Skip to main content

A Bay Street sign, the main street in the financial district is seen in Toronto, January 28, 2013.

Mark Blinch / Reuters

The majority of Canada's financial regulators are abandoning a "best-interest" standard that would have strengthened the obligations financial advisers owe to their clients.

The Canadian Securities Administrators posted a bulletin on Thursday morning stating that all provincial regulators, excluding the Ontario Securities Commission and the Financial and Consumer Services Commission in New Brunswick (FCNB), will no longer be looking at implementing a mandatory best-interest standard that would have required a registered dealer or registered adviser to act in the client's best interests – in a higher standard than the current model.

Often referred to as a "fiduciary duty" – the initiative would have helped strengthen relationships between Canadian investors and their financial advisers.

Story continues below advertisement

"The ongoing problem of the lack of clarity regarding the duty of care that an adviser has to a client remains – we had an opportunity to clarify and sadly this opportunity is being passed by for most of the provinces," says John De Goey, a portfolio manager with Industrial Alliance Securities Inc.

The topic of financial advisers acting in the best interest for clients has been on the table for a number of years. The CSA first published a paper in 2012 and then a second consultation paper in 2016 titled "Proposals to Enhance the Obligations of Advisers, Dealers and Representatives Toward Their Clients." The paper sought comment on proposed regulatory action aimed at strengthening the obligations that securities advisers, dealers and representatives owe to their clients.

In addition to the best-interests standard, the paper also included several " target-reform" proposals to the industry, including the regulation of conflicts of interest, the know-your-client and know-your-product requirements, the suitability obligation and the use by registrants of business titles.

If approved, these potential proposals were intended to better align the interests of registrants – advisers – to the interests of their clients.

Thursday's announcement means that regulators in Quebec, Alberta, Manitoba and British Columbia will not be doing further work on the proposed regulatory best-interest standard. But they will continue to look at the other reform proposals.

"The OSC and FCNB expressed their support for a regulatory best-interest standard that would act as a guiding principle in the consultation paper, while the British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC), Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) and Manitoba Securities Commission (MSC) expressed strong concerns about the benefits of introducing a regulatory best-interest standard over and above the targeted reforms," according to the CSA.

"We want advisers to act in the best interest of their clients. However, we believe that the better route to achieve this is to enhance the existing standards to focus on the areas of greatest concern," said ASC spokeswoman Alison Trollope.

Story continues below advertisement

"For example, the targeted reforms will require registrants to deal with conflicts in a manner that prioritizes the interests of the client ahead of the interests of the registrant."

The bulletin states the OSC and the FCNB will continue to work to articulate a regulatory best-interest standard and will carry out further consultation with stakeholders and self-regulatory organizations.

In an e-mailed statement, OSC vice-chair Grant Vingoe said, "We have been clear all along that we support a best-interest standard and are prepared to demonstrate leadership here. It's what investors expect and deserve. This is about doing the right thing – and fulfilling one of our greatest responsibilities as a regulator: delivering effective investor protection to the public we serve. There's more work that needs to be done to establish how the best-interest standard would apply across the various business models in the market."

The bulletin further states that both the BCSC and Quebec's Autorité des marchés financiers felt that introducing a regulatory best-interest standard in the current regulatory environment, in which conflicts would still be permitted to exist between registrants and their clients, could exacerbate one of the harms the CSA identified: misplaced trust and overreliance by clients on their registrants.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter