come down to the value between those two options,” Mr. Carroll said, adding that an SRO would stand a better chance of increasing exam frequency.

But the issue “isn't just a numbers game” Mr. Tittsworth countered.

If exam frequency is the only factor that matters, “the regulator who inspects more is the best,” he said. “But I don't buy that … There have been some astounding failures of broker-dealers” who supposedly get examined every two years.

“For the SEC to expand what it's doing now would obviously be cheaper than turning over [adviser exams] to Finra,” Mr. Tittsworth said.

0
Comments

What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Featured video

Events

3 tips when hiring millennials

Advisers want to add young talent, but ask if they want to add millennials and most will begin to squirm. Hunter Hart, and Marc Schliefer of Equity Planning Inc. disspell some myths and misconceptions of hiring millennials.

Video Spotlight

The Search for Income

Sponsored by PGIM Investments

Recommended Video

Path to growth

Latest news & opinion

The most important tax changes for 2018

The Internal Revenue Service issued inflation adjustments to more than 50 tax provisions for 2018.

E*Trade acquiring custodian Trust Company of America

Discount broker buying second-tier custodian for $275 million.

Another thousand Dow points higher, and investors yawn

Market milestones keep falling like dominoes, with 51 records broken so far this year.

LPL retains $570 million with super-OSJ deal

Kansas-based nVision Wealth will come under supervision of Chicago-based IHT Wealth Management.

How does your advisory firm stack up?

Comparing a firm's pay to the competition can point out vast flaws.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print