So I was reading an article over on WSJ, and that
was a comment that someone left in response to the
article, which perfectly frames it up.
The article was talking about Bank of America’s
Merrill Lynch move to get compliment with the
DOL’s new rule.
They announced they will no longer offer
retirement savers the option of paying a
commission for trades.
The DOL’s new rule is to limit commissions in
retirement accounts because Obama’s administration
said it was putting brokers profits first and not
On the surface, it sounds like the government is
doing the right thing, but are they?
Commissions are only generated on a transaction,
and most are passive in their retirement accounts,
which wouldn’t typically create that many
But, yet Obama’s administration has said
retirement advice offered has cost American’s $17
billion a year and diminishes their annual returns
by a percentage point.
They didn’t disclose how they got that $17
billion, but it sounds inflated.
When I see things like this, I find myself curious
on where it originated from because I haven’t
heard of a public outcry related to this.
I bet if we follow the money, we can create a safe
assumption where this originated.
Investors who want a retirement account at Merrill
will need to pay a fee based on a percentage of
According to Morningstar’s estimates, fee-based
accounts generate 60% more revenue than accounts
that charge a commission.
The only way to keep these leeches out of your
pocket is to take control of your money, accounts
and investment sections and learn to do it
If you’re up to the challenge, then you’ll find
tremendous value with the courses, reports and
book found here:
To your wealth, freedom and options!