The “Best Interest” standard is central to the regulation of advisers and brokers. It’s key to the DOL COI proposed rule and recent SEC statements and decisions. Now, a Securities Industry Financial and Markets Association (SIFMA) statement discusses conflicts of interest, disclosure and fee transparency. Despite its obvious importance, federal policy makers and regulators still have not affirmed or promulgated a view of the “Best Interest” standard as drawn from the Advisers Act and common law.

SEC Chair Mary Jo White’s recent statement that the SEC should proceed with rule-making on a uniform fiduciary standard focuses attention on what such a rule may entail. Recent SEC decisions, statements from senior staff and commissioners and statements from former SEC staff and commissioners provide bold lines of a clear picture of the SEC’s view of the duty of loyalty. These bold lines suggest traditional views that conflicts of interest are inherently harmful and should be avoided have altered. Instead they depict a new and benign view of conflicts. A view that holds that conflicts are routine and acceptable — not inherently inconsistent with providing objective advice.

Fiduciary law is complex in its nuances and structures; fiduciary principles are not so complex. Instead they reflect the wisdom of Emerson, who noted, “Nothing is more simple than greatness; indeed, to be simple is to be great.” So it is with principles on which fiduciary best practices and an emerging advisory profession must rest. This paper notes the attributes of character, suggests relevant operating principles or premises for best practices based on these attributes, why these principles matter, and how they starkly differ from principles underlying common brokerage sales practices aggressively advocated by brokerage lobbyists. Throughout, the simplicity of these principles and their meaning to investors stand out.