The latest threat to independent advisers

History is rife with examples of adverse, unintended consequences resulting from well-intentioned lawmaking acting in the face of a crisis.
AUG 16, 2009
History is rife with examples of adverse, un-intended consequences resulting from well-intentioned lawmaking acting in the face of a crisis. The astronomical costs and burdens of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 on public corporations of all sizes come to mind as just one example of this. For those of us who advocate for the middle-class American investor, there are serious, unintended consequences in recently introduced legislation that would change worker classification rules in a manner that threatens the ability of independent financial advisers to serve their retail clients. For more than 30 years, the independent broker-dealer industry has provided the investing public with comprehensive and affordable fi-nancial solutions, delivered today through a network of more than 98,000 independent financial advisers — about 42.3% of all practicing registered representatives. These independent advisers aren't employees of broker-dealers, but self-employed business owners and entrepreneurs. They manage their own financial advisory practices and, importantly, provide financial advice to retail investors without being burdened by the potentially conflicting agenda of a parent company. It is a business model that has worked well for the country as a whole, in no small part because independent advisers are principally responsible for serving a segment of the U.S. population that has been substantially overlooked by the big Wall Street institutions: The millions of “Main Street” households with net investible assets of tens and hundreds of thousands, rather than millions, of dollars. This demographic segment represents the backbone of America, and needs access to sound financial advice, products and solutions more than ever before. What threatens this model is the recently proposed scrapping of an important feature in Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978: The “safe harbor” in this area of tax law allows workers to be classified as “independent contractors” rather than “employees” in industries where such designations are part of “longstanding, recognized practice.” Spurred on by labor unions targeting the misclassification of workers as independent contractors in certain industries — and embraced by a federal government eager to reap unpaid payroll taxes that such a tax code change would produce — Congress is seriously considering a blanket removal of this safe-harbor provision. Although independent advisers aren't the intended target of this legislation, we think that they will be caught in the crossfire. This would be unjust and inappropriate for advisers who responsibly pay their taxes, operate in a heavily regulated and thoroughly documented industry in which cash payment for services is strictly prohibited, and aren't involved in the industries of concern to labor unions. Under the envisioned changes, independent advisers would be exposed to unnecessary and onerous Internal Revenue Service scrutiny of their worker classification status. Independent broker-dealers could be forced to reclassify the independent advisers they serve as employees. Under such circumstances, additional costs and compliance burdens would cripple the ability of these broker-dealers to remain profitable while providing the vital services needed by the independent advisers to serve their clients. Additionally, independent broker-dealers could be subject to hefty back taxes, penalties and interest. These payments could be so substantial as to threaten the very existence of small and midsize independent broker-dealers. There is no doubt that independent advisers reclassified as employees of broker-dealers would lose much of the independence and entrepreneurial spirit that is so crucial to the advice, products and solutions they provide to their clients. Ultimately, all this would result in a massive industry upheaval that significantly diminishes the access to financial services and options available to Main Street American investors. Dale E. Brown is president and chief executive of the Atlanta-based Financial Services Institute, which represents the interests of independent broker-dealers and independent financial advisers.

Latest News

More Americans are invested in the elections than the stock market
More Americans are invested in the elections than the stock market

A substantial number of people in a new 2,200-person survey believe their wealth, their "wallet power" and their retirement timelines are at stake.

Stocks rally to fresh highs as JPMorgan drives bank gains
Stocks rally to fresh highs as JPMorgan drives bank gains

The S&P 500 headed toward its 45th record in the year helped in part by a surprise interest income gain at the Wall Street giant.

Boosting payouts on cash crimps wealth management at Wells Fargo
Boosting payouts on cash crimps wealth management at Wells Fargo

Meanwhile, Wells Fargo’s WIM group reported close to $2.3 trillion at the end of last month.

Another AI-washing case shows where SEC is headed
Another AI-washing case shows where SEC is headed

The Securities and Exchange Commission has focused on "black-and-white" allegations of AI washing, but that could broaden out to a gray area that may loop in more financial services companies, a lawyer says.

High-net-worth giving splits along generational and gender lines, find BofA survey
High-net-worth giving splits along generational and gender lines, find BofA survey

More than nine in 10 HNWIs prioritize charitable giving, but demographics help shape the whys and the hows.

SPONSORED Destiny Wealth Partners: RIA Team of the Year shares keys to success

Discover the award-winning strategies behind Destiny Wealth Partners' client-centric approach.

SPONSORED Explore four opportunities to elevate advisor-client relationships

Morningstar’s Joe Agostinelli highlights strategies for advisors to deepen client engagement and drive success