"Remember the fiduciary rule, the one that “requires brokers to act in the best interests of savers and went into partial effect in June”? Who could be opposed to such a thing? But of course when a regulation sounds so very good, there is usually some other consideration around the corner, perhaps involving secondary consequences. And, as some of us had predicted, it is not working out so well:
The rule requires brokers to act in the best interests of retirement savers, rather than sell products that are merely suitable but could make brokers more money. Financial firms decried the restriction, which began to take effect in June, as limiting consumer choice while raising their compliance costs and potential liability.That is from Lisa Beilfuss at the WSJ. Allison Schraeger is one who saw this coming."
But adherence is proving a positive. Firms are pushing customers toward accounts that charge an annual fee on their assets, rather than commissions which can violate the rule, and such fee-based accounts have long been more lucrative for the industry. In earnings calls, executives are citing the Department of Labor rule, known varyingly as the DOL or fiduciary rule, as a boon.
“Primarily because of DOL” and market appreciation, assets are growing in fee-based accounts, said Stifel Financial Corp. SF 0.40% Chief Executive Ronald Kruszewski, on a call in July. In an interview, he said such accounts can be twice as costly for clients.
Monday, August 14, 2017
Is the fiduciary rule costly for clients?
See Who is winning with the fiduciary rule? by Tyler Cowen.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.