Groups Urge SEC to Uphold Fiduciary Standard

A coalition of organizations urged Mary Jo White, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to establish a uniform fiduciary standard for broker/dealers and advisers.

In a letter to White, the group urged focus on investor protection, and called on the SEC to extend a client-first fiduciary standard to broker/dealers providing personalized investment advice to retail customers. The standard should be at least as strong as the existing one for investment advisers. The letter vigorously opposed any rule that would weaken investor protections.

At the heart of the debate surrounding the need for a fiduciary standard is fairness, said Kevin R. Keller, chief executive officer of the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards. “Whether saving for retirement or their children’s college education, American investors should get advice that is best for them and not their financial adviser,” Keller pointed out. The adviser’s duty to an investor should not depend on the regulator of the adviser, he said, urging the SEC to stay true to Congress’ intent in the Dodd-Frank Act. American investors deserve investment advice from an adviser who has a fiduciary duty to act in their best interests at all times, Keller said.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

The letter outlines the group’s concerns that the SEC’s March Request for Information (RFI) signals that the SEC may be backing away from requiring a fiduciary standard for broker/dealers that is “no less stringent” than the one under which registered investment advisers (RIAs) currently operate.

Section 913 of Dodd-Frank required SEC staff to analyze standards of care applicable to advisers and broker/dealers, and recommended that the standard of care should be what is in the best interests of the consumer without regard to business model.

“The assumptions contained in the RFI fail to include key elements of the fiduciary standard such as the obligation to act in the best interest of the customer.  If the fiduciary duty is based on the RFI assumptions, it would be weaker than that originally set forth in the Section 913 Study and far less stringent than that currently imposed under the Advisers Act,” the group said in its letter. “If the SEC were to adopt this approach, we fear that it would significantly weaken the fiduciary standard for SEC-registered investment advisers, while adding few new protections for investors who rely on broker-dealers for investment advice. This approach would have negative consequences for investors and is one we would vigorously oppose.”

Disclosure Does Not Replace Loyalty

Full disclosure plays an important part of the fiduciary relationship between an adviser and client, but it does not replace loyalty, ongoing duty of care, or managing conflicts or avoiding them where possible, said Lauren Locker, national chair of the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors. “Relying on disclosures to sidestep working in the best interest of the client is inconsistent with the Advisers Act of 1940 and would weaken the existing fiduciary standard for registered investment advisers,” Locker said. The organization strongly opposes a standard where disclosure displaces advice based on principles.

“Requiring a fiduciary standard of broker/dealers doesn’t mean they need to stop earning commissions or providing services to middle class clients,” said Michael Branham, president of the Financial Planning Association. Rather, it means broker/dealers need to put clients’ interests first by fully disclosing and appropriately managing conflicts of interest, he explained: “Financial planners who have voluntarily embraced the fiduciary standard have demonstrated that it can be applied successfully across business models for the benefit of both clients and advisers.” 

“The Commission's RFI does not appear to incorporate the most crucial aspect of fiduciary duty – that the overarching duty to act in the client’s best interest is an ever-present overlay to all of the other duties, rules, and assumptions discussed in the RFI,” said David G. Tittsworth, executive director of the Investment Adviser Association. The RFI seems to contemplate simply adding disclosure requirements to existing broker/dealer rules and labeling the result a fiduciary standard, Tittsworth said, calling this approach watering down the Advisers Act fiduciary standard.

Organizations that signed the letter are: AARP, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Consumer Federation of America, Financial Planning Association, Fund Democracy, Investment Adviser Association, National Association of Personal Financial Advisors and the North American Securities Administrators Association.

The text of the letter is here.

PSNC 2013: CEO Roundtable

As the retirement security of having a defined benefit (DB) plan has become a thing of the past, the role of the plan sponsor has also changed.

New Focuses for Plan Sponsors 

Speaking at a CEO roundtable discussion at the PLANSPONSOR National Conference, Elaine Sarsynski, EVP of MassMutual’s Retirement Services Division, said she encourages plan sponsors and advisers to focus on plan health and plan action. “The question I always like to ask a plan sponsor or adviser is, do you know how many people in your plan are on track to retire with 75% monthly replacement income at age 67?”

Want the latest retirement plan adviser news and insights? Sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters.

Christine Marcks, president of Prudential Retirement, said the new focus for plan sponsors is longevity. “People are beginning to recognize that there is a much higher likelihood that they are going to spend 25 to 35 years in retirement, and that’s the scary factor here. [Defined contribution] plans were not initially designed to solve for that risk.  There is growing interest, and growing recognition, that this is something that we need to do, and that plan structure needs to solve.”

Pat Murphy, managing director and head of distribution for New York Life Retirement Plan Services, added that “there is an opportunity to use technology for us as an industry and to stop looking at your employee as a participant in a 401(k) plan that we are managing, and to use technology and aggregation tools to understand the individual as a whole person.” Murphy referenced, for instance, that many participants have what some call “yapping dogs,” or assets in other plans that need to be considered when evaluating retirement readiness. 

Technology 

With technology having already altered the delivery methods of statements, disclosures and how participants access their plans, Alison Cooke Mintzer, global editor-in-chief of PLANSPONSOR, asked how technology will be used to improve outcomes.  Marcks said the guiding principle is to go mobile.  A recent survey indicated 55% of adults use smartphones in some capacity—triple the number from last year. “We’ve been focusing on engaging with participants, and we’ve done studies on how to engage the Millennium generation with gamification techniques. This will change over time, but this is the direction we’re going in now. We’ve also become engaged in virtual and online communities.”

Murphy said, “With technology, it’s imperative that we create better outcomes and not just make the process simpler for us and make us more profitable. That would be selfish. Human interaction is critical to get participants comfortable to make decisions. We will deploy video chat for those who contact our call center, in the absence of an adviser—they want to look at somebody and have a trusted conversation.” 

Sarsynski said MassMutual looks at technology as “easier, faster, and cheaper for plan sponsors, advisers and participants. We need to get those motivated moments so that participants can take action so that we can ensure that they retire on their terms. That’s how we go to work each day and that’s how we use technology.”

Exchange Programs 

The panelists discussed the emerging idea of a retirement benefits exchange. For example, some small- to medium-sized companies are considering in the future offering employees a stipend, and, similar to health benefit offerings, have them choose what would work best for them as individuals. A program such as this may help drive down escalating costs for smaller businesses.

«