Podcast Center
Video Center
Webcasts
Resource Center
Events
March 29, 2010 at 03:45 AM
Gosh, sure sounds like the FP Coalition thinks I really missed the bus on the Financial Planning Act of 2010 (see their response to my March 15 blog “True Colors”).
Ouch! Silly me; I thought simply reading the Act itself–which they reportedly wrote, and have unequivocally supported–would provide a fairly clear picture of their positions. Who knew? I’ll get in touch with those folks as soon as I can, so they can set me straight, and faithfully report back on how they’ve persuaded me to change my views.
In the meantime, why don’t you make up your own mind. Here are the various places the Coalition felt I fumbled the ball, along with the relevant passages from the FP Act itself: They seem to pretty much speak for themselves. But, hey, what do I know?
Coalition: “The Kohl proposal was never designed to take over the world. Only those who hold themselves out as a financial planner would have been[required] to register.”
The FP Act: “Sec. 303 (3): The term ‘financial planner’ means–(A) an individual who– (iii) provides, or offers to provide, directly to individuals advice with respect to the management of financial assets in not fewer than 2 areas of financial planning, including–(I) investment planning; (II) income tax planning; (III) education planning; (IV) retirement planning; (V) estate planning; (VI) risk management;
My Comment: Anyone who offers advice regarding financial assets in any TWO of those six areas? And that would be whom: brokers, insurance agents, tax accountants, estate attorneys, pension advisors, trust officers, private bankers, and Schwab Customer Service reps? You do the math. Sounds like a pretty substantial portion of the financial services industry to me.
