This week we have a guest post from Mike DiCenso, who is president of GBS Investment Consulting, which provides integrity driven, comprehensive investment consulting services for institutions of higher learning, endowments/foundations, healthcare institutions, insurance companies, corporations, non-profit organizations, family trusts, and retirement plans. He is an AIF Designee and a former speaker at the fi360 Conference.
* * * * *
We are all aware that many brokers, consultants and advisors are creating confusion in the market by positioning themselves as fiduciaries to a plan when they are not actually alleviating any fiduciary liability for plan sponsors. Making matters worse, when the plan sponsor believes that an advisor is relieving them of its liability, the plan sponsor may be taking their eye off the ball because they think someone else is handling this for them, putting them at greater risk. This is exactly why the DOL is looking to enhance and evolve the 1974 version of the “Definition of Fiduciary.” The DOL is looking to make it more difficult to avoid fiduciary responsibility and make anyone who states they are a fiduciary to actually take on the corporate and personal liability of a fiduciary. To help alleviate this confusion in the market, we have assembled this piece to help clarify the differences between 3(21) Investment Advisors and 3(38) Investment Managers under ERISA. Let’s take a look:
Continue reading "3(21) vs. 3(38) and are you holding yourself to the fiduciary standard?" »
Recent Comments