SEC Charges Former NAPFA President with Kickback

or Register to post new content in the forum

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
May 26, 2009 2:58 pm
SEC Charges Former NAPFA President with Kickback Scheme



 
http://www.financial-planning.com/news/putman-charged-sec-2662012-1.html?ET=financialplanning:e374:1889013a:&st=email
 
I guess this proves the whole argument that even fee-only advisors and financial planners are not exempt from "conflicts of interest".
May 26, 2009 3:34 pm
B24:
SEC Charges Former NAPFA President with Kickback Scheme









http://www.financial-planning.com/news/putman-charged-sec-2662012-1.html?ET=financialplanning:e374:1889013a:&st=email



I guess this proves the whole argument that even fee-only advisors and financial planners are not exempt from "conflicts of interest".





B- Awesome. That's why I don't custody client assets. Fo -get -it.



I guess it's just all about how you look at it. In my mind, when I am using commission-based products, I feel a little conflicted. When I have the option to do whatever I need to do to best manage a client account, then I feel no conflict. Since I get paid the same no matter what.



In this case, they had some sort of an agreement to receive kickbacks. My firm receives no such kickbacks from anybody.