Top
Stories
Blog: The Practical Employer Reality Bites: Fox Debuts New Workplace Reality Show May 24, 2013
Blog: The Ethical Workplace Restoring Workplace Trust, Part II May 23, 2013
Latest News Disaster Preparedness: Tornadoes May 22, 2013
Blog: The Practical Employer Email Surveillance as Evidence of Retaliation May 22, 2013
Latest News Workforce Software Gets to Work Abroad May 21, 2013
Blog: The Practical Employer Social Media is the Digital Water Cooler May 21, 2013
Blog: The Practical Employer Fired for Suing an Ex-Employer? Court Rejects Public Policy Claim May 20, 2013
Featured Article Explaining Exchanges May 17, 2013
Featured Article Breaking Down the Language Barrier May 16, 2013
Featured Article Now, You’re Speaking My Language May 16, 2013
Latest News

Despite Complaints, Labor Department Nixes Additional Fees for 401(k) Advisers

The agency finalizes controversial rule calling for level-fee arrangements; the new scheme also greenlights computer models.

  • By Darla Mercado
  • Published: October 25, 2011
  • Updated: July 9, 2012
  • Comments (0)
Related Topics:

The Labor Department has finalized a rule that will deter advisers from receiving additional compensation based on the funds they choose for retirement plans.

The rule, which covers investment advice for participants and their beneficiaries, will apply to employees in 401(k) plans as well as clients in individual retirement accounts.

The regulation, effective on Dec. 27, 2011, will give fiduciary advisers two choices on how to provide participants with advice. First, they can receive compensation on a level fee basis, which means they--and their affiliates--won't be able to receive variable compensation based on the investments they choose.

Alternatively, advisers can use a computer model that's certified as unbiased by an independent auditor. That outside auditor will examine whether the model is set up according to generally accepted investment principles.

Labor Department Assistant Secretary Phyllis Borzi noted that the final version addressed one of the hot-button issues raised by advisers when the rule was proposed in March 2010. At the time, critics claimed the computer model would be biased toward passive investments and against active options.

They argued the rule's original language said that it should be designed to avoid selecting options based on factors that could not be expected to persist in the future - such as performance.

"The big question is how relevant is historical performance," said Borzi on a call with reporters Oct. 24. "While historical performance isn't always an indicator of what the future will hold, you could provide that information as part of this model, with the caveat that the past isn't always prologue."

Darla Mercado writes for InvestmentNews, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, email editors@workforce.com.

Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management's Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Leave A Comment

Guidelines: Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content you post.

Stay Connected

Join our community for unlimited access to the latest tips, news and information in the HR world.

Follow Workforce on Twitter
HR Jobs
View All Job Listings

Search