Skip to content

Library

Why the New DOL Fiduciary Rule Is Scarier Than Ever

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.

Read More »

FACC Oregon Comment Letter 3-14-24

While in general FACC applauds the Division’s present efforts to adopt permanent rules implementing SB 536, and we appreciate the Division is proposing for the most part to adopt disclosure forms specified in the NAIC model regulation, we must take exception to the Division’s latest proposal to deviate from NAIC model forms by inclusion of non-conforming and confusing questions concerning duty of care. For reasons explained herein, we oppose such deviations from NAIC model forms and respectfully ask the Division to reconsider and remove those questions from the proposed forms.

Read More »

FACC Missouri Comment Letter 03-15-24

We appreciate the proposed amendment follows the changes to the NAIC Model Regulation.  We believe the work that the Department has done is important to ensure uniformity and consistency across many jurisdictions which makes implementation more cost effective for industry and ultimately benefits everyone including consumers.  We trust the final adopted regulation

Read More »

FACC Comment Letter – Opposing DOL Fiduciary Rule

FACC sincerely hopes the DOL will reflect in earnest over our concerns about this ill-conceived package of rules and exemptions even though DOL and FACC are engaged in ongoing litigation relating to prior DOL pronouncements. FACC is driven primarily by its commitment to a strong marketplace in which independent agents can function effectively in delivering quality fixed annuity and insurance products to clients who, in turn, want choices for protecting their assets and achieving a secure retirement. It is FACC’s hope that the DOL will reconsider and withdraw its proposed rulemaking, which will otherwise merely serve to unleash a new round of litigation and confusion for retirement savers at a time when those energies could be spent more productively working towards better education of consumers, improving coordination among regulators, and strengthening laws that govern America’s retirement system.

Read More »

FACC Testimony DOL Hearing 12-12-23

FACC believes the DOL is trying to turn 50 years of ERISA history upside down – which we think is wrong – both legally and as a matter of public policy.  Putting aside the legal issues for a moment – those will have their day if this proposal goes forward – we believe the DOL has created a “false narrative” – for lack of a better phrase – suggesting there is a need to bring Title I regulation for employer plans to IRAs sold to individual consumers covered by Title II. 

Read More »

FACC Comment Letter 12-11-23 – Nevada Rule Proposal

For reasons explained herein, FACC must strongly oppose the proposal to amend Nevada’s suitability regulation as presently drafted. While we are pleased Nevada is seeking to update its regulations, FACC is extremely troubled by the extensive deviations from the NAIC model regulation found in this proposal, which will have adverse consequences for industry and the public, both foreseeable obstacles and unintended consequences. We urge the Department to withdraw this proposal and instead adopt the NAIC model regulation updates.

Read More »

FACC v. DOL Supplemental Brief

The Proposed Rule proves an important point, i.e., the DOL’s goal has remained unchanged over the past 15 years of rulemaking. While the DOL will likely insist that the Proposed Rule is different from the New Interpretation because the DOL is repealing the five-part test, that is an immaterial distinction. In fact, the Proposed

Read More »

DOL Comment Letter from Figari+Davenport

It is hard to state forcefully enough how the Department’s proposals reflect a complete lack of deference to the Chamber of Commerce opinion. The Department seems to believe it is unencumbered by the Fifth Circuit decision, which it tries to reduce to mere criticism of the Best Interest Contract (BIC) Exemption. In

Read More »

FACC DOL Rule Press Release-Supplemental Brief Motion

FACC at the same time is strongly objecting to DOL’s new rule proposal as inherently incompatible with ERISA as spelled out by the Fifth Circuit decision. “FACC will have no choice but to ask the courts yet again to intervene if the DOL dares to move forward with this proposal

Read More »

FACC Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion For Leave to File Supplemental Brief

In this regard, by now proposing to overhaul PTE 84-24, the DOL sabotages the assurances in its briefing that the New Interpretation had preserved that exemption for insurance agents who would be swept into its far broader reading of the five-part test. Similarly, the DOL has argued that the major question doctrine should not apply because the expansion of fiduciary responsibility under ERISA did not have far-reaching economic impact or involve a matter of political significance. The contents of the new proposal, introduced with fanfare by the President himself, demonstrate otherwise.

Read More »