![]() |
![]() |
|
Comments on Proposed New RegulationsProposed November 2, 2011Received on January 6, 2012:Comment from Louis E. Conrad II, COMPASS Wealth Management, LLC (PDF, 1.2 KB) ************************************** Received on December 29, 2011:Comment from Brad Richardson Bradyco Financial (PDF, 78 KB) ************************************** Received on December 23, 2011:To Whom it May Concern I am writing in response to the new proposals set forth in the custody laws, specifically amending the SEC version regarding invoices and audits. Obviously, full disclosure for clients is an extremely important part of a fair and honest financial advisory relationship. However, it's important that each law/regulation be very carefully thought out and not overly burdensome to the client or the advisor, or too lenient for the client or the advisor. I think that the current proposal can be EASILY improved upon for both the advisor and the client, with very little changes. I'm in operations, and the current proposed law is a logistical nightmare, mostly for the advisor, but very much so for the client as well. Let's examine it and it should become quite clear that something would need to change: 1) COST: If you charge your clients monthly, which is the most common way to charge (or quarterly), sending an invoice to a client every single month is quite costly. Let's say you have 400 clients (small firm), with stamps/paper/envelopes/ink, it's probably around $1 per mailing, so $400 total. Now factor in the staff time it takes to address all the envelopes, stuff them, stamp them, etc, that's several days worth of work for 2 people, so that would average about $480 at two staff people at $15 an hour for two days. So now we are talking about $880 per month, or $10,560 per year, all to send an invoice, that is simply a duplicate of what shows up on the statements. If you choose to instead simply have a surprise audit, the costs range from around $7k - $10k per year - and this is for a small firm!! 2) DOESN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM: If the argument for providing a separate invoice is that most people don't look at their statements, what makes you think they will look at these invoices? Realistically, even clients who think it's great to send it, are they really going to open it every month and examine the fees? No, overtime the will absolutely ignore it - people are much more likely to examine their client statements to see how much money they have for retirement, education, etc. 3) ANNOYANCE TO CLIENT: From a client's perspective, there is NO doubt that MANY of them will request to opt out of this mailing, as they don't want to receive 12 letters each year that is a duplicate of the statements that they are already receiving. Obviously, we can say, sorry, but the state requires us to do so. This will frustrate them, cut down a lot of unnecessary trees, burn a lot of CO2, all so that the many who want to opt out can simply throw it in the trash. Will there be an opt out system? Even with an opt out system, logistically, that is very hard to track. 4) ANNOYANCE TO CLIENT: Let's say the opt out of regular mailing, and they prefer to have it emailed - which most will do as most people prefer email to regular mail. There are many issues with this. 5) NOT EFFECTIVE: The client seeing the monthly, or quarterly charge, is not nearly as relevant as what the annual charge is. SOLUTION: This proposed solution will solve virtually all of the logistical problems, is more effective for the purpose of the law (to protect the client and fully disclose the fees), and is considerably less burdensome for the advisor. It's very helpful for the client to have this annual number, because they can use this information to provide it to their tax preparer because they can potentially write off some/all of the fees. They also have a much better understanding of all of the fees that are charged for the year and they don't have to perform all sorts of calculations to see what the annual fee actually was. For those that are actually interested in the monthly or quarterly fees, they will be motivated enough to look at their investment statements either online or mailed to them, which clearly state their fees. Please take this suggestion seriously! The balance of what is the proper regulation and what protects the client is always a difficult and conentious issue. I think if you examine the current proposal, it negatively affects both the client as well as the advisor - while the proposed solution has a much more positive affect on the client. Any new regulation is burdensome on the advisor, however, the proposed solution is much less burdensome, and I think it's ultimately a fair deal. Thank you for considering this and for your continued help with this issue. ************************************** Received on December 7, 2011:Please note that most of our billing invoice or statements can be or are done electronically. In our case, fees are calculated by our portfolio management system and a file is generated and submitted electronically to our custodian Charles Schwab. They deduct the fees from the client accounts and transfer them to our corporate account held at Schwab. So if a separate bill is sent to the custodian it would be redundant and arrive at the custodian after it has already been processed. ************************************** Received on November 3, 2011:Dear Secretary Galvin, ************************************** Received on November 2, 2011:Dear Sirs; |
|||||
| |
| Home | Search | Index | Feedback | Contact | Back to Securities Division Home | Top of Page |