In April of this year, the Securities and Exchange Commission voted on an obscure ruling called the “Merrill Lynch rule”, which allows broker representatives to offer fee-based accounts without having to register as investment advisors. Broker representatives accept commissions as their compensation, so they must sell a product in order to receive compensation.
This ruling is something that consumers of financial products (investors) need to understand.
The Investment Advisor Act of 1940 provides certain protections to the consumer – such as ensuring that the advice provided is in the best interest of the consumer, for example. This ruling allows the broker representative to bypass this registration, so long as their advice is “solely incidental” to traditional brokerage services.
The obvious question here is, why would anyone hire a professional to provide them with “incidental advice”? If you were to ask folks why they do business with these brokerage firms, the answer would likely be because they feel comfortable that they’ll get good advice from a brand name company. In reality, you’re getting advice from people, not from a company. It’s a person you must trust.
In truth, there’s no such thing as incidental financial advice. Just as there is no such thing as incidental dentistry or an incidental brake job. Incidental financial advice is, by definition, incomplete financial advice, and does more harm than good. Either advice is provided properly and completely, in the interests of the consumer, by a professional acting as a fiduciary, or it’s simply a part of an overall sales job for insurance or investment products.
Two Types Of Professional
This ruling by the SEC effectively separates a class of financial professionals from being held to a fiduciary standard. The irony is that the SEC is pointing out with this ruling that the advice provided by the broker reps is incidental to their primary function of selling securities products. Doesn’t it make you wonder then, why the brokerage firms advertise themselves as financial advisors, financial consultants, and other titles that imply something other than what their primary job function is?
The Financial Planning Association, the largest organization of professionals who are dedicated to financial planning, stated in a written response to the SEC decision: “We believe that, at an absolute minimum, a consumer warning label is warranted given the confusion in the marketplace over who is a broker agent and who is a fiduciary investment advisor.”
With the adoption of this ruling, the SEC has effectively created two classes of financial professionals – those that work strictly in the best interest of their clients, and those that hide behind an exemption.
I just thought you’d like to know about this.