Don't Finalize Fiduciary Rule Now, Groups Urge DOL

Analysis April 15, 2024 at 03:07 PM
Share & Print

What You Need To Know

  • Trade groups say Labor and OMB should allow for further input.
  • ERISA attorney and former DOL official Brad Campbell said the rule was completed too quickly.
  • But Better Markets' Stephen Hall called the groups' request a meritless, last-ditch attempt to stop the rule.
Melanie Waddell

Industry trade groups are pressing the Labor Department to continue to receive public input on its fiduciary rule and not "finalize the rule now."

In a letter sent Monday to acting Labor Secretary Julie Su as well as the Office of Management and Budget, the 11 groups — which include the Financial Services Institute, the Insured Retirement Institute, the American Council of Life Insurers, Finseca and the National Association of Insurance Financial Advisors — state that Labor rushed its rule through and asked Labor and OMB to "stand up for the integrity of the regulatory process and continue the public input process."

The groups' letter comes just days after the White House Office of Management and Budget concluded on April 10 its review of Labor's final fiduciary rule.

Industry officials anticipate Labor could release its final rule by Wednesday.

The trade groups' letter cites concerns around "significant rulemaking flaws in the regulatory process at your two agencies" associated with Labor's recently proposed "Retirement Security Rule: Definition of an Investment Advice Fiduciary."

"The ramifications of this proposed rulemaking are extensive, making the need for public comment and careful review critical," the groups state. "In the view of many experts, DOL's 2016 rule had devastating effects on low- and middle-income individuals. We anticipate similar impacts should the proposal go final with little change."

Jason Berkowitz, IRI's chief legal and regulatory affairs officer, told ThinkAdvisor Monday in an email that Labor's "response to industry comments, testimony, and feedback to date has not been encouraging. However, we will seize upon every opportunity to remind DOL about the likely harm its proposed rule will inflict upon millions of retirement savers and the significant rulemaking flaws in this regulatory process."

The groups state in their letter that "it is paramount that the rulemaking process include careful scrutiny and a robust public policy dialogue," and that they "have grave concerns regarding DOL and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs' … extremely short review of a major rule that displayed little interest in public input and collaborative discourse."

The groups pressed Labor and OMB "to reconsider this rush to judgment and allow for further input and constructive dialogue before this rule is finalized. The consequences of this rule are too significant to be overlooked."

'Can't Be Done This Fast'

In a lengthy LinkedIn post, Brad Campbell, former head of Labor's Employee Benefits Security Administration, who's now a partner at Faegre Drinker in Washington, stated that "the bottom line on the final DOL fiduciary rule package OMB just greenlighted — it just can't be done this fast if you're doing it right.

"I don't say this lightly. I say it based on my experience as someone who has managed the regulatory process in promulgating controversial and economically significant Federal rules. This is not how it is done," he explained.

Campbell went on to state that he doesn't believe that Labor "could — in only 66 calendar days — give appropriate consideration under the Administrative Procedure Act to the roughly 20,000 comments it received; give appropriate consideration to the dozens and dozens of significant legal, technical and policy issues those comments raised; make decisions to appropriately resolve each of those issues; draft a well-written final rule text and preamble explaining the final text; and develop and draft an economic analysis, small business impact analysis, and Federalism analysis that reflects all those new decisions while correcting the significant deficiencies of these analyses in the prior Proposal."

Further, OMB could not "… in only 33 calendar days have given appropriate consideration and review of DOL's regulatory package under the APA and the various Executive Orders governing the regulatory process."

'Last Refuge of a Desperate Group'

But Stephen Hall, legal director at Better Markets, countered in an email to me the same day that Campbell and the groups' "procedural argument has no merit whatsoever. It is the last refuge of a desperate group of industry opponents fighting tooth and nail against the DOL rules."

"Why?" Hall asked. "Because the rules will, once and for all, end the ability of financial advisers—especially insurance companies and their agents—to extract easy profits at the expense of their retirement-saver clients. They have launched every conceivable attack against these overdue reforms, yet none of them hold water."

Labor's rulemaking process, "was thorough, inclusive, and transparent, including an ample comment period that complied with all of the laws, rules, and guidance governing the rulemaking process under the APA," he said.

Labor, Hall added, "also convened multiple days of public hearings at which stakeholders from all sides were able to offer their input. These critics gloss over the fact that the proposed changes to the 'best interest' standard governing advisers represent only modest amendments to requirements that have been in place since 2020."

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