11

What your financial adviser's not saying

Elderly woman talks to financial adviser in her home.

To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.

Get Adobe Flash player

TEXT OF STORY

Kai Ryssdal: Not too far below health care on the legislative agenda when Congress gets back to work next week will be coming up with new rules for how Wall Street does business. A lot of the discussion so far has been about protecting consumers from potential wrongs they don't even know about.

Forget the bigger problems of toxic assets and collateralized debt obligations for a second. What if your financial adviser's selling you an investment that he or his firm stand to profit from? From New York, Marketplace's Amy Scott has more.


AMY SCOTT: I'm going to use one of those jargony finance words we at Marketplace generally try to avoid. Fiduciary.

BARBARA ROPER: A fiduciary duty is the responsibility to act in the best interests of your clients.

That's Barbara Roper. She's director of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America.

Roper says there are basically two kinds of people you can go to for financial advice. You can go to a registered investment adviser. Or a registered broker-dealer. One big difference? Investment advisers are required by law to put your interests ahead of their own. Broker dealers are not.

Roper says they have to sell you products that are suitable but not necessarily in your best interest.

ROPER: Broker-dealers give extensive investment advice, but they're regulated as sales people and have not been subject to a fiduciary duty. However, they call themselves financial advisers, they offer advisory services, they market themselves based on the advice offered. And this, of course, creates a great deal of consumer confusion.

I'll say. The Obama administration wants to cut through that confusion by applying the same fiduciary duty to anyone who gives investment advice.

The broker-dealer industry has fought the idea for years. Critics say brokers make a lot of money selling their firm's own products when a competitor's might be better or cheaper for you.

But since the financial crisis, the industry's changed its position. Ira Hammerman is general counsel to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, or SIFMA. That's the brokerage industry's main trade group. He admits there are flaws in the system.

IRA HAMMERMAN: We owe investors clarity, and we do not have clarity today. So what we would like to see is a new federal standard, a high standard, and one that offers consistent protection to investors across the land.

But what exactly will that standard be? That's where the fight is shaping up.

Consumer advocate Barbara Roper says the brokerage industry doesn't want a real fiduciary standard but a watered down "fiduciary lite." She says SIFMA supports a standard that only applies when brokers give financial advice, not when they actually sell whatever mutual fund or other product they advise you to buy.

ROPER: An approach that would be poorly understood by investors, and an invitation to abuse.

Roper says, for example, a broker would be held to a fiduciary standard when advising you to buy a growth stock mutual fund. But when it came time to sell the product, he might be inclined to push the one that earned him a higher commission.

The Obama administration has proposed that the SEC look into these sorts of conflicts, and ban forms of compensation that may be harmful to investors.

Dale Brown is CEO of the Financial Services Institute, a group representing broker-dealers and financial advisers. He, and pretty much everyone I talked to, says it's impossible to rid the advice industry of conflicts.

DALE BROWN: What's important, I believe, is not that there are conflicts of interest, there are. But it's how are those conflicts disclosed and managed so that the investor gets the advice and help and service that they need.

Brown says there's nothing wrong with the commission-based business model. He says it makes advice accessible to people who might not be able to afford an adviser who charges a fee.

Andy Rosenfield is CEO of Guggenheim Investment Advisers, a firm that markets itself as conflict-free. He says even when conflicts are disclosed, investors don't always read the disclosure or understand it.

ANDY ROSENFIELD: When I get a prescription from a doctor, it comes with a five-page printed sort of insert that you unfold, I seldom read it. On the other hand if the prescription says on the face, "Don't be in the sun," you understand.

The investing equivalent might be a simple notice saying: "This broker receives compensation from a third party." That would be one way of letting investors decide whether the advice benefits them, or their broker.

In New York, I'm Amy Scott for Marketplace.

About the author

Amy Scott is Marketplace’s education correspondent covering the K-12 and higher education beats, as well as general business and economic stories.

Pages

Zakk Greene's picture
Zakk Greene - Jun 28, 2010

National Ethics Bureau is a meaningless designation used to impart a
false sense of ethical responsibility and expertise to an agent. The truth is that anyone can purchase membership in this organization. A quick google search will show NEB members are not immune to breaches in ethics: http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#hl=en&q="DOCKET+NO.+E-2007-0020"+"NEB"

Ian Edwards's picture
Ian Edwards - Sep 2, 2009

O wow i just found out they also sponsor a E&O program. for details see http://www.EOforLess.com

Ian Edwards's picture
Ian Edwards - Sep 2, 2009

National Ethics Bureau is kind of like the BBB for financial planners. You can do a zip code search for nearby approved members. See details here:
http://www.ethicscheck.com/about/benefits.htm

Jody Newman's picture
Jody Newman - Sep 1, 2009

With fee-only planners, where is there a conflict of interest?
The story was well done -- I agree.

Troy Smith's picture
Troy Smith - Sep 1, 2009

$1,000 of commissions, $1,000 of money management fees, or $1,000 of hourly charges listening to advice, which arrangement has no conflicts? There is no such thing as a "conflict free" engagement with a financial adviser, insurance agent, stockbroker, wealth manager, accountant, attorney, name your professional, etc. $1,000 of fees, or $1,000 of commissions is still $1,000. The issue is how they are disclosed and are they required to be disclosed by law. Even "fee-only" advisors are required by law to provide disclosures. The story was well done.

Adrea B's picture
Adrea B - Aug 31, 2009

One more comment to follow up. I think about 70% of my portfolio was invested in this high risk, high yield fund. There were not letters to me asking if that was okay, there were no emails or letters produced by the company, demonstrating that they'd reviewed my file and met with the broker. There was no protection of "the little guy" here. And regardless of what the SEC says companies must do, they don't...and they get away with it.
Thank you for listening. I'm sure my experience is just one of many, where we can't get heard and are taken advantage of.

Adrea B's picture
Adrea B - Aug 31, 2009

I was so hopeful to hear Ms. Scott's interview with Ms. Roper and hope I hear from someone. I have the audio tapes of the hearing. I am a victim of the SEC's protection of it's own. I apologise for the harsh, yet accurate, word. Firsthand I've experienced the bias and lack of oversight of the SEC of the company, and the company of it's stockbroker, who was also a certified financial advisor. I'd never been to arbitration and I did so, believing in the system. The arbitration and SEC do NOT protect the consumer. They protect the industry. My attorney, with significant SEC experience, took my case on contingency, because he knew it was strong. One is required to sign, saying there is no appeal. When I divorced, my broker never had me sign a new client form, solely for myself, which would have indicated my lack of experience and safety goals. (Safety goals mentioned often in emails). I was placed in risky funds, totally wrong for my lack of experience and necessity of safety. And when i questioned him, he said it's safe, and he has his Mother in them. So I trusted that. I later learned that the fund he placed me continued to go down in value as he continued to place me in it. I also later learned that Morningstar rated many other funds much higher than this one, for the entire time he continued to invest me in it...and those funds did well, while this one declined. I believe the company and/or the broker, had a relationship with the fund. I'm sorry to say that one very nice arbitrator was hard of hearing, so we were asked to speak up and it was obvious he still couldn't hear well....and he fell asleep a few times during the hearing. The company brought in the "new york team" to San Francisco. In one instance, the broker could have saved me money if he'd only filed a letter with the company he bought from for my account. I learned from my attorney that when you buy a certain amount of something, you receive a discount. He bought this amount for me and never sent the letter for the discount. My attorney was astonished that we didn't win on that point. The assumption was that the judges didn't want to taint the reputation of the company nor the broker, for that mistake. Yet he and the company made other larger mistakes. I know that there are other SEC attorneys who feel the same way about the arbitration system. Beware if you arbitrate. I afterwards learned that, if the "judges" rule against the big company, it taints them for being being hired again by the big companies, to be arbitrators....so with some of them, there's a bias if they need the fees.
I very much hope someone contacts me.
There is so much wrong here.

Jody Newman's picture
Jody Newman - Aug 31, 2009

Fee-only financial planners don't take commissions from any financial products they recommend or any compensation of any kind except the fees paid directly to them by their clients, so clients get unbiased, objective advice. There is no potential conflict-of-interest and no incentive for the advisor to give anything other than advice in the best interest of the client. No warnings are necessary; clients don't need to read disclosure statements or complicated explanations.
It's silly to say that commissions make advice affordable; advice that is in the broker's self interest is not worth anything to the client.
(Full disclosure: I am a fee-only financial planner.)

Raymond Fancher's picture
Raymond Fancher - Aug 31, 2009

There is a conflit of interest any time money is involved: Buying a: Car, Insurance, Home, appliences, shoes, clothes, TV's etc As a salesman I want to get the most money (commission) for my product. Every since the first camel was traded, somebody has always gotten the better end of the deal.

Richard Hanseen's picture
Richard Hanseen - Aug 31, 2009

The issues are complex not simple. But for sure it should be clear, a broker is a salesman! If he doesn’t produce he gets the ax. He sells what his boss tells him to sell.
I am a CPA/PFS and Registered Investment Advisor. I grew up on Fiduciary Responsibility, so for me it is easy to see the client’s issues first. .
I take issue with the idea that you can teach this stuff to high school students. To try to tell a teenager, going through puberty, the difference between a broker and registered investment advisor and expect it to have in impact is a little naive. And to take it a little further, the brokerage community designed derivatives but cannot value them....a high school student can?
The depreciation rules are complex also, the book rules are different than the tax rules. Then how about component depreciation? But education is one facet of solving the problem. I think the real issue is to let the public know the difference between a broker and a fiduciary.
What’s gong to happen when the banks sell securities to their unsuspecting depositors? The depositors think banks are Fiduciaries, not any more; they are brokerage houses selling risk, sometimes big risk.
I would love to have further discussions but that would take a book.

Pages