Kitces.com - Advancing Knowledge in Financial Planning

Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (May 26-27)

May 25, 2018 02:52 pm 0 Comments CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" – this week's edition kicks off with the news that the 5th Circuit Appeals Court has denied what appears to be the last and final appeal of the states to intervene and defend the Department of Labor's fiduciary rule, in what will probably prove to have been the final effort to revive it (although the court itself still hasn't actually issued their final mandate to vacate the rule after their March 15th decision). On a happier note in the news this week, Focus Financial began the paperwork process to file for an IPO, in what would be the first ever initial public offering of an independent RIA providing wealth management (or at least, a holding company that has aggregated dozens of them together).

From there, we have several tax-related articles this week, including a look at savings strategies for high-income individuals who want to save more above-and-beyond maxing out their 401(k) plans and IRAs, workarounds for families that have (unwittingly?) saved money in grandparent-owned 529 plans and now realize the adverse financial aid consequences of the arrangement, and tips and strategies for estate tax (and broader estate) planning when working with ultra-HNW clients (where it's not just about the technical strategies themselves, but ensuring they are properly implemented to avoid IRS scrutiny, and appropriately communicated to the family to avoid future disputes).

We also have a few practice management articles on attracting and retaining employees, including: new research that what employees want isn't just a progression of Maslow's hierarchy but a combination of 3 core areas (career, community, and cause); why it's a good idea to try customizing job descriptions to individual employees (essentially fitting the job description to the employee, instead of the traditional approach of trying to find an employee who fits the job description); tips for handling underperforming employees; and why some advisory firms are exploring new employee benefits like month-long sabbaticals to attract and retain top talent.

We wrap up with three interesting articles, all around the theme of the advisor's role in not just providing advice and recommendations to clients, but helping them actually implement the advice: the first looks at how coaches often command much higher fees than advisors (because people will pay 'something' for good advice and expertise, but even more for someone that helps ensure they actually get it done!); the second looks at how the research on trust in professionals (including advisors) isn't just about demonstrating the advisor's competency and expertise, but his/her "warmth" and caring (because client's won't implement the advice if they don't believe it's really in their best interests); and the last draws on Dr. Moira Somers' new book "Advice That Sticks" and the research from the medical industry on what leads to patients actually adhering to the advice and prescriptions their doctors provide... and what advisors can learn from it about how to make our own advice "stick", too!

Enjoy the "light" reading!

Why RIA Custodians Should Start Charging A Basis Point Custody Fee

May 24, 2018 01:41 pm 0 Comments CATEGORY: Practice Management

A custodian is one of the most crucial vendors for RIAs that manage client assets. From the core custodial services of trading and holding and keeping records of electronically-owned securities, to the ancillary technology that custodians provide to help advisors run their business, a good RIA custodial relationship can help firms attract and retain clients. However, as the advisory industry has shifted from a focus on sales to advice, custodians and the RIAs they serve are increasingly in conflict with one another, as many of the ways in which RIAs can help their clients reduce costs and further grow their wealth (reducing unnecessary trading costs, seeking out the best cash options, etc.) are actually detrimental to the bottom lines of the RIA custodians they use!

In this week’s #OfficeHours with @MichaelKitces, my Tuesday 1PM EST broadcast via Periscope, we discuss why RIA custodians should start charging the RIAs they serve a custody fee, and why a basis-point custody fee would ultimately better align the interests of RIAs and the custodians that serve them, allowing custodians to actually focus on providing the best services and solutions to RIAs, instead of just seeking new ways to make money off of an RIA's clients instead!

To better understand why an RIA custody fee would be an improvement relative to the status quo, it is helpful to first look at how RIA custodial platforms actually make their money in the first place. In practice, most RIA custodians make money in three ways: (1) earning money on cash (either through the expense ratio of a proprietary money market fund, or by sweeping the cash to a related bank subsidiary), (2) servicing fees for mutual funds and ETFs, such as sub-TA fees along with 12b-1s via "No Transaction Fee" (NTF) platforms, and (3) ticket charges earned whenever a client makes a trade. In practice, many of these fees may ultimately be trivial to the end consumer (e.g., it's unlikely a 50 basis point fee on a 1% cash position is going to make or break a client's retirement), but when companies like Charles Schwab have almost 1.5 trillion dollars on their RIA platform, these expenses result in substantial revenues for RIA platforms when aggregated across all clients... albeit at the direct expense to the client.

And the reason this structure matters is that it means RIA custodians are fundamentally misaligned with the advisors they serve. Because a situation is created where we as RIAs create value for our clients by trying to systematically dismantle the custodian’s revenue and profit lines! Instead of just leaving cash in whatever money market fund is available, we look for ways to reduce cash balances or shift that cash to institutions that best compensate our clients for holding cash. Instead of using an NTF fund with a higher expense ratio, we'll shift our client's assets to a non-NTF fund when the ticket charge will reduce costs for them (or vice-versa). And unlike broker-dealers who stand to profit from increased trading (by marking up the ticket charges for themselves), RIAs try to reduce trading costs by helping clients avoid unnecessary trading. In short, the problem is that as RIAs, custodians have put us in the position where we look better by sticking it to the custodian... and the more we manage to ‘play the game’ and dismantle the custodian’s profit centers, the more money we save our clients, and the better we look to our clients!

And this is why the future of the RIA custody business will eventually be RIAs simply paying a basis point custody fee to the RIA custodian instead. Which is a huge leap relative to the “free” that we as RIAs currently enjoy with our custodians... but basis point custodial fees would actually be better for all of us in the long run! Suppose RIA custodians charged 10 basis points, tiering down to 7, 5, and then 3 basis points for large firms (intended to simply approximate what they already make off of RIA clients on average). If custodians did this in lieu of making money off of our clients, now their incentive is not to try and figure out how they can make more money off of our clients, but instead to truly create the best RIA custody platform out there for gathering client assets! With a custody fee in place, RIA custodians could then pay better rates on money market funds, eliminate ticket charges that annoy our clients (and time spent by advisors devising ways around ticket charges for our clients), and eliminate both 12b-1 fees and sub-TA fees, instead providing a new version of truly "clean shares" that strip out all back-end fees (regardless of what fund company is used). In other words, once the RIA custodian gets an RIA custody fee, the custodian is freed up to actually give us as advisors the best possible solutions for our clients!

Of course, there may be some challenges in getting RIAs to adopt such a model, particularly given that a subset of RIAs – namely those that use buy and hold portfolios for clients and actively seek ways to get clients the best deal on cash holdings – are already paying less (as they're effectively subsidized by the RIAs that do not use such strategies!).

But the bottom line is just to recognize that, in the long-run, both RIAs and the custodial platforms they use would be better off with custodians charging a basis point custody fee, rather than just looking for ways to make money off of our clients. Even though it may feel really awkward to us when we’re not using to paying that custody fee, it will ultimately be better, both for the custodian and for the RIA itself, by properly aligning their interests… which means, in the end, it’s better for the client, too!

GDPR Compliance Rules For Financial Advisors Engaged In Digital Marketing

May 23, 2018 07:01 am 2 Comments CATEGORY: Practice Management

In recent weeks, you may have noticed a wave of "Privacy Policy updates" coming through your email inbox. What financial advisors, and particularly those of us in the US, may be less knowledgeable of, is what's driving these updates. The answer is the "General Data Protection Regulation" (GDPR), which is a new set of laws that govern internet privacy in the EU, and will go into effect this week on May 25, 2018. And while it may seem that privacy regulation in the EU is irrelevant to US advisors - who are not based in the EU - the reality is that if you have any clients in the EU, you market your services to clients in the EU, or you have clients who will be moving to the EU, then you are subject to GDPR as well! And there is some debate that even merely having EU web traffic that you're tracking on your website could trigger GDPR rules for US financial advisors!

In this guest post, Zach McDonald of Mineral Interactive shares his thoughts on how US financial advisors can remain compliant with EU laws as GDPR goes into effect, including understanding the rights of consumers guaranteed under GDPR (e.g., the right to be forgotten, right to have access to personal data, right to grant or deny services consent, and the right to grant or deny placement of cookies), the advisors potentially impacted under GDPR (including any advisors who work with or solicit clients in the EU, and potentially even those who may merely have EU web traffic), the steps advisors can take to become GDPR compliant (from getting permission to track cookies, to verifying that vendors are compliant, and more), and the tools advisors commonly use that could also create GDPR issues (such as appointment schedulers, landing pagers, and many others)!

Ultimately, though, the key point is to acknowledge that advisors in the US cannot simply ignore GDPR as something that only applies to those in Europe. Many advisors in the US could fall under GDPR, due to something as minor as a single existing client who moves to Europe. And until we see how the EU will enforce the regulations, there is a risk that even just getting EU web traffic (whether the advisor wants it or not!) could trigger GDPR issues. As a result, advisors overlook GDPR compliance at their own risk, as failure to comply with GDPR can lead to substantial EU fines! And given the recent scandals and large-scale breaches of consumer data in the US – such as those at Facebook and Equifax – there's also the possibility that GDPR could simply serve as a bellwether of changes to come here in the US as well! (Which means we may all be subject to GDPR-like rules soon enough!)

#FASuccess Ep 073: Why Successful Advisor Marketing Is More About Staffing Than Spending with Sheri Fitts

May 22, 2018 07:01 am 0 Comments CATEGORY: Financial Advisor Success Podcast

Welcome, everyone! Welcome to the 73rd episode of the Financial Advisor Success Podcast!

My guest on today's podcast is Sheri Fitts. Sheri is the founder of ShoeFitts, a marketing consulting firm for financial advisors, and is the Chief Marketing Officer for Sheridan Road, a Chicago-area advisory firm that works primarily with qualified plans and has nearly $13 billion of assets under management.

What's unique about Sheri, though, is her particular focus on how to craft "unforgettable" marketing strategies to really differentiate yourself... right down to the fact that, as the founder of ShoeFitts marketing, she gives away colorful socks as a gift. Because it's unique. And that makes it hard to forget.

In this episode, we talk in depth about how to leverage and maximize marketing ideas, from the importance of trying to craft your own memorable and distinct marketing initiatives, why it's crucial to align the marketing of the firm with the kind of business you want to grow towards in the future, the importance of systematizing your marketing processes so that you can measure and refine them, and why it's so important to have a staff member who is formally responsible for marketing in your firm, even if that means 75% of your "marketing costs" are actually staffing costs, and only 25% of the budget actually goes to a traditional spend on marketing itself.

We also talk about Sheri's own path as a marketing consulting, how she decided to make the leap from a traditional corporate job to going out on her own as an independent consultant because she didn't want to be buried in managing people, the ironic challenge she faced when her independent consulting firm grew so quickly that she once again found herself in the position of managing people, and how she restructured her firm yet again to allow her to focus her time on the tasks she enjoys the most. Which I think has parallels for most of us as advisors, too.

And be certain to listen to the end, where Sheri provides her own perspective on the fundamental difference between sales and marketing, and why advisory firms need to cultivate both in order to succeed.

So whether you are interested in learning how to craft an unforgettable marketing strategy, what you can do to systematize your marketing process so that it can be measured and refined, or are wondering how you can best structure your firm so that you can focus on the tasks that you want to, I hope you enjoy this episode of the Financial Advisor Success podcast!

How To Profitably Price Fee-For-Service Financial Planning

May 21, 2018 07:01 am 1 Comment CATEGORY: Practice Management

Two-Step Process For Determining Apporpriate Fee-For-Service Planning Fee

A considerable challenge for financial advisors providing standalone fee-for-service financial planning advice is figuring out the "right" price that is both profitable to the advisor, and attractive to consumers. Notably, this is a challenge that largely did not apply to past generations of advisors, who typically either just sold products with commissions (that were determined by product manufacturers and not chosen by the advisor anyway), or charged an AUM fee (in which there was strong convergence on the 1% price point for all advisors). As a result, fee-for-service advisors who are aiming to reach clients through a different compensation model have both an opportunity to expand service into previously unserved markets (particularly those prospective clients who cannot be reached through traditional advisor business models like commissions or AUM), but also a challenge in needing to take more responsibility for determining how to price their services in the first place.

In this guest post, Alan Moore of XY Planning Network and AdvicePay, shares his thoughts on how to profitably price a fee-for-service financial planning offering, including the options for calculating financial planning fees (e.g., flat fee, hourly, project-based, percentage of net worth and income), the structure of paying advice fees (e.g., one-time fees, ongoing fees, or a combination), setting the right advice fee frequency (e.g., monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, annual), how to integrate some combination of fee-for-service and AUM fees (for firms that are looking to transition from an existing AUM model), how to make sure your fees are both profitable for the advisor and reasonable for your (niche) clientele!

Ultimately, though, the key point is to acknowledge that like the massive shift from commissions to AUM over the past few decades – which allowed advisors to serve clients in a fundamentally different way and reduced certain conflicts of interest – the opportunity to provide fee-for-service financial planning allows advisors to continue to evolve their business models, profitably serving an ever-increasing range of clients with fewer conflicts of interest. Yet the freedom and flexibility of the fee-for-service model does present new challenges in setting an advisory firm's fees in the first place... even as advisors with a fee-for-service financial planning model are poised for success in serving the next generation of clients (who are eager to receive real financial advice, but want to pay for it directly!)!

Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (May 19-20)

May 18, 2018 02:58 pm 0 Comments CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" – this week's edition kicks off with the news that the DoL fiduciary rule still isn't quite dead yet, with the attorney generals of three states now appealing to the full group of 5th Circuit judges to (re-)consider their request to take up the defense of the DoL fiduciary rule after the Department of Justice declined to defend it themselves, suggesting that it's inappropriate that the judges who vacated the fiduciary rule itself should also be allowed to determine alone whether the states should be allowed to appeal their ruling.

Also in the news this week were some notable statements from the SEC's enforcement division that its recent Share Class Selection Disclosure (SCSD) Initiative may be part of a broader enforcement policy shift where the SEC will try to use amnesty programs to encourage more advisory firms to step forward and fix widespread abuses (while the SEC focuses its resources on higher-stakes enforcement issues with less of a "broken-windows" approach to their firm exams), and an interesting survey finding that affluent clients are increasingly looking to their financial advisors to be tax experts (in addition to investment experts).

From there, we have several articles on building relationships with clients and colleagues, including one that explores why most networking meetings are useless (hint: if you really want to build new relationships, you need to engage in an activity with someone you don't know, not just casual conversation), another looking at the kinds of (often unwitting) behaviors that advisors engage in with prospects that may prevent them from becoming clients, and the issues to consider when trying whether to spend more time socializing with clients outside of a professional setting (or not).

We also have a few retirement-related articles, from a look at why the uncertainties of retirement mean Monte Carlo analysis is especially appropriate to evaluate and craft potential retirement recommendations (because it implicitly explores a very wide range of "What-If" scenarios), to how to handle new retirees who excitedly retire early only to discover that retirement is a "total bore" for them, and a look at how the decisions of where retirees live is starting to reshape how cities develop, as retirees increasingly are not just moving to warmer climates to retire but instead are simply seeking out more distant suburbs and/or lower cost metropolitan areas.

We wrap up with three interesting articles, all around the theme of the financial advisory industry's struggles with diversity: the first is a look at a recent CFP Board research study on the factors that are limiting racial diversity of financial advisors; the second is a study showing that financial advisors have the worst rate of sexual harassment (as compared to other industries); and the last shows that financial advisors also have the largest gender pay gap of any occupation, even after controlling for advisor productivity and years of experience, suggesting that the profession is still far less of a true meritocracy than is commonly believed... and that for all of these issues, there is a need for a broader change in the culture of financial services, beyond just building better "awareness" and "sensitivity training" programs.

Enjoy the "light" reading!