Don't Party Like It's 1999
After suffering its third humiliating defeat on the
"Merrill Lynch" rule in two years in front of a high federal court, the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) finds itself facing a serious
dilemma.
The SEC can either let the ruling stand, challenge
it in court or seek legislation to change the law. The betting is that
the agency will continue to try to determine the best way to let
wirehouse brokers deliver financial advice while permitting them to
avoid or sidestep fiduciary responsibility.
If the SEC continues to pursue this goal, they will
have the strong financial support of the wirehouses and their lobbyists
as they seek to lubricate the wheels of government, most likely
Congress. The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association
(SIFMA) has urged the SEC to petition for a rehearing, claiming the
court's verdict impairs consumer choice.
Even though the nominal layout of the competitive
playing field will revert to its 1999 boundaries, the changes that have
redrawn the financial services business over the last eight years
remain in force. What's at stake is about $300 billion in assets held
in about one million accounts, or 20% of all retail accounts, according
to SIFMA.
The SEC has until May 14 to petition the appeals
court for a rehearing and another 45 days after that to decide whether
to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. Most experts consider
any petition or appeal unlikely, given the agency's embarrassing and
abysmal recent record in court.
While the SEC's divisions of market regulation and
investment management may be spoiling for a courtroom victory, it's
likely that SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, a longtime congressman, will
overrule them and seek other avenues. Many think the SEC and SIFMA will
lobby Congress for legislative relief.
"That is a scenario that is likely," says Tom
Bradley, CEO of TD Ameritrade Institutional, which supported the FPA's
lawsuit. "In the end, the wirehouses want to provide advice without
accepting fiduciary responsibilities. This period of limbo could drive
more brokers to go independent."
Despite the vast financial resources wirehouses can
marshal to bring their case to Congress' attention, observers say they
can expect a "huge fight" in the legislative branch, which has many
other priorities ranging from the war in Iraq to the subprime mortgage
fiasco. The SEC has indicated it will rely on a study by the RAND
Corp., scheduled to be completed in 12 months, to decide how advice
will be delivered.
Whether or not they decide to seek legislative
relief, the wirehouses probably will have no choice but to repaper many
fee-based accounts. Depending on the nature of each broker-client
relationship, some accounts will revert to traditional brokerage
accounts while others can be converted to full-fledged advisory
accounts and brokers can become Investment Advisor Representatives
(IARs) under their employers' corporate RIA.
"If they make a lot of folks IARs, that's perfectly
fine," says Duane Thompson, head of government relations at FPA. "If
they receive a fee, they are or should be subject to a higher standard."
The last act has yet to be played out, but some
think it could be anticlimactic. "It's not over yet," says Roy
Diliberto, who was chair of FPA when it first challenged the rule seven
years ago. "I don't see how, in this political environment, Congress
would approve laws saying you don't put the customers' interests first
and you don't have to disclose it."
Yet the SEC's tenacity in fighting for a dubious
rule on behalf of the wirehouses has amazed him. "I never would have
thought the SEC would have carried it this far, especially after
[former SEC Chairman] Arthur Levitt, who originally proposed it,
indicated it was a mistake," Diliberto continues. "The SEC has been
acting like their constituents are the major brokerage firms, not the
investing public."
CFP Board Moving Headquarters
To D.C. By Year's End
In a 1,700-mile cross-country move designed to gain
a bigger voice for CFP licensees in policy and lawmaking decisions in
the nation's capital, the CFP Board of Standards will move its
headquarters from Denver to Washington, D.C., by the end of the year.
"We're recognizing that if we're going to accomplish
our mission to make sure the public gets ethical, competent advice, we
have to be where that policy is being shaped and sit in on those
conversations," CFP Board of Directors Chair Karen P. Schaeffer says.
The move is especially key as the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) undertakes its overhaul of Investment
Advisors Act regulation, she says. Schaeffer declines to specify the
cost of the move, but says it will impact the CFP Board's 40 current
employees, who will have the opportunity to reapply for their jobs.
Those who decide not to make the move or who aren't hired will get
"generous severance and job counseling," adds Schaeffer, who says that
a group of consultants the CFP Board hired is still working out what
staffing competencies are needed at the new headquarters. Office space
has yet to be located.
Schaeffer indicates the motivation to move this year
is more complex than FPA's growing Washington presence and the success
of its five-person government relations office, especially its recent
landmark legal victory forcing the SEC to rescind its "Merrill Lynch"
exemption for brokers offering investment advice.
"That wasn't it so much, but there have been a lot
of developments, and it's more and more clear that financial planning
is being done and regulated in so many different venues in a piecemeal
way," she says. "And we're out in Denver saying, 'Hey, talk to us.
We'll facilitate that. We'll steer that. We know about that.' We didn't
have the relevance we would have liked in many situations where
decisions regarding planning have been key."
Schaeffer says that the decision was not made
recently, but over a number of years. "I've been on the board five
years now, and I think the feeling was there when I started that the
board was missing opportunities in Washington and had a mission that it
wasn't fulfilling as well as it could."
While the CFP Board attempted to create a Washington
presence by opening an office in the northern Virginia suburbs back in
2000, the group's controversial and now-departed CEO, Sarah Teslik,
shuttered that office and terminated its two employees a month before
officially beginning her job in January 2005. Now, a little over two
years later, the CFP Board is ready to move its entire headquarters
there.
After a six-month search for Teslik's replacement,
the CFP Board will name its new CEO "in short order," says the board's
outside spokesman, Javier E. David. As for policy priorities once it
moves to Washington, Schaeffer says the board will work those out in
May. "We have to be enlightened regulators first and foremost, and I
think by being in Washington, D.C., we'll inspire a vision of how to do
that," she argues.
Is becoming a true self-regulatory organization like
the National Association of Securities Dealers in the cards for the
group, which oversees 55,000 CFPs in the United States and another
55,000 abroad? "It's not on my list of priorities right now," says
Schaeffer. "Our first mission is to serve the public. It's hard to have
conversations about an SRO when there are some pieces of the puzzle
still coming into place, like the evolution of planners
themselves." -Tracey Longo
Advisors Settle Multimillion Lawsuits
Former advisory firm partners Don Rembert and
Marjorie Fox have settled their respective lawsuit and countersuit over
who owned advisory clients after she was terminated from their firm in
the Washington, D.C., suburb of Falls Church, Va. The settlement
narrowly avoided a trial that could have cost either of them millions
of dollars in damages that each was seeking and could have set
far-reaching precedents in the advisory industry. Read Tracey Longo's
full story of the case in the FA News section of Financial Advisor's
Web site, http://www.fa-mag.com.