Outside voices and views for advisers

Busting DOL fiduciary rule myths of industry opponents

Claims that the regulation will harm the 'average Joe' investor by increasing costs, reducing access to advice and derailing retirement plans are bogus

Jan 12, 2018 @ 6:29 pm

By Brian Lakkides

According to the opponents of a new rule designed to ensure that retirement savers get the best advice possible, the entrepreneurial mindset and innovative spirit that has powered the U.S. economy for decades is a thing of the past. They think we can't adjust — and thrive — under the new fiduciary rule.

I disagree. And my own Detroit-based business, around for 30 years, shows why.

The Department of Labor's fiduciary rule is an attempt to level the playing field for consumers by requiring the financial services industry to provide retirement investment advice in the best interests of clients. In legal jargon, it's the end of the suitability standard. But it ought to be the beginning of something better.

Since the fiduciary rule was proposed, the financial services industry has been running around like Chicken Little. Their oft-repeated message is that the rule from the Department of Labor will harm the "average Joe" investor by increasing costs, reducing access to advice and derailing retirement plans.

The dire warnings about "orphaned accounts," a metaphor long-used to describe accounts previously assigned to advisers who've since left a firm, have escalated dramatically as the industry applauds the Department of Labor's plans to kill the rule.

Independently verified data on this so-called trend is hard to come by. But other facts are impossible to deny.

First, the financial services industry itself, not any government rule, has long limited access to services. The most visible is minimum account size requirements well in excess of $100,000, and directing small accounts to call centers or assigning them to rookie advisers who are hardly in the position to offer advice.

(More: The latest news and resources on the DOL fiduciary rule)

Second, compensation for commission-based advisers provides a disincentive to servicing a small account at a big firm.

Other claims made by those in the financial industry opposed to the fiduciary rule fail the smell test.

For instance, the claim made by the Insured Retirement Institute and others that roughly three million clients would liquidate over $30 billion in existing retirement assets is dubious at best. Given the entrepreneurial spirit of American business, I can't believe that millions of potential clients with billions of dollars to invest would simply be ignored.

A more rational conclusion is that someone will rise to the challenge of serving this multibillion dollar, not-so-niche market. Why wouldn't the financial services industry evolve like the accounting profession?

Tax preparation firms such as H&R Block emerged as alternatives for people with simple needs. They left the higher-value services to traditional accounting firms — and got rich doing it. Wall Street might make less money under a fiduciary rule, but picking winners and losers shouldn't be the goal of public policy that affects all Americans.

Why am I so confident in calling out bogus Wall Street claims? Because we've been serving as a fiduciary for small account holders for over 30 years.

When we started Cygnet, a fee-based investment adviser, our vision was to provide all people with the same quality and objectivity of advice regardless of wealth, income or investible assets. Our concept is no different than how a blood pressure cuff and cholesterol test work the same during a physical, whether you're a CEO or an auto assembly-line worker.

Thirty years later the result is an investment advisory firm that serves as a fiduciary for over $100 million, but with an average account balance of less than $150,000. Our minimum is $10,000, but we'll waive it if you have a relative who's already a client, or if you automatically invest each month in amounts that would result in a $10,000 investment in two years.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce claimed recently that investment advisers are dropping clients with an average account balance of $21,000. My response: Tell them to give us a call!

If a small firm from Detroit can succeed in being a fiduciary for the average Joes that keep Michigan chugging along, you have to wonder why Wall Street is fearful of the fiduciary rule. Maybe Wall Street is no longer a true American innovator — or truly concerned about that average Joe.

Brian Lakkides has been a financial consultant with Cygnet since 1992.


What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Sponsored financial news

Upcoming Event

Apr 30


Retirement Income Summit

Join InvestmentNews at the 12th annual Retirement Income Summit - the industry's premier retirement planning conference.Much has changed - and much remains to be learned. Attend and discuss how the future is full of opportunity for ... Learn more

Featured video


When can advisers expect an SEC fiduciary rule proposal and other regs this year?

Managing editor Christina Nelson and senior reporter Mark Schoeff Jr. discuss regulations of consequence to financial advisers in 2018, and their likely timing.

Recommended Video

Path to growth

Latest news & opinion

Bond investors have more to worry about than a government shutdown

Inflation worries, international rates pushing Treasuries yields higher.

State measures to prevent elder financial abuse gaining steam

A growing number of states are looking to pass rules preventing exploitation of seniors.

Morgan Stanley reports a loss of advisers after exiting the protocol for broker recruiting

The firm said it lost 47 brokers in the fourth quarter, the most in any quarter of 2017.

Morgan Stanley's wealth management fees climb to all-time high

Improvement reflect firm's shift of more clients into fee-based accounts priced on asset levels, which boosts results as markets rise.

Legislation would make it harder for investors to sue mutual funds over high fees

A plaintiff would have to state in their initial complaint why fiduciary duty was breached, and then prove the violation with 'clear and convincing evidence.'


Hi! Glad you're here and we hope you like all the great work we do here at InvestmentNews. But what we do is expensive and is funded in part by our sponsors. So won't you show our sponsors a little love by whitelisting investmentnews.com? It'll help us continue to serve you.

Yes, show me how to whitelist investmentnews.com

Ad blocker detected. Please whitelist us or give premium a try.


Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print