DOL Fiduciary Rule: Lower Fees, Unhappy Customers

by | Jul 17, 2017 | *Financial Awakenings, Fee Only Financial Planning, In The News, Money Psychology, Weekly Column

I recently learned about an unexpected response to the new Department of Labor rule which mandates that all financial advisors and brokers act as fiduciaries (that is, in the best interest of the consumer) when dealing with customers’ retirement plans. This means brokers will be discouraged from selling high fee and commission products to a customer’s IRA or similar retirement plan. The ruling may force many brokers to revamp for IRA products that have lower fees and commissions.

However, according to a J. D. Power survey as reported in Financial Planning, customers are not happy with their brokers charging them lower fees. While the survey found that the clients of fee-only advisors were “generally more satisfied with what they pay their firm,” it also found that commission-based clients are going to leave in droves if their advisors switch to a lower-cost, fee-only model.

Let me get this straight. A broker who until now has owed no fiduciary duty to the customer, and who sells high fee and commission products to that customer, will now be forced by their company to place the consumer’s interest first. When dealing with the customer’s IRA, the broker cannot receive commissions and can only earn a lower fee. The broker places a low-fee product in the client’s IRA. The result? The client is so upset they will take their business to another firm.

According to J. D. Powers, that is correct. Their survey says around 60% of the customers of brokerage firms that may have to switch to fee-only when dealing with customer’s IRAs will “probably” or “definitely” take their business to another firm.

I am imagining the following conversation between a customer and a broker.

Broker: “Because of the new DOL regulations I can no longer sell you a high fee and commission variable annuity to be owned by your IRA. To comply with the ruling, my company has eliminated the 7% upfront commission on this annuity; we will now charge you a 1% annual fee. They also reduced the annual management expenses from 3% to 1%. Plus, now any advice I give you or product I recommend must be in your best interests.”

Customer: “So you are eliminating the upfront 7% commission and replacing that with a 1% annual fee, which means 7% more of my money immediately goes to work for me in the investment, right?”

Broker: “That’s right.”

Customer. “And instead of the upfront commission you are charging a new 1% annual fee, but reducing the annual management costs of the investments from 3% to 1%. So I’ll still make an additional 1% every year I own this, in addition to saving 7% up front, right?”

Broker: “That’s right.”

Customer: “And further, you’re now going to look out for my best interests rather than the best interests of your company.”

Broker: “Yep.”

Customer: “This is ridiculous. I’m outta here!”

Broker: “Where are you going?”

Customer: “To find a firm that will continue to sell me high commission, high fee products for my IRA and that will work against my best interests!”

Broker: “You probably won’t find any. Every financial company selling investment products to IRAs has to comply.”

Customer: “I’ll find someone, somewhere. Goodbye!”

This defies all logic. I can only make up stories as to why the survey found the majority of brokerage customers would leave. Might some believe the new fees would cost them more than they currently pay? My best assumption is that there was no explanation of what “fee-only” or “fiduciary” meant.

If the results of the J. D. Power survey don’t make a lot of sense to you, join the crowd.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email