ELO

Sep

2014

Brokers Under Pressure To Sell In-House Products

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

Two former private bankers at Deutsche Bank filed a suit recently, alleging that their bank pushed them to steer their clients’ money into the bank’s own investment products even though those products were against the clients’ interests.

According to a survey, the pressure to favor in-house products is “very common” at banks and securities firms, especially when it came to higher-fee “alternative investments” like hedge and private equity funds.

Over the last two decades, some brokerage firms have moved away from business models favoring their own firms’ funds. However, advisers still routinely feel pressure to bolster their commission revenue, giving them an incentive to steer clients into higher-fee products to “pump up their production.”

Morgan Stanley, the nation’s largest retail force with 16,316 brokers, has less than 5 percent of its clients’ managed-account assets in Morgan Stanley-sponsored funds. At the Merrill Lynch unit of Bank of America, its 13,845 brokers also have less than 5 percent of its $552 billion in managed client accounts in Merrill’s own funds.

However, percentages are higher at some other big-name firms. Private bankers at Goldman Sachs, for example, typically put a majority of clients’ cash and fixed-income investments into Goldman funds, while steering a majority of their higher-risk assets such as actively managed stocks, hedge funds and private equity to external managers.

Likewise, Deutsche Bank’s roughly 335 brokers in the United States invest about 34 percent of their client account assets in the bank’s own investment products. JPMorgan Chase reduced the average percentage of its own funds in the accounts of Chase Strategic Portfolio, to about 31 percent from about 42 percent, according to the program’s current brochure.

The attorneys of Eccleston Law Offices represent investors and advisers nationwide in securities and employment matters. Our attorneys draw on a combined experience of nearly 50 years in delivering the highest quality legal services.

Jun

2014

Wirehouse Reps Move Dramatically to Fee-based Model

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

Wirehouses are shifting away from a commission-based brokerage model to a fee-based business model. Over the past decade, the number of fee-only and fee based advisers has increased to 84% at the wirehouses, compared with about 57% for the rest of the brokerage industry.

The challenge is to find an appropriate price for advice which is competitive with what others in the industry are charging. Some advisors charge between 0.75% and 1% of assets under management as an annual fee rather than drawing commissions. In order to offset the decline in commission, advisers undertaking the move must be prepared to generate revenue from different sources or to make the shift incrementally.

The fee-based account gives advisers a more stable source of revenue that, over time, allows them to market and to focus on existing clients.

May

2014

Wirehouses Hunt for Bank Channel Talent

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

Wirehouses are recruiting top advisors from the bank channel. As the broker-dealer industry becomes more competitive, even big firms are becoming much more flexible and open in their recruitment in order to ensure success and meet their aggressive recruiting goals.

The effort historically has been risky. Most bank advisers build their businesses through company referrals rather than prospecting, so clients often are less willing to transfer their assets. Moreover, bank advisers pose legal risk. While most brokerage firms have signed the Protocol for Broker Recruiting, banks have shied away.

Bank of America Merrill Lynch is a member of the protocol, for example, but that does not apply to advisers in its bank channel, Merrill Edge. J.P. Morgan Securities signed on earlier this year, but clarified that it was limited only to the few hundred advisers in its private client group and excluded the JPMorgan Chase Private Bank.

In addition, bank advisors face tighter restrictions on what client information can be taken. Morgan Stanley was sued earlier this year when it recruited a trust adviser from PNC Bank. PNC accused the firm of helping the adviser misappropriate trade secrets. Bank advisers have employment contracts that have non-solicits or non-competes, or event sometimes a garden leave provision of 30, 60, or 90 days. Competent legal counsel, such as Eccleston Law, should be retained to review and consult.

Another concern is that many bank advisers are working with mass- affluent clients with less than $250,000 in assets, while most wirehouse accounts require investible assets of greater than $250,000 for the adviser to receive a payout. Still, wirehouse managers are willing to take on the risk, especially if a successful bank hire can provide a connection to a big-name client.

May

2014

UBS Advisers Stage Revolt to Save Branch Manager

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

UBS brokers in San Francisco recently staged a kind of mutiny with some prepared to resign in order to prevent their popular branch manager, Michael Williams, from being replaced.

The firm considered replacing Williams due to poor branch performance. Of the firm’s eight geographic regions, that region was ranked among the lowest in terms of recruiting.

Moves are common in the brokerage industry, where managers are frequently reassigned, relocated or sometimes fired as firms keep a close watch on performance. Advisers may be reluctant to see their manager go, but it is rare for the firm to backtrack on its decision.

About 20 of the 75 advisers objected. Many included top producers, who began placing calls to executives at the firm, including the head of the adviser group, the head of wealth management, and the firm’s chief executive. They told the executives the move was a mistake. Support for Mr. Williams mounted, and by the weekend, the firm reversed its decision.

Apr

2014

Five Issues Worth Thanking About In Selling Your Advisory Practices

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

According to a report by Mark Elzweig in his Think Advisor publication, there are the five issues:

First, cash down payments: the less involvement sellers have, the more they will want up front. Down payments typically range from 10% to 40% of a practice’s value. The value, of course, is a moving target. In 2013, FP Transitions says that the average cash down payment was 33%. And the true value is determined between a willing buyer and a willing seller.

Second, adjustable rate notes (ARNs) for the practical sellers: ARNs basically are promissory notes issued by the buyer that guarantee the seller payments of principal plus interest. That means sellers will want to keep a hand in the practice, adding as much value as possible by smoothing relationships with existing customers and helping the buyers transition and retain assets. The ARN payouts can vary dramatically both in timing and size. Some are paid annually, others every few years. Interest rates can be adjusted up or down depending upon the buyer’s attainment of asset and/or revenue targets. The incentives need to encourage both buyers and sellers to do more, not less.

Third, earnouts: another incentive for sellers to remain involved. Earn out bonuses mean sellers need to do all they can to encourage the success of their buyers, and like back end bonuses, typically set both gross revenue and asset bogies.

Fourth, taxes: everyone pays them, but only one gets to claim the capital gains rate. Advisors who have owned their practices for more than one year can elect to have the proceeds from a sale taxed at capital gains rates. However, the buyer must agree to be taxed at ordinary income on the same transaction.

Fifth, revenue multiples: what everyone always looks at first. Sellers should seek buyers with similar types of practices and philosophies. Hammering out a deal requires patience and savvy. Before selling their practice, advisors should have inspected potential buyers to be sure they are a good match.

Apr

2014

FINRA Suspends Wells Fargo Advisor for Downloading Confidential Customer Information from Prior Employer

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

FINRA enforcement has sanctioned a Wells Fargo Advisor with a 90-day suspension for taking more information than is allowed when he left a credit union affiliated with Raymond James Financial Services to join Wells Fargo Advisors (then Wachovia Securities) in late November 2008.

Prior to resigning from the credit union, where Steven Tomlinson had worked as manager of the investment services group as well as a Raymond James branch manager, Tomlinson allegedly used a personal flash drive to download confidential customer information, including account balances, social security numbers, dates of birth, and quarterly account statements. Of the 2,000 customers whose information he downloaded, only about 200 were his clients.

According to FINRA, Tomlinson provided the flash drive to a Wells Fargo administrative assistant so she could create mailing labels for announcements that he had joined Wells Fargo. While she worked with the flash drive, Tomlinson did not supervise the administrative assistant, and never informed her that the drive contained confidential information, was unencrypted and was not password protected.

This disciplinary decision underscores the need for reps to hire competent financial services employment attorneys to effectuate a move from one firm to another firm.

Apr

2014

The 15 Best Paying Cities for Financial Advisers

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

According to a report from InvestmentNews, the country’s 15 best cities for compensation for lead advisors are listed below.

15. San Antonio, Texas

Total Compensation: $131,186

Base Salary: $107,690

Incentive Pay: $17, 622

Population: $1,327,407

14. Indianapolis, Indiana

Total Compensation: $133,464

Base Salary: $109,560

Incentive Pay: $17,928

Population: 820,445

13. Phoenix, Arizona

Total Compensation: $134,268

Base Salary: $110,220

Incentive Pay: $18,036

Population: 1,445,632

12. Jacksonville, Florida

Total Compensation: $136,144

Base Salary: $111,760

Incentive Pay: $18,288

Population: 821,784

11. Columbus, Ohio

Total Compensation: $136,814

Base Salary: $112,310

Incentive Pay: $18,378

Population: 787,033

10. Austin, Texas

Total Compensation: $138,422

Base Salary: $113,630

Incentive Pay: $18,594

Population: 790,390

9. Dallas, Texas

Total Compensation: $144,050

Base Salary: $118,250

Incentive Pay: $19,350

Population: 1,197,816

8. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Total Compensation: $144,318

Base Salary: $118,470

Incentive Pay: $19,386

Population: 1,526,006

7. Houston, Texas

Total Compensation: $145,256

Base Salary: $119,240

Incentive Pay: $19,512

Population: 2,100,263

6. Chicago, Illinois

Total Compensation: $147,266

Base Salary: $120,890

Incentive Pay: $19,782

Population: 2,695,598

5. San Diego, California

Total Compensation: $149,410

Base Salary: $122,650

Incentive Pay: $20,070

Population: 1,307,402

4. Los Angeles, California

Total Compensation: $156,110

Base Salary: $128,150

Incentive Pay: $20,970

Population: 3,792,621

3. New York, New York

Total Compensation: $167,366

Base Salary: $137,390

Incentive Pay: $22,482

Population: 8,175,133

2. San Francisco, California

Total Compensation: $168,840

Base Salary: $138,600

Incentive Pay: $22,680

Population: 805,235

1. San Jose, California

Total Compensation: $171,922

Base Salary: $141,130

Incentive Pay: $23,094

Population: 945,942

Apr

2014

UBS Plans Its Own Independent Channel

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

As registered investment advisers have become a more serious competitor, UBS Wealth Management Americas is considering its own independent channel.

UBS is considering an independent firm, similar to Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network, where around 1,500 advisers function as the independent arm of the wirehouse.

According to a client survey UBS performed, clients are attracted to an RIA for objective advice. UBS also seeks to integrate its banking and insurance products, where UBS believes that it has a competitive advantage.

Mar

2014

Wirehouses Update Succession Plans for Retiring Advisers

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

According to InvestmentNews, wirehouse firms, where 30% of advisers are planning to leave the business in the next decade, have been updating their succession programs for aging advisers with new names, higher payouts and lower barriers to entry, as the competition for the assets of retiring advisers heats up in the brokerage industry.

The basic processes for retiring at a wirehouse are similar across the firms. They all aim to provide retiring advisers who meet certain criteria a share of the total revenue from their book for up to five years after they retire. Moreover, the wirehouses have been refining that original plan, and adding more flexibility and options in recent years as new channels come into the marketplace.

Payouts at the wirehouses have been steadily increasing and this year reach as much as 250% of an advisor’s book of business, depending on length of service, size of the book and other firm metrics.

Advisors at the higher end of the range are generally serving on a team, are 55 or older, have been with the firm for a good part of their career and have a number of fee-based accounts and younger clients.

For example, Morgan Stanley is updating its Former Financial Adviser Program this year to provide additional payouts to both lower producing and top-tier advisers. Bank of America Merrill Lynch‘s original Client Transition Program paid out between 70% and 80% of trailing-12 production over four years, but it was updated for 2013 to pay up to 160% of trailing-12 with a minimum of 100%.

The payout is matched with where the adviser falls on the production grid. Even though the payouts are still somewhat lower than the independent space, where the income is often taxed as a capital gain rather than as ordinary income, the wirehouses benefit from the structure and sense of stability the programs provide.

TEAMING UP

As wirehouses encourage their advisors to team up, they also are doing more to bolster the partnership between the retiring advisor and his or her successor.

Morgan Stanley requires its advisors to have been on a team for at least one year, and will offer enhanced payouts to lower-producing advisors who join a team.

Merrill Lynch’s program is not open to any advisors who have not been on a team for three years.

UBS Wealth Management Americas’ Transitioning Financial Adviser Program provides for a five-year payout, but two of those years are spent in the office in a consulting role, helping clients get to know their new advisors.

Wells Fargo Advisors’ program will pay up to 160% of trailing-12 revenue and will provide a loan to the inheriting adviser for up to 200% of the departing advisor’s book value.

LOWER THRESHOLD

Firms are also lowering the thresholds for entry into their succession plans to make it easier for recently recruited advisors to take advantage of the program.For example Morgan Stanley’s plan has one of the lowest length of service requirements at three years..

Advisors already at the wirehouses are generally receiving large offers, but should still be careful to consider how much they are being offered and compare that with offers at other firms or other channels.

Mar

2014

FINRA Will Renew Push for Shift in Investment Adviser Oversight

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

FINRA plans to renew its lobbying efforts for legislation that would shift oversight of financial advisers away from the SEC and into the hands of a self-regulating body, Investment News reports.

In 2012, FINRA first attempted to push such legislation. Its efforts were resisted by advisors and the measure died. FINRA backed down when the new Congress convened last year and the champion of the SRO bill, Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., relinquished his seat as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

FINRA is motivated to expand its regulatory authority because the brokerage industry is shrinking.

Over the past two years, FINRA has maintained that it isn’t mounting a lobbying campaign to become the adviser SRO and isn’t engaged in talks with the House or Senate. But FINRA has repeatedly stated that adviser oversight should be increased.

Both FINRA and the Investment Adviser Association (“IAA”) agree that there is a regulatory gap regarding investment advisers. The SEC currently examines only about 8 percent of the nearly 11,000 registered investment advisors in the country on an annual basis.

The SEC’s failure to examine more investment advisers largely is due to a lack of resources. In adopting the current budget, Congress denied the SEC’s request to hire an additional 250 investment adviser examiners.

The restrictive budget leaves the door open for FINRA and its allies to argue that inadequate adviser oversight should be addressed by contracting out this critical function to a private organization like FINRA.