Why the New DOL Fiduciary Rule Is Scarier Than Ever

Commentary February 07, 2024 at 05:06 PM
Share & Print

It's back!

Just when we thought the never-ending saga of market conduct standards might be coming to resolution, the federal agency that can never take "no" for answer is back at it.

And just like any good horror flick, the U.S. Department of Labor's new fiduciary rule package is scarier than ever. While it may seem like we've seen this movie before, there are key differences with this sequel and we cannot assume the same ending.

In 2010, DOL premiered its initial fiduciary proposal, which was soon retracted after a poor reception. DOL's main feature until now was its 2016 fiduciary rule, which was ultimately shot down by the courts.

DOL's 2020 guidance on rollovers or "fiduciary lite" was mostly nullified by a federal court in Florida while the remainder hangs in the balance in a lawsuit filed by the group I lead, the Federation of Americans for Consumer Choice. In late 2023, the DOL unveiled — on Halloween with no sense of irony — the latest formulation of this Nightmare on Main Street regulation.

Invoking the specter of "junk fees," the DOL seeks to embroil the financial services industry in yet another round of turmoil and lawsuits.

DOL keeps resorting to the same script, which is to turn all agents and brokers into fiduciaries because apparently there is a lack of regulation around an industry that is otherwise awash in regulatory requirements. This is not intended to be cynical but reflects exasperation with the DOL's 15-year fixation on extending its regulatory power through fiduciary duty.

'Plot Twists'

Yet this time around there are a couple of plot twists.

For one, this time the DOL is trying to overhaul PTE 84-24, changing it in fundamental ways that threaten the basic business model of independent distribution. Not only does DOL want to turn every agent and broker into a fiduciary, it also wants to impose on them an untested regime of regulation under amended PTE 84-24 which is largely unworkable for those agents working with multiple companies representing a variety of products.

This reconstituted PTE 84-24 shuns the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation Best Interest and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners' model regulation in favor of new requirements that force brokers and agents to declare they are fiduciaries, strangulates many forms of compensation, makes inadequate allowances for the role of independent marketing organizations, and imposes draconian supervisory obligations upon insurers.

It should send chills up the spines of agents and IMOs who cherish their independence and current way of doing business.

The other frightful concern is how the DOL is accelerating adoption mainly for political reasons.  The DOL's expansive rule package — nearly 500 pages containing a rewrite of the longstanding five-part test, overhaul of PTE 84-24, and changes to other PTEs — is on a fast track.

The DOL rule package had a short 60-day comment period and its proposed effective date is a mere 60 days after promulgation of the final rule.

This stands in contrast to the 2016 rule, which was accompanied by lengthy comment periods together with post-adoption temporary enforcement periods and a sensible two-year transition. This time around, the DOL uses the pretense that these are old issues and the industry is prepared when in fact what DOL is proposing radically alters accepted business practices and would be highly disruptive.

In view of these developments, FACC reckons only the courts can stop the DOL, even though considerable support abides in Congress and other regulatory authorities share in criticism of  DOL's encroachments.

FACC brought its lawsuit challenging the PTE 2020-02 guidance on rollovers because it knew then — and believes it has been vindicated since — that DOL is possessed by a wrongheaded notion that all salespeople are fiduciaries. By whatever means, the DOL seeks but one end, which is to turn everyday agents and brokers into fiduciaries.

None of this is easy because the industry is fatigued by endless legal and regulatory wrangling. But it would be a mistake now to let our guard down. FACC believes its lawsuit wending through federal courts is more important than ever because the latest rulemaking by DOL only proves that DOL is testing for any opening to expand its jurisdiction over the insurance industry.

Yes, the industry must beat back this latest rule proposal, but it is equally important that the industry stop DOL from achieving the same ends through reinterpretation of existing regulations. That is what FACC's current lawsuit is all about.

The industry also faces tactical issues on how to stop DOL from getting its way by implementing these new rules and requirements before they can be challenged in court.

As mentioned, DOL is rushing to put its new rules into effect with accelerated rulemaking and preposterously short implementation periods, all designed to force the industry to comply with such requirements before the industry could have its day in court. The industry may have no choice but to consider seeking preliminary injunction if DOL continues down this path.

Looking back, FACC acknowledges it has been beneficial to have renewed focus on market conduct standards. This has spurred other regulatory agencies to refine the standards of care, mostly going from "suitability" to "best interest" and creating more uniform disclosure around the role of agents and brokers vis-à-vis their clients.

One can debate whether any of this has truly altered the basic proposition that agents and brokers have always strived to provide the highest quality products and services for their clients. But there is certainly value either way in reminding industry of its responsibilities and ensuring consumers are treated fairly.

The problem is the DOL wants to turn legal principles on their head by turning brokers and agents into fiduciaries contrary to centuries of common law and far removed from the law of the land as decreed by Congress through enactment of ERISA.

DOL officials guided by an arrogance that only Washington can solve problems are on a relentless campaign to turn every financial services transaction into a fiduciary relationship.

While that may sound superficially appealing — after all, in theory, who could oppose higher standards in any industry? — the misapplication of fiduciary duties ordinarily reserved for trust  officers thrust upon financial salespeople will impede the natural marketplace, depriving consumers of the wider spectrum of choices that best meet their needs.

Not every consumer needs or wants a full-fledged fiduciary advisor, but that is the one-size-fits-all approach that DOL insists must be foisted on American consumers across the board.

It is disheartening that a federal agency like the DOL can expend endless energies and taxpayer dollars tilting at these windmills. Unfortunately, what it means is more litigation lies ahead, which in turn means more controversy that is good for bureaucrats and lawyers but does nothing for everyday consumers.

The DOL leaves industry no choice but to defend itself against this latest assault threatening to upset longstanding business practices and disrupt a thriving marketplace that has served consumers well.

Once again in 2024 — "It's alive!"

So another sequel ensues as industry fends off DOL's latest proposals. FACC recommends everyone grab another bag of popcorn and prepare for more litigation.

Pictured: Kim O'Brien


Kim O'Brien is FACC's CEO and has over 35 years of experience in the insurance industry. She previously headed other major industry trade associations for over a decade, including serving over 25 years as a leader in annuity and life product development for major insurance carriers.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Related Stories

Resource Center