Monday, April 3, 2017

DoL Rule Under Attack. But from Where?

Today's quiz. Who said this last week?
I have a very nuanced view of the DoL fiduciary duty rule: I think it is a terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad rule. For me that rule was never ever about investor protection. 
To me, that rule, it was about one thing and it was about enabling trial lawyers to increase profits.
So, who said it? No, not the head of an investment bank but rather the head of the SEC! Chairman Piwowar is certainly turning the SEC around - first looking to do away with private placement restrictions and now coming out strong against the DoL's fiduciary rule.

He is correct on the first comment. It is a terrible rule, which does more damage to brokers and investors than any perceived benefit, and we will all be better off if the administration manages to do away with it. The securities industry has enough rules and regulations, and brokers and advisers, in practice,  are already fiduciaries to their customers, The rule itself was a quagmire, and would have adverse effects throughout the industry, and would remove investment choices from investors across the country.

I don't know about the second comment, I don't think that customer lawyers have enough influence to get the Department of Labor to do anything. FINRA, maybe. The federal government? Doubtful.

'SEC chair rips into DoL fiduciary rule
Post a Comment