On April 29, 2021, the State of New York Supreme Court Appellate Division in the Third Judicial Department issued an Opinion and Order finding that the amendment to New York Insurance Regulation 187 was unconstitutionally vague. In this Faegre Drinker podcast, a cross-disciplinary team of our attorneys discusses the preliminary implications of this important decision.
Author: Brad Campbell
Posts by Brad Campbell:
Investigating financial service providers to 401(k), 403(b) and other retirement plans for compliance with ERISA remains an area of focus for the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Employee Benefits Security Administration.
Join members of Faegre Drinker’s ERISA financial services team on April 27 from noon to 1:00 p.m. CT, as we explore what registered investment advisers can expect if they are selected for an investigation and best practices for getting through an investigation and negotiating a favorable resolution as quickly and painlessly as possible. While the focus will be on RIAs, this session should be informative for broker-dealers and dual registrants as well.
In light of the significance of the final rules and commission interpretations issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 5, 2019, Drinker Biddle & Reath’s Best Interest Compliance Team is publishing a series of articles on the subject. The first article, “The Final Reg BI Package: What to Know and What’s Next,” described the final package of rules and interpretations. The second article covered “Form CRS .” The third article, summarized here, will provide a more detailed analysis of strategically selected provisions of the RIA Guidance.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Interpretation Regarding Standard of Conduct for Investment Advisers (RIA Guidance) reaffirms, interprets, clarifies, and provides guidance regarding the fiduciary duty an investment adviser owes to its clients under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (Advisers Act) as it has been interpreted by common law and SEC guidance. The RIA Guidance also describes the underlying responsibilities that constitute an investment adviser’s fiduciary duties: the Duty of Care and the Duty of Loyalty.
On June 5, 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved the Regulation Best Interest Final Package, the new disclosure requirements that accompany the financial services industry’s new Regulation Best Interest standard of care. In light of the significance of Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) for the financial services industry, Drinker Biddle & Reath’s Best Interest Compliance Team is publishing a series of articles on the SEC’s finalized “Reg BI Package” of rules and guidance.
One of the four parts of that package is Form CRS − a mandate that broker-dealers and investment advisers with retail investors (natural persons, trusts or entities representing natural persons) provide a two-page relationship summary disclosing information about their firm before a new client enters an investment adviser’s agreement or engages the services of a broker-dealer, or in the case of an existing client when there is any material change in the nature and scope of the relationship.
In a previous post, we discussed why broker-dealers and their representatives will likely still be fiduciaries to ERISA plans and IRA investors in many cases despite the DOL Fiduciary Rule’s impending death (we say “impending” because, while the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in mid-March vacates the Fiduciary Rule in its entirety, the court’s official order implementing this decision has yet to be issued). To review, this is because broker-dealers and their representatives often satisfy all the prongs of the soon-to-be reinstated 1975 fiduciary regulation’s “Five-Part Test” defining when investment recommendations rise to the level of “fiduciary” advice. Previous industry assumptions that brokers and other “sellers” of investments generally were not fiduciaries under the 1975 regulation should no longer be relied upon. In this post, we’ll examine how the Fiduciary Rule’s impending demise will affect prohibited transaction and compensation issues for broker-dealers in light of their likely continuing status as fiduciaries. Continue reading “Why Fiduciary Status Still Matters in a Post-Fiduciary Rule World: A Look at Prohibited Transactions And Compensation”
The “old” rules will again prevail—but the old rules will not be applied in the old ways, and this will have some significant impacts on broker-dealers.
As the DOL has not asked for a rehearing of the Fifth Circuit’s decision vacating the Fiduciary Rule, or yet sought to appeal the decision, it is widely anticipated that the March 15 ruling will soon take effect, restoring the DOL’s 1975 regulation defining fiduciary investment advice to plan and IRA investors (we say “widely anticipated” because, while the official mandate vacating the Fiduciary Rule is expected soon, it has been delayed while the court considers efforts from certain states and other third parties to intervene in the case). While the SEC has proposed new regulations for broker-dealers, and while we expect the DOL to propose new prohibited transaction exemptions or regulations that will coordinate with the SEC’s actions, it will be at least a year before these initiatives could begin to apply. Continue reading “Old Standard, New Day: The Death of the Fiduciary Rule Doesn’t Mean That Broker-Dealers Won’t be Fiduciaries”