By
Investment advisors in the state of Idaho will soon be able to provide clients with fee-based advice on life insurance even if they do not have any kind of life insurance license, according to recently passed Idaho Bill No. 1342.
Richard Cooke, chairman of the local Financial Planning Association chapter in Boise, disagrees with this legislation.
"We feel that the consumer's interest must come first and that this is a consumer protection issue," says Cooke. "We simply feel that anyone advising and consulting on a fee basis should have the most basic understanding of insurance."
William Anderson, vice president and associate general counsel for the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors, says he has looked at the situation countrywide. "In some states they have decided to pass insurance consulting laws which provide that you have to get a license if you're going to consult about insurance," Anderson says.
"We looked at the laws of each state, and there are about 23 of them that have consulting laws as opposed to producer licensing laws," he says.
An insurance consulting law requires an advisor to obtain a license to provide advice regarding insurance as opposed to a producer license that allows the sale of insurance.
According to Anderson, his research reveals that of those 23 states requiring an insurance consulting license for advisors, only 3 exempted investment advisors from the licensing requirement–Maryland, Maine, and California. Now, Idaho will be added to that list.
NAIFA is taking the same position as Cooke and opposes this exemption for investment advisors. "It is our view that investment advisors should not be exempted from insurance consulting laws," he says.
"The fact that a person is an investment advisor provides no basis to determine that the person has sufficient knowledge and experience to provide advice concerning insurance," Anderson says.
Cooke testified before committees in the Idaho house and senate, opposing the legislation. He states that the training it takes to become an investment advisor doesn't provide enough insurance background needed to charge a fee for insurance advice.
"I am licensed for life and health, as well as an RIA–so I have my series 7 and 63 and I know what it is to go through the series 65 test and to be able to charge fees on the securities side. I know how much training they have on insurance–zero," says Cooke.
It was this very argument that prompted him to contact the national Financial Planning Association for support, but to his surprise, he found none.
Rather than supporting Cooke's position, the FPA went in the opposite direction and supported the legislation. In addition, the national FPA lobbied for the inclusion of the Certified Financial Planner designation as part of that exemption.
"I was shocked," says Cooke. "They sent a letter to every member of the senate business committee to that effect."