A lot has changed since NAPA Net readers last weighed in on the Labor Department’s fiduciary proposal — and so has our readers’ sense of what it could mean.
In the six months since then, we’ve not only gotten a chance to see and evaluate the proposal, but comments have been rolling in.
That activity has certainly allowed for a more informed perspective, and we received a significant number of new options from respondents.
However, the top expected result, according to NAPA Net readers remained unchanged; fewer advisors will offer retirement advice.
After that, there was more variety in the top 10. In fact, seven of the top 10 voted responses weren’t even on the January list. Here are the remaining top nine responses (the remaining six new votes are highlighted below):
- (NEW) A watered-down version of the proposal will become effective and accomplish some (but not all) of the original proposed rule's objectives.
- (NEW) Advisors who focus on rollovers/distributions will likely have their business models changed.
- (NEW) The majority of the rules will go through with some tweaks to the Best Interest provision. I don't think it will significantly drive up cost.
- Initially some disruptive effects, but all will settle out in a few years.
- (NEW) All retirement plan advisers will be fiduciaries, industry consolidation will increase, fees will drop.
- (NEW) Once enacted, there will be too much political weight to reverse the course.
- Advisors who work with retirement plans will all be fiduciaries.
- (NEW) Fiduciary advisors will only be impacted by reporting/compliance costs, brokers focused on rollover opportunities will exit.
- There will be fewer advisors.
So, there you have it — at least on the version of the proposal currently before us. Certainly good discussion fodder for the NAPA DC Fly-In Forum next week!
Thanks to everyone who participated in our reader poll. Got a suggestion for a future survey? Note it in the comments section below, or email me at [email protected].
