Tag Archives: conflict

Things I Worry About (26): Pooled Employer Plans and DOL RFI (7)

Key Takeaways

  • The DOL has issued guidance about PEPs—pooled employer plans—that includes questions designed to assist the DOL in developing future guidance about PEPs.
  • Some of those questions suggest a possible fiduciary safe harbor for small employers who adopt PEPs.
  • This article continues a discussion of the questions asked by the DOL and my comments on those questions and issues. In particular, this article covers some of the “safe harbor” questions raised by the DOL.
  • While the DOL questions are for future guidance, advisors and providers should be paying attention because, among other reasons, some current practices may be disfavored by the DOL.

This series of articles examines the DOL’s July 29, 2025, release that includes interpretative guidance on PEPs, solicits information about PEP practices, includes tips for selecting PEPs, and discusses a possible fiduciary safe harbor for adopting PEPs. 2025-14281.pdf (SECURED).

The first two articles in this series,  Things I Worry About (20) and Things I Worry About (21), discussed some of the DOL’s findings when it reviewed the 2023 Forms 5500 filed by PEPs.

The third, fourth and fifth articles, Things I Worry About (22)Things I Worry About (23), and Things I Worry About (24), reviewed issues identified by the DOL for employers who may be deciding whether to join a PEP.

Continue reading Things I Worry About (26): Pooled Employer Plans and DOL RFI (7)

Share

Things I Worry About (25): Pooled Employer Plans and DOL RFI (6)

Key Takeaways

  • The DOL has issued guidance about PEPs—pooled employer plans—that includes questions designed to assist the DOL in developing future guidance about PEPs.
  • Some of those questions suggest a possible fiduciary safe harbor for small employers who adopt PEPs.
  • This article begins a discussion of the questions asked by the DOL and my comments on those questions and issues. In particular, this article covers some of the “safe harbor” inquiries. The remaining DOL safe harbor questions will be discussed in my next article.
  • While the DOL inquiries are for future guidance, advisors and providers should be paying attention because, among other reasons, some current practices appear to be disfavored by the DOL.

This series of articles examines the DOL’s July 29, 2025, release that includes interpretative guidance on PEPs, solicits information about PEP practices, includes tips for selecting PEPs, and discusses a possible fiduciary safe harbor for adopting PEPs. 2025-14281.pdf (SECURED).

The first two articles in this series,  Things I Worry About (20) and Things I Worry About (21), discussed some of the DOL’s findings when it reviewed the 2023 Forms 5500 filed by PEPs.

The third, fourth and fifth articles, Things I Worry About (22)Things I Worry About (23), and Things I Worry About 24, reviewed issues identified by the DOL for deciding whether to join a PEP.

This article begins a series about the part of the guidance that was an RFI, where the DOL is soliciting information that would be helpful for future guidance. I quote and then discuss the questions that are the most interesting and relevant to employers and service providers.

Continue reading Things I Worry About (25): Pooled Employer Plans and DOL RFI (6)

Share

Things I Worry About (21): Pooled Employer Plans and DOL RFI (2)

Key Takeaways

  • The DOL has issued guidance about PEPs—pooled employer plans—that provides tips for adopting employers and questions about PEPs and a possible fiduciary safe harbor for small employers who adopt PEPs.
  • In addition, the preamble to the guidance includes some interesting information about the development of PEPs.
  • That information includes data about the successes of PEPs and also some considerations for evaluating PEPs.

This series of articles examines the DOL’s July 29, 2025 release that includes interpretative guidance on PEPs, solicits information about PEP practices, includes tips for selecting PEPs, and discusses a possible fiduciary safe harbor for adopting PEPs. 2025-14281.pdf (SECURED).

Continue reading Things I Worry About (21): Pooled Employer Plans and DOL RFI (2)

Share

Things I Worry About (10): FINRA Enforcement and Senior Investors (2)

Key Takeaways

  • FINRA’s 2025 Annual Regulatory Oversight Report 2025-annual-regulatory-oversight-report.pdf included a focus on issues related to retirees and senior investors.
  • The Report provides guidance to broker-dealers about the priorities of FINRA in its regulation, supervision and enforcement programs for broker-dealers. In other words, it is one of FINRA’s ways of telling the regulated community that it should be paying particular attention to certain issues.
  • Consistent with my focus on retirement plans and retirees, I searched the Report for references to retirement, rollovers, elderly and senior investors. As expected, FINRA did have a lot of concern about those subjects. Here is what I found.
  • While the FINRA Report only directly applies to broker-dealers, the issues and concerns apply to investment advisers as well, but the regulator in that case is the SEC.

This article is a sequel to my last one on FINRA’s 2024 Annual Regulatory Report Things I Worry About (9).

Among other things, FINRA is focusing on services and recommendations by broker-dealers and their registered representatives to retirees, senior investors and investors with diminished capacity.  To state the obvious, the regulator is concerned about the aging of the Boomers in real time.

The Report discusses the application of Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) to rollover recommendations. Here is what it says in the section on Failure to Comply with the Compliance Obligation:

Failing to have written policies and procedures reasonably designed or enforced with respect to account recommendations, for example, by:

  • not being reasonably designed to address recommended transfers of products between brokerage and advisory accounts or rollover recommendations;…

Continue reading Things I Worry About (10): FINRA Enforcement and Senior Investors (2)

Share

Things I Worry About (9): FINRA Enforcement and Senior Investors (1)

Key Takeaways

  • FINRA’s 2024 Annual Regulatory Oversight Report 2024 FINRA Annual Regulatory Oversight Report | FINRA.org included a focus on issues related to retirees and senior investors.
  • The Report provides guidance to broker-dealers about the priorities of FINRA in its regulation, supervision and enforcement programs for broker-dealers. In other words, it is one of FINRA’s ways of telling the regulated community that it should be paying particular attention to certain issues.
  • Consistent with my focus on retirement plans and retirees, I searched the Report for references to retirement, rollovers and senior investors. As expected, FINRA did have concerns about those subjects. Here is what I found.

Among other things, FINRA is focusing on services and recommendations by broker-dealers and their registered representatives to retirees, senior investors and investors with diminished capacity.

The Report has one part that specifically focuses Reg BI’s application to plan-to-IRA  and IRA-to-IRA transfer recommendations. Here is what it says. The bolding is mine.

Continue reading Things I Worry About (9): FINRA Enforcement and Senior Investors (1)

Share

The New Fiduciary Rule (26): Changes to PTE 2020-02 (1): Affecting the Advisor

In November 2023, the U.S. Department of Labor released its package of proposed changes to the regulation defining fiduciary advice and to the exemptions for conflicts and compensation for investment recommendations to retirement plans, participants (including rollovers), and IRAs (including transfers). On March 8, 2024, the DOL sent the final rule to the Office of Management and Budget in the White House.

Key Takeaways

  • The DOL’s proposed fiduciary regulation includes a new and expanded definition of when a person will become a fiduciary under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code due to recommendations to retirement investors.
  • As a result, many more advisors and agents will be fiduciaries.
  • If a fiduciary recommendation to a retirement investor is conflicted, any resulting financial benefit will be prohibited under ERISA and the Code. In that case, to avoid the consequences of a prohibited transaction, it would be necessary to comply with the conditions of a prohibited transaction exemption (PTE)—most likely PTE 2020-02.
  • This article discusses the proposed changes to PTE 2020-02 that will affect individual advisors and agents. My next article will discuss the changes that affect the financial institutions.

The first, and current, version of Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE) 2020-02 was effective in December 2020. In November of 2023, the DOL proposed amendments to PTE 2020-02 in connection with its proposed regulation expanding the definition of fiduciary advice to retirement investors—private sector retirement plans, participants in those plans, and IRA owners.

The proposed regulation will cause many more people and firms to be fiduciaries when they make “investment” recommendations to retirement investors. (I put the apostrophes around investment because the term, as used in the regulation, includes a range of services and types of properties.)

Continue reading The New Fiduciary Rule (26): Changes to PTE 2020-02 (1): Affecting the Advisor

Share

The New Fiduciary Rule (25): Robo Advice and Robo Conflicts

In November 2023, the U.S. Department of Labor released its package of proposed changes to the regulation defining fiduciary advice and to the exemptions for conflicts and compensation for investment recommendations to retirement plans, participants (including rollovers), and IRAs (including transfers). On March 8, 2024, the DOL sent the final rule to the Office of Management and Budget in the White House.

Key Takeaways

  • The DOL’s proposals make it clear that robo advice, both “hybrid” and “pure”, can be fiduciary advice, subject to the provisions of ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code.
  • When pure robo advice (no human directly involved) or hybrid robo advice is given, if it satisfies the regulatory definition of fiduciary advice, the financial institution will be a fiduciary under ERISA (if to an ERISA plan or a participant in such a plan) and subject to ERISA’s duties of prudence and loyalty.
  • If robo advice generates a fiduciary recommendation that is conflicted, the conflicted amount (e.g., commissions, management fees) will be a prohibited transaction under ERISA and the Code, which would necessitate compliance with the conditions of a prohibited transaction exemption (PTE).
  • This article discusses robo advice under PTE 2020-02.

Under the current PTE 2020-02, the exemptive relief is not extended to “pure” robo-advisers. Instead, only “hybrid” robo-advisers can provide nondiscretionary fiduciary advice to retirement investors where the advice is conflicted (e.g., proprietary investments, revenue sharing, commissions). However, when the proposed amendments to the PTE become final and applicable, compensation resulting from conflicted nondiscretionary advice will be permitted if the conditions of the exemption are satisfied.

Continue reading The New Fiduciary Rule (25): Robo Advice and Robo Conflicts

Share

The New Fiduciary Rule (24): The DOL Fiduciary Rule Requires a Recommendation. What is That?

In November 2023, the U.S. Department of Labor released its package of proposed changes to the regulation defining fiduciary advice and to the exemptions for conflicts and compensation for investment recommendations to retirement plans, participants (including rollovers), and IRAs (including transfers). On March 8, 2024, the DOL sent the final rule to the Office of Management and Budget in the White House.

Key Takeaways

    • The DOL’s proposed fiduciary regulation includes a new and expanded definition of when a representative of a broker-dealer, investment adviser, bank or insurance company will become a fiduciary under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code.
    • The new definition starts with whether a “recommendation” has been made. If a recommendation results in fiduciary status, but does not include a conflict of interest, the only purpose of the definition is to determine whether ERISA’s fiduciary standards apply to advice to ERISA-governed retirement plans (including participants in those plans). It would have no effect under the Code (e.g., IRAs) in that case.
    • However, if a fiduciary recommendation is conflicted, it will be a prohibited transaction under ERISA and the Code, which would necessitate compliance with the conditions of a prohibited transaction exemption (PTE).
    • This article discusses the definition of “recommendation.”

The preamble to the proposed fiduciary regulation describes the significance of a recommendation as follows:

Whether a person has made a ‘‘recommendation’’ is a threshold element in establishing the existence of fiduciary investment advice.

Continue reading The New Fiduciary Rule (24): The DOL Fiduciary Rule Requires a Recommendation. What is That?

Share

The New Fiduciary Rule (17): Permissible Compensation under PTE 84-24

The U.S. Department of Labor has released its package of proposed changes to the regulation defining fiduciary advice and to the exemptions for conflicts and compensation for investment recommendations to retirement plans, participants (including rollovers), and IRAs.

Key Takeaways

  • ERISA’s fiduciary and prohibited transaction rules require consideration of costs and compensation when fiduciary recommendations are made to “retirement investors,” that is, to private sector retirement plans, participants in those plans, and IRA owners.
  • Where the Internal Revenue Code’s prohibited transaction rules would be violated, the protection of an exemption is needed. In that case, the protections of PTEs 84-24 and 2020-02 will require that costs and compensation be considered.
  • This article focuses on limitations on compensation under PTE 84-24.
  • While the general rule in ERISA and the Code is that compensation cannot be more than a reasonable amount, the PTE has additional limitations.

ERISA’s fiduciary responsibility rules require that costs, for investments, insurance products and services, be no more than a reasonable amount. In other words, a prudent process will consider the costs of products and services relative to their value to the retirement investor and relative to reasonably available alternatives. ERISA’s prohibited transaction rules, and the exemptions to the prohibitions, impose a similar limit on compensation when a fiduciary recommendation is conflicted, that is, the compensation cannot be more than a reasonable amount when compared to the value of services being offered. These rules apply to all ERISA-governed retirement plans and participant accounts in those plans (including rollover recommendations).

The Code has prohibited transaction provisions with similar limitations on compensation, that is, compensation cannot exceed a reasonable amount relative to the services provided. The Code limits apply to both tax-qualified retirement plans and IRAs (including individual retirement annuities). However, the Code does not have a standard of care for recommendations to IRA owners. Instead, the applicable standard of care is imposed by other laws and regulations (for example, the best interest standard for insurance agents in NAIC model rule 275).

Continue reading The New Fiduciary Rule (17): Permissible Compensation under PTE 84-24

Share

The New Fiduciary Rule (16): Permissible Compensation under PTE 2020-02

The U.S. Department of Labor has released its package of proposed changes to the regulation defining fiduciary advice and to the exemptions for conflicts and compensation for investment recommendations to retirement plans, participants (including rollovers), and IRAs.

Key Takeaways

  • ERISA’s fiduciary and prohibited transaction rules require consideration of costs and compensation when fiduciary recommendations are made to “retirement investors,” that is, to private sector retirement plans, participants in those plans, and IRA owners.
  • Where the Internal Revenue Code’s prohibited transaction rules would be violated, the protection of an exemption is needed. In that case, the protections of PTEs 84-24 and 2020-02 will require that costs and compensation be considered.
  • This article focuses on limitations on compensation under PTE 2020-02. However, compensation of advisors and their firms is often an element of the costs of the services and products, and thus can also be part of the consideration of costs.
  • While the general rule in ERISA and the Code is that compensation cannot be more than a reasonable amount, the PTE has additional limitations.

ERISA’s fiduciary responsibility rules require that costs, for both investments and services, be no more than a reasonable amount. In other words, a prudent process will consider the costs of investments and services relative to the value of those investments or services to the retirement investor and relative to reasonably available alternatives. ERISA’s prohibited transaction rules, and the exemptions to the prohibitions, impose a similar limit on compensation when a fiduciary recommendation is conflicted, that is, the compensation cannot be more than a reasonable amount when compared to the value of services being offered. These rules apply to all ERISA-governed retirement plans and participant accounts in those plans (including rollover recommendations).

Continue reading The New Fiduciary Rule (16): Permissible Compensation under PTE 2020-02

Share