Proposal To Protect Retirees' Nest Eggs Becomes Latest Lobbying FlashpointMarcus Baram - HuffPo
Posted: 06/14/11 08:45 AM ET
<snip>
In a decision that reverberated through the universe of retirement professionals and their clients, Young's case was dismissed. Principal felt vindicated, stating at the time that it makes "every effort to ensure our business conduct fully satisfies our high ethical standards." The decision, along with many other cases in which it proved difficult to hold investment advisers accountable for allegedly self-serving advice, helped convince the Labor Department to make some changes.
The resulting proposal, which broadens the definition of a fiduciary -- a person bound to look out for another's interest -- has sparked a fierce lobbying battle in Washington, D.C., largely under the radar of the media.
By defining a fiduciary as a person who provides investment advice to retirement plans for a fee or some compensation, the proposal is intended to foster impartiality of advice and make advisers accountable. It also would strip investment advisers -- from large mutual funds to individual accountants -- of a long-standing source of revenue.
The proposal is fiercely opposed by a diverse array of interests, from Wall Street's biggest banks and securities industry groups to a bipartisan group of lawmakers including Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). The Labor Department has been flooded by comments, with those in opposition -- including Principal Financial -- drowning out the voices of consumer advocates and retiree groups. Several other firms that have been targeted by lawsuits involving their investment advice, including State Street, Northern Trust and JPMorgan, have filed lengthy letters in opposition to the proposal.
<snip>
More:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/14/retirement-proposal_n_876343.html:kick:
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
