Editorial comment: Why fix what is not broken?

Finally. Some common sense seems to be emerging in Congressional consideration of retirement product provider regulation.

Specifically, the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency will now specifically exempt providers of retirement products from oversight by the CFPA.(See our articles on this here and also here.) The House Financial Services Committee approved an amendment to that effect earlier this month. This revision will exclude just about all insurance companies and products from CFPA oversight.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said in a memo that providers of IRAs, 401(k) plans, 529 plans and pension plans will be exempted from CFPA oversight.

Thomas Currey, president of National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors, called it right, when he said that “imposing another layer of regulation on top of an already robust insurance regulatory regime is unnecessary and would provide no additional benefit to consumers.”

That is a point made here in this space many times, albeit in different words. The retirement arena has a rich and deep infrastructure. This includes state insurance regulation but also federal oversight by virtue of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, the Federal Employees Retirement System (1986), the Pension Protection Act of 2006, and a host of other Acts, both federal and state, plus existing financial bodies, agencies and committees, and a myriad of tax codes.

Furthermore, the retirement field teems with professional groups, consumer interest organizations and various associations (trade and otherwise).