Subscribe

Fiduciary standard for CFPs could be raised, leaders say

But some fee-only advisers say CFP Board should admit that mark holders who receive commissions have conflicts with the best-interest standard.

Updates to the professional standards that certified financial planners must follow could strengthen the fiduciary level of care requirement, but CFP Board leaders didn’t promise changes to its stance that advisers can act in the best interest of clients no matter how they are compensated.
Keeping the best interests of clients at the forefront of financial advice is critical to the industry’s success, said Michael Greene, chair of the board of directors of the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards Inc. He was speaking to fee-only advisers at the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors conference in Phoenix on Thursday.
The board announced in December it has a commission in place to evaluate and make recommendations to modify the professional standards of conduct in place for those holding the CFP certification. The last review led to the board adopting a fiduciary standard of care.
“We will in no way be looking to water down that standard,” he said. “I can see us only continuing to strengthen that.”
Some NAPFA members believe the CFP Board should give up its “compensation neutral” stance that allows brokers who accept commissions to become CFP holders. They believe clients should pay advisers based on the services provided, rather than from products sold through the planning process.
(More: Coverage of the DOL fiduciary rule from every angle)
All of the 2,622 members of NAPFA must have attained the CFP designation and be fee-only advisers.
“The CFP Board should have the courage to say what they think a true fiduciary is,” said Chris Long, owner of Long & Associates. “They are inching forward on that, but they’re conflicted because so many broker-dealers are CFPs.”
(More: CFP Board disciplines mark holders over outside business activities)
Less than 7% of the 74,619 CFP holders identify themselves as fee-only advisers, according to the board’s records. Mr. Greene addressed Mr. Long’s comment with a statement he admitted some might not like to hear.
“Let’s acknowledge that all business models are conflicts,” Mr. Greene said. “As long as we are in the business of somehow being paid for advice, there’s conflict.”
What is important is figuring out how to mitigate the conflicts and disclose them, he said.
Mr. Greene said the recent Labor Department fiduciary rule requiring all retirement advice to be in the best interest of clients is another step toward moving the whole industry in the fiduciary direction.

Learn more about reprints and licensing for this article.

Recent Articles by Author

Celebration of women fostering diversity in the financial advice profession

Honoring the 2020 and 2019 InvestmentNews Women to Watch for their achievements and dedication to improving the financial advice profession.

Merrill Lynch veteran Michelle Avan dies

Avan recently became SVP and head of global women's and under-represented talent strategy, global human resources for Bank of America.

Finalists for Women in Asset Management Awards announced

More than 100 individuals were named on the short list for awards in 16 categories; the winners will be announced on Sept. 9.

Rethinking advisory fees means figuring out value

Most advisers still charge AUM-based fees, but that's not likely to be the case in 10 years, according to Bob Veres. Some advisers are now experimenting with alternative fee models.

Advisers need focus on growth and relationships, especially now

Business development expert Robyn Crane believes financial advisers need to be taking advantage of this unique time.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print