Damn! Trump lost on the Fiduciary Rule too?!?!

[underpants]

I must have missed this yesterday


US court upholds Obama-era retirement advice rule

https://www.google.com/amp/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/02/09/us-court-upholds-obama-era-retirement-advice-rule.html?client=safari

A U.S. federal judge on Wednesday upheld an Obama-era rule designed to avoid conflicts of interests when brokers give retirement advice, in a possible setback for President Donald Trump's efforts to scale back government regulation.

The stinging 81-page ruling comes just days after Trump ordered the Labor Department to review the "fiduciary" rule — a move widely interpreted as an effort to delay or kill the regulation.

The decision by Chief Judge Barbara Lynn for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas is a stunning defeat for the business and financial services industry groups that had sought to overturn it.

[DURHAM D]

1. Good news. I missed it too.

Thanks for posting.

[underpants]

8. I just saw it on FB

Had not heard anything about it.

[90-percent]

2. Give the man time

Dismantling Democracy takes months, not weeks.

At least it did after Hitler was appointed President.

-90%

[dchill]

26. I'll give him time...

Prison time.

[PatrynXX]

29. keep getting this oh this moron is the most Right Wing idiot ever

Not really. He is the most Authoritarian nut though. The opposite of a Libertarian. Hitler was just Right of Center, so indeed Trump is to the right of Hitler but Authoritarian is the problem here (another noteable Authoritarian is Stalin) hmmm all 3 seem to by Tyrants and it never ends well, just had no idea we'd have one in America. Then again didn't think... ahem can't say that. Sigh. Gotta get past that problem. Trumps the issue now. I'm just no longer free to say anything anymore

[Dustlawyer]

43. The Republicans and Trump are going after your ability to sue corporations

next week with 5 different tort reform bills. Along with gutting regulations that keep us safe, now they want virtual immunity from any civil actions for the harm this will cause!!!

Call your representatives on this please. They really are taking away our Freedoms!!!!

[90-percent]

54. I don't think our Founding Fathers envisioned

that the route for "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" would end up being a life time of economic servitude to the wealthy corporate monarchs of today? They founded the USA to escape tyranny, not create it!

-90% Jimmy

[malaise]

3. This is Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge!

Rec

[underpants]

6. Does their trying to get this reversed not tell you everything

you need to know?

I know there were issues with being sued but TOUGH LUCK STOP RIPPING PEOPLE OFF!

[slumcamper]

17. And this was at the TOP of their agenda--so yes--

it speaks loudly. It may not tell us everything but it's a pretty loud siren that they essentially seek to regress to a place of "BUYER BEWARE" or "Sorry. No protections. You're on your own. You're screwed."

Isn't this also "picking winners and losers," the exact thing free-marketers rail about?

The Trump agenda is some real shitty capitalism, folks.

Why am I NOT surprised?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

40. I hate capitalism just as much as the next guy.

But this is how slide into neo-feudalism, which is worse.

[malaise]

20. We knew that ages ago

[DK504]

48. They can't see the correlation.

The KumQuat Commie thinks they are just being mean to him. He'll be on Twitter to let all of us know about it momentarily.

[Ms. Toad]

4. Damn. Seriously.

There are parts of the rule Trump wants to block that are extremely expensive and paternalistic.

If I want to continue the kind of relationship I have with my broker (and reinvest the dividends on several mutual funds I selected more than a quarter of a century ago), I will have to switch to paying a fee based on the size of the investment (as opposed to the token fee I currently pay annually). Mutual funds are considered actively managed - so I must either sell off these investments for EFTs, or pay a flat fee that anticipates frequent trading (which I don't do) - and saves investors from shady brokers who make money by churning.

In other words - because becuase some brokers abuse retiree accounts by constantly trading mutual funds, I have to pay as if I traded an average of perhaps a dozen times a year, even though I've traded - I believe - once in the 15 years this broker has been managing my account.

I don't know what the rest of this order does - but I was hoping this was one EO I could actually benefit from.

[marybourg]

33. You can move your investments "in kind", that is,

without selling them and incurring capitol gains tax, to any of several low-cost brokers such as Schwab, Vanguard, Fidelity and pay very low costs. especially if you're a buy and hold investor.

[Ms. Toad]

34. All that is changing - they will be forced to impose the same

balance-based fees for retirements accounts comprised of mutual funds. The percentage may be lower, but it will still be a balance-based fee (which I've always rejected). The exception for for aggregated stocks & bonds only applies to EFTs. And any dividends from the mutual funds I've held for a quarter of a century have to be spun into EFT, rather than continuing to grow the funds that have done well for me. {Those brokers would be great for non-retirement accounts - the new rules only apply to tax-advantaged retirement accounts.}

So my current plan is to hold the mutual funds, and set up new accounts with EFTs purchased with any new money + dividends from the funds I can't buy any more of without switching to a balance-based fee.

It really pisses me off that I can't continue to pay the flat-fee pittance to my broker because some brokers have abused the system. (Not to mention that my spouse is with one of those abusers - and he talked her into switching to a balance-based system early, with permission to shift money around without even getting her consent - and is gleefully charging her about 30% more than my broker feels guilty about charging me if I move to an actively traded retirement account. So the new system has actually made it easier for this particular kind of abuse with respect to our family's retirement money.)

[marybourg]

37. Call Vanguard or Fidelity or Schwab ( or all 3) and talk to them. I think you'll be

surprised how well you can be accommodated, with no balance based fees, only a small charge for each trade, of which you do few.

[Ms. Toad]

39. Today they could accommodate me -

But my understanding is that all changes as of April 10 for tax-favored retirement accounts, based on the new regulations set to take effect then, unless I switch from mutual funds to EFTs.

(Aside from which, since part of my goal is to keep the mutual funds I have and keep them growing, moving to entities that aren't associated with those particular funds (aside from one Fidelity fund) would also defeat the purpose.)

[harun]

55. Yeah, I have Fidelity and Schwab and they both work well and with low fees.

[theglammistress]

5. I missed this too

Thanks for posting.

[uponit7771]

7. This is even better news, they'll appeal but this but the appeal theory has to be strong. Fud rules

... are very needed.. they're fud rules for real estate agents there should be some for financial agents too

[Victor_c3]

9. Colbert said this on his show the Colbert Report years ago

"One person's ethics are another person's regulations - and we all know regulations are bad!"

I'm sure I'm messing it up, but I love to repeat that all the time in arguments with conservatives

[Baitball Blogger]

10. First time I've heard any agency finally recognize the concept of fiduciary responsibility.

The tide must be, indeed, changing.

[safeinOhio]

11. "You'll get tired of winning"

So true.

[benld74]

12. I guess I missed it because NO tweetstorm about it

[Mr.Bill]

14. At this point it's too complicated

for 45 to understand it and comment on it. "Muslim Ban" is so much easier for him and his base to toss around on twitter. When the words get over two syllables they are kind of lost.

[47of74]

23. Two syllables?

Hell, even one syllable stretches them to the limits of their abilities.

[TrollBuster9090]

13. That's good news, but...

But it was only overturning an Executive Order. I have no doubt that the GOP Congress will repeal Dodd-Frank and other laws fairly quickly. So, it might be a hollow victory.

[Mr.Bill]

15. Yeah, but to do that

they will need 60 votes in the Senate.

[bluecollar2]

28. they only need 50 votes and they have them...n/t

[Mr.Bill]

38. To overturn or pass legislation they need 60 votes to overcome

a filibuster in the Senate.

[bluecollar2]

42. not if they suspend the rule....n/t

[Mr.Bill]

56. And I don't think they will

unless they are damn sure they will do well in the 2018 elections. And with a loose cannon in the White House, they are far from sure of that.

[bluecollar2]

58. looks like they're gonna go for it

I wonder what the odds are in Vegas.

I'd bet on the Republicans going for broke and stealing the next elections now that they have Sessions as AG

[FBaggins]

31. It wasn't even that

The case was just a ruling against those fighting the rule in court. It doesn't have anything to do with the executive order. The fact that a regulation is found to be legal doesn't keep it from being changed by the next administration.

[underpants]

45. Thanks for the correction. Bad subject line. My mistake

[progressoid]

16. This administration is such a shitstorm, it's hard to keep up with everything.

[90-percent]

27. and that shitstorm creation is by design

even thought Adolph probably didn't use that exact term in Mein Kampf. This book acting as an unpaid consultant for 45's campaign and administration.

shit storm, gas lighting. All social technologies used with great effect by former Trump consultant Joesef Goebbels.

THE BIG LIE

This admin is so stoopit they probably think they will be able to successfully pull off a false flag terrorist attack on U.S. soil. It would be delicious to see the perp walks if such an event ever reaches our Court System.

90%

[Rural_Progressive]

59. Having totally pissed off the intelligence community

It's hard to believe that Rasput..........oops I mean Bannon will be willing to take a run at a false flag operation. But my, oh my, it sure would be the end of the entire cabal.........my bad, I mean administration if they do.

[Alice11111]

49. Yeah, while you are trying to figure out what and why he did one thing, he does 3 more...

Even he has no idea of the consequences. He just acts on impulsive ideas. No time for counsel or intelligence briefings. He loves the pace and stimulation though, like a coke head. Then, Bannon put the order in front of him which put Bannon on the NSC, and 45 claims he didn’t know. Any real president would have fired him immediately, not to mention he would have read the order before signing. Pretty scarry when he even admits he's not reading the orders they stick in front of him.

[Doitnow]

52. There is speculation that 45 can't read. Stir that one into the pot and see what you get.

[LAS14]

18. Yahooo!!! nt

[Lucinda]

19. KNR

[StarryNite]

21. Great news!

[50 Shades Of Blue]

22. YESSSSS!!!!!!!

[annabanana]

24. Fantastic..

Now what's the situation for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau?

on edit: (looking around), . . . aw crap:

Consumer Bureau Foe Maps Out a Plan for Its Destruction
http://www.govexec.com/oversight/2017/02/consumer-bureau-foe-maps-out-plan-its-destruction/135294/?oref=govexec_today_pm_nl

Continuing his crusade against “the most powerful, least accountable agency in U.S. history,” House Financial Services Committee Chairman Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, took to the op-ed page of the Wall Street Journal on Thursday with a tactical plan for shutting down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

[gademocrat7]

25. Great news

[Sgent]

30. He can still repeal it

by revoking / suspending the rule.

This lawsuit was against Obama, and said the Fud rule was illegal. The decision just says that the fud rule is in fact legal.

[underpants]

44. Thanks for the correction. Bad subject line. My mistake.

[IronLionZion]

32. I hope these judges don't get Trumped

I'm grateful they are standing tall against tyranny. But I'm sure Trump's people are planning out all sorts of dastardly punishments

[DonCoquixote]

35. a texas judge too!

Keep this up, for four years and thereafter!

[Greybnk48]

36. This is incredibly good news for everyday people!

I missed it too, but thanks to you I will go to bed happy! I gave you a heart in gratitude!!

[Cha]

41. Obama +1! blotus 0x3

[Baitball Blogger]

46. I know, right?

It's a rite of passage in my right-wing community to break fiduciary responsibilities. No one ever suffers the consequences.

[Nitram]

47. Kudos to the American system of justice.

It has its flaws, it makes mistakes, but it is now playing an essential role in the checks and balances that protect our government from abuse of power.

[MadDAsHell]

50. Look into this rule a little more. It upped our 401k plan fees by thousands.

People need to understand that TPAs and brokers won't take on this fiduciary role for free.

Everyone in my plan now pays more because of this. There's ALWAYS a cost to regulation, and it ain't always on the businesses.

[Greybnk48]

51. Well, if our financial advisor tries to pull that shit

I know exactly the person we'll be transferring our business to.

P.S. I fucking LOVE Government regulations, especially the one's that protect my family from greedy assholes.

[MadDAsHell]

53. Why wouldn't ANY advisor charge more? You're asking them to do extra work and take on extra risk.

Would you do that for free?

[Lifelong Protester]

57. K & R

[Grins]

60. For those not aware, here's a quick rundown with John Oliver doing the explaining...

John Oliver:

The part about Congress (i.e., Republicans) trying to shut this down starts around the 16:20 mark.

Fun fact!!

The lead attorney for the plaintiffs in the case of Chamber of Commerce et al v. US Dept of Labor was - Eugene Scalia! Yes; son of THAT Scalia.

[mdbl]

61. "a stunning defeat

a stunning defeat for the business and financial services industry groups that had sought to overturn it."

What the F(*& is wrong with these people? Why don't they just say they want to be crooks? Why can't we just be crooks and be left alone? Holy' Sh!^ this country is screwed.