Initial Costs of Rule to be Nearly 20 Times DOL's Estimate
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the Financial Services Institute (FSI) released its study, “Economic Consequences of the U.S. Department of Labor’s Proposed New Fiduciary Standard.”
The study was conducted with Oxford Economics and focuses on the economic impact of the Department of Labor’s (DOL) proposed fiduciary rule for retirement advice on the independent financial services industry and investors who rely on independent advice.
The study estimates the DOL’s proposed rule will cost the independent financial services industry and investors nearly $3.9 billion in total startup costs to implement the rule – nearly 20 times DOL’s preferred cost estimate.
This amount does not take into account the cost of investors’ lost access to advice or the ongoing costs of maintaining compliance with the rule. The evidence presented in the study also suggests that if the rule is implemented, only high net-worth investors will be able to access and afford professional retirement investment advice.
Unintended Consequences
“This study shows that the DOL’s proposed fiduciary rule would be costly and burdensome to both the independent financial services industry and the investors that rely on the critical advice they receive,” said FSI President & CEO Dale Brown. “It also illustrates the unintended consequences the rule will have on hard-working Americans trying to save for retirement, particularly low and moderate-income investors who need advice the most.”
Other findings of the study:
• DOL has dramatically underestimated the compliance cost of the new rule and how difficult it will be for small firms to survive if it is implemented.
• The proposed rule will result in estimated startup costs ranging from $1.1 million to $16.3 million per firm, depending on firm size.
• BDs and investment advisers would be forced to either substantially change their current business models or navigate the challenging demands of a new “Best Interest Contract Exemption” (BICE).
• The rule will result in less access to advice from financial advisors for small and medium-sized investors. One unintended consequence may be that it will become harder for minority investors with small asset holdings to seek advice from financial advisors.
• The proposed rule will result in industry consolidation likely to force small broker-dealers out of business.
• An expanded potential for systemic risk in the retirement savings market as savers are increasingly pushed into the same set of standardized “low-cost” assets.
Click here for the full report.
Methodology
This report represents a close reading and critique of the Department’s Regulatory Impact Analysis, acknowledging the wealth of comments already published on this topic.1 To inform this work, Oxford Economics conducted its own data gathering with the help of FSI,2 the professional organization that represents independent financial services firms and independent financial advisors.
About the Financial Services Institute (FSI)
The Financial Services Institute (FSI) is the only organization advocating solely on behalf of independent financial advisors and independent financial services firms. Since 2004, through advocacy, education and public awareness, FSI has successfully promoted a more responsible regulatory environment for more than 100 independent financial services firm members and their 160,000+ affiliated financial advisors – which comprise over 60% of all producing registered representatives. We effect change through involvement in FINRA governance as well as constructive engagement in the regulatory and legislative processes, working to create a healthier regulatory environment for our members so they can provide affordable, objective advice to hard-working Main Street Americans. For more information, please visit financialservices.org.
About Oxford Economics
Oxford Economics is a global leader in thought leadership, forecasting, and quantitative analysis, serving more than 850 international corporations, financial institutions, governmental organizations, and universities worldwide. Founded in 1981 as a joint venture with Oxford University, Oxford Economics is now a leading independent economic consultancy. Headquartered in Oxford, with offices around the world, it employs more than 200 people, including over 120 economists, and a network of 500 contributing researchers.
n more at oxfordeconomics.com. [1] It is important to note that this report is an economic analysis of the rule’s likely impacts. While Oxford Economics consulted with FSI lawyers and believe that the study is not misrepresenting the rule’s requirements, this is not a legal analysis. Where the study reports interpretations of the rule’s likely effects—frequently necessary because the Department does not make clear its own intended meaning—these reflect comments Oxford Economics received from knowledgeable individuals in their interviews. [2] This work was conducted under contract with and financially supported by FSI. [3] Sutherland (2015). “Legal Alert: DOL Has Many Questions About its Fiduciary Reproposal.” http://www.sutherland.com/NewsCommentary/Legal-Alerts/174358/
