Contact FreedomWorks

111 K Street NE
Suite 600
Washington, DC 20002

  • Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
  • Local 202.783.3870


New Regulation on Retirement Investments Means Less Choice for Your IRA and 401k

The Obama administration has proven exceptionally talented in making law without Congress, using the vast alphabet soup of agencies such as the EPA, the IRS, the FCC, and the NLRB to drastically increase the government’s reach into our lives. Among all of the massively damaging regulations coming out of these agencies is a little-noticed rule from the Department of Labor that could drastically affect millions of Americans’ choice in IRA and 401K investments.

Given this rule’s potential to greatly limit choice and increase the costs of workers’ retirement investments, John Berlau of the Competitive Enterprise Institute has appropriately dubbed it “ObamaCare for Your IRA”.

The thrust of this regulation is that you, the consumer, can’t be trusted to make your own choices in investment advice. Actually, this lack of trust in your common sense is not just implied, it is stated explicitly. As Berlau notes, “On page 4 of the proposed regulation, DoL expresses the view that “seldom” can Americans “prudently manage retirement benefits on their own” and that they “generally cannot distinguish good investments from bad.”

Enter the Obama administration, to protect the befuddled masses from themselves.

Registered investment advisers who actually manage and provide routine advice on IRA and 401k retirement plans are bound by a “fiduciary” standard, meaning that they must place their client’s interests above their own when recommending investments and disclose potential conflicts of interest that may lead to them peddling a particular product. This new regulation, however, would apply that same fiduciary standard to a much wider range of financial professionals, even including custodians of self-directed IRAs.

Many of the non-registered brokers and dealers this regulation would affect cater to smaller investors, and many supplement their income by taking fees from mutual funds and other asset companies in exchange for hawking their products. The upside of this practice is that it allows them to charge lower rates to their customers, giving access to these investments to a wider range of customers. These brokers are required to disclose their potential conflicts of interest already, meaning that customers can make their own choices as to the wisdom of trusting their sales pitch. The alternative to this model is that these brokers would charge higher fees, or move over to a registered investment adviser role that would likely force them to raise the minimum level of investment in their products. Both of these results would price many Americans out of their products.

Even more troubling is how this would affect custodians of 401ks managed directly by the investor or self-directed IRAs, which allow investors to invest in non-conventional assets such as precious metals or real estate. Even though these funds are being managed by the investors themselves, the IRS requires that they be under the management of a separate custodian. If these custodians are designated to hold fiduciary responsibility, the government will be able to more heavily regulate the types of investments that can be made with these accounts. They would be held liable for unapproved investments, even though their clients are making choices for themselves. This would certainly lead to fewer investment options being available for these types of retirement accounts.

Making investing for your retirement more expensive and reducing consumer choice - the Obama administration's modus operandi remains the same whether they're tackling health care or your retirement accounts.

The comment period for this rule ends on July 21st, and if you are concerned about the government’s invasion of your choice in investments, you can let them know your concerns by leaving a comment with the Department of Labor below:

keith.c.westbrook's picture
Dr Keith C. Westbrook Ph.D.

My posted response to DOL:
As a former series 6/63 registered financial representative as well classroom prepared for registered investment advisor before cancelling my final exams due to the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory reform legislation, your over-reach into another area of the financial sector is without warrant or cause.
The "fiduciary standards" you claim to want to have adhered to by all investors and or advisors of any licensing level including state and federally regulated insurance agents and brokers already exists at the state regulatory level. It is totally unnecessary in the self-directed self-managed IRA.
Every professional I have ever worked with or trained under had a comprehensive understanding of the concept of "doing no harm" for both the clients best interest as well as their own self-interest for both self-preservation in the market place as well as continued growth and financial success.
This new level of regulatory confiscatory control is not meant to prevent individual financial malfeasance, it is meant to provide another opportunity to collect fees and tariffs that are to be "needed" to implement these new regulations and the staffing required for their enforcement.
Speaking of enforcement your recent track record on this matter in regards to MF Global the former Oldest Commodities Broker in America before its destruction at the hands of sycophants that have contributed to the Dodd-Frank Bill and the subsequent regulations you are attempting to implement from, it is duplicitous at best and dishonest on multiple levels. Why are all of the principal players including Jon Corzine still walking the streets while Bernie Madoff is in prison when both are guilty of theft and or loss of BILLIONS of dollars?
The BILLIONS of dollars that will be removed from the economy by these new regulations in an economic environment that is at best pathetically weak and more accurately recessionary, (despite the market manipulation by the Federal Reserve buying assets against its charter and algorithmic electronic trading being done autonomously to the benefit of those that fund your political bosses campaigns and post-governmental careers) is dangerously irresponsible.

Your new scheme is nothing more than another violation of the 9th. and 10th. Amendments.

This is just a further attempt to destroy the free market with your failed Keynesian economic policies.

I have a simple suggestion why not try enforcing the current laws and regulations before further destroying what little is left with more of your failed socialist confiscatory regulatory schemes since the last decade has been such a resounding financial success for so many Americans thanks to them!