Wealth Professional forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Notify me of new replies via email
Wealth Professional | 26 Feb 2014, 10:37 AM Agree 0
Soaring administration costs and the push to a fee-based model are these advisors regulatory beefs.
  • Jaye Walter | 26 Feb 2014, 11:47 AM Agree 0
    I think that it has become evident that we need to streamline the regulatory process and costs. Otherwise, we have redundancies and duplication of effort which may or may not actually benefit clients at all levels. To paraphrase the Mr. Scott from Star Trek 3, " the more you add to the plumbing, the easier it is to mess it up.."
  • Neil Hughes | 26 Feb 2014, 11:57 AM Agree 0
    It seems to me that regulators work hardest to justify their positions and any benefit to retail clients is incidental. We have so many levels of regulation that advisors spend too much time jumping through hoops and filling out forms to satisfy some obscure regulatory game with no measurable benefit to clients, and not enough time working directly for their clients.
  • Bob White, CLU | 26 Feb 2014, 06:23 PM Agree 0
    I agree with the comments on the extra fees that are getting passed on to clients and advisor's alike, and the down loading od a tremendous amount of admin, which either paralyzes a practices to the point of being unable to do the proper planning job for the clients, or hiring more support staff and minimizing the return on time and knowledge and expenses of the advisor.

    Yet, regulators get paid very well, check out the pensions they get vs, the clients, the advisor's, so it is very self serving.

    It is starting to look and feel like the Income Tax act. A big machine that protects us from ourselves.

    Spend some money educating the public not to make stupid mistakes and that they should not buy anything unless they know what they
    know what it is they are doing, and then let social services look after their retirement plans.


    Bob White
  • Doug McCaw | 27 Feb 2014, 07:59 AM Agree 0
    The industry response to protecting investors is similar to other things goverment or quasi government organizations do - lather up the paper rather than address the real cause. Arthur Levitt, former SEC Chairman stated in his book - "Take On the Street: What Wall Street and Corporate America Don't Want You to Know" - "behaviour is driven by the method of compensation". Eliminate commission compensation and you can reduce Compliance issues to a minimum.
Post a reply