Updated Saturday, December 20, 2014 as of 1:35 AM ET

SEC Commissioner 'Not Convinced' on Uniform Fiduciary Standard

WASHINGTON -- Just a day after a top SEC official hinted at discord within the commission about an expansion of fiduciary rules to include brokers, a voting member of the agency spoke out in opposition to the proposal, at least until supporters can build a stronger case.

Get access to this article and thousands more...

All On Wall Street articles are archived after 7 days. REGISTER NOW for unlimited access to all recently archived articles, as well as thousands of searchable stories. Registered Members also gain access to exclusive industry white paper downloads, web seminars, blog discussions, the iPad App, CE Exams, and conference discounts. Qualified members may also choose to receive our free monthly magazine and any of our daily or weekly e-newsletters covering the latest breaking news, opinions from industry leaders, developing trends and growth strategies.

Already Registered?

Comments (4)
For a moment I thought the near-impossible/improbable was happening: a federal regulator against another regulation. No, while handing a little something with one hand Gallagher reached around the backs of the folks and stole something bigger.

I've got a Ph.D. in politics from the Sam Twa school of political science and that is rule number 1: don't trust them. Proven right again!
Posted by Kirby L | Wednesday, May 21 2014 at 12:40PM ET
Sam Twa? Where the hell is that?
Posted by Gary D | Wednesday, May 21 2014 at 1:24PM ET
What a complete farce! The "cost" issue is a complete ruse. Most BDs already have a proprietary RIA, so they should be reviewing trades by their IARs (investment advisory repesentatives) using the "best interests" standard. Furthermore, FINRA has already come out in Release 12-25 and unequivocally stated that reps and BDs must always act in the best interests of their clients. So, again, there should be no extra costs in adopting a universal fiduciry standard.

If Commissioner Gallagher, or Chairwoman White or any other Commissioner for that matter, wants more evidence of the need for a universal fiduciry standand, all they have to do is call their enforcement division and FINRA to see the ongoing abusive practices of the financial services industry. Given the current regulatory emphasis on transparency, perhaps Commissioner Gallagher should work on a better story and come clean on the real reason the SEC refuses to do the right thing (see FPA v. SEC decision)
Posted by James W | Wednesday, May 21 2014 at 2:25PM ET
This debate has nothing to do with what standard of care "advisers" must use with clients. It has everything to do with conflicts of interest inherent in the investment industry. If advisers have two "suitable" products and one pays 2% and one pays 5% there will always be a conflict of interest. If a fiduciary standard is applied this type of conflict must cease to exist. This is what the BD industry seeks to avoid.
Posted by Bryin S | Thursday, June 05 2014 at 1:16PM ET
Add Your Comments:
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.

Already a subscriber? Log in here