GovTrack’s Bill Summary
We don’t have a summary available yet.
This bill passed in the House on October 29, 2013 and goes to the Senate next for consideration.
20% chance of being enacted.
The following factors determined this bill’s prognosis:
The sponsor is on a committee to which the bill has been referred, and the sponsor is a member of the majority party. ▲
The bill was introduced in the first year of the Congress. ▼
6+ cosponsors serve on a committee to which the bill has been referred. ▼
The bill was referred to House Education and the Workforce. ▼
Key: ▲ Correlated with successful bills. ▼ Correlated with unsuccessful bills. Correlation may not indicate causation.
Last updated Oct 30, 2013.
|Referred to Committee|
|Reported by Committee|
|Signed by the President||...|
To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to provide protections for retail customers, and for other purposes.
The committee chair determines whether a bill will move past the committee stage.
No summaries available.
Click a format for a citation suggestion:
H.R. 2374--113th Congress: Retail Investor Protection Act. (2013). In www.GovTrack.us. Retrieved March 12, 2014, from http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr2374
“H.R. 2374--113th Congress: Retail Investor Protection Act.” www.GovTrack.us. 2013. March 12, 2014 <http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr2374>
|title=H.R. 2374 (113th)
|accessdate=March 12, 2014
|author=113th Congress (2013)
|date=June 14, 2013
|quote=Retail Investor Protection Act
We don’t have a summary available yet.
The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.
The summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.
This summary can be found at http://www.gop.gov/bill/113/1/hr2374.
The SEC regulates the conduct of broker-dealers and investment advisers. “Broker-dealers trade securities for their own account or on behalf of their customers. Broker-dealers typically charge commissions on the trades they execute for their customers. Investment advisers provide advice to clients about the value of securities and the advisability of investing in, purchasing, or selling securities. Investment advisers typically charge an annual fee from their clients calculated as a percentage of the total assets that they manage.”
“Historically, broker-dealers and investment advisers have been held to different standards of conduct in their dealings with customers.” Broker-dealers are held to a “suitability” standard, which requires that they, “when recommending the purchase, sale, or exchange of any security, must have reasonable grounds to believe that the recommendation is suitable for the customer given the customer’s financial status and investment objectives.” Alternatively, “investment advisers are regulated directly by the SEC under a heightened ‘fiduciary duty’ standard of conduct . . . . Under this fiduciary duty standard, investment advisers owe to their clients the affirmative duty of ‘utmost good faith, and full and fair disclosure of all material facts,’ as well as an obligation ‘to employ reasonable care to avoid misleading’ their clients.”
Although broker-dealers and investment advisers are held to differing standards of care, a 2008 SEC study found that these entities often offer similar services, leading customers to “fail to distinguish broker-dealers and investment advisers along the lines that federal regulations define.” As a result, Dodd-Frank required the SEC to report to Congress on the differing standards of care applicable to broker-dealers and investment advisers. It also authorized, but did not require, the SEC to issue rules to harmonize these deviating standards of care.
In House Financial Services Committee proceedings, experts expressed concern that “[i]mposing a uniform fiduciary standard of conduct on broker-dealers and investment advisers has the potential to disproportionately harm the ability of less affluent retail investors to access personalized investment advice.” In addition, “it [was] unclear . . . whether a fiduciary standard of conduct offer[ed] a superior level of investor protection compared to the standards of conduct applicable to broker-dealers.” As such, H.R. 2374 requires the SEC to ensure that rulemaking regarding changes to the standards of care governing broker-dealers and/or investment advisers is necessary.
Separate from the SEC’s authority to regulate broker-dealers and investment advisers under the federal securities laws, the DoL “is authorized to define when a person, including an investment adviser registered with the SEC, becomes a ‘fiduciary’ under ERISA by reason of providing ‘investment advice’ for a fee or other compensation with respect to ERISA benefit plans or plan participants.” There is concern that inconsistent standards promulgated by the DoL and the SEC governing retirement plan fiduciaries would be confusing and costly for investors and difficult for service providers to follow. H.R. 2374 would reduce the potential for conflict among such related regulations.
 Id. at 2-3 (emphasis added).
 Id. at 3 (emphasis added).
 Id. at 2. These benefit plans include employee pension plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (“IRAs”) which typically invest in securities registered with the SEC.
H.R. 2374 prohibits the Department of Labor (DoL) from prescribing any regulation to amend the definition of “fiduciary” under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) until 60 days after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issues a final rule relating to standards of conduct for brokers and dealers (“broker-dealers”) pursuant to section 913 of the Dodd-Frank Act. Section 913(g)(1) of Dodd-Frank authorizes, but does not require, the SEC to promulgate rules to extend the fiduciary standard of conduct that is currently applicable to investment advisors to broker-dealers when providing advice about securities to retail customers.
In addition, H.R. 2374 requires the SEC, prior to issuing a rule relating to standards of conduct for broker-dealers, to determine 1) whether the existing unique standards of conduct for broker-dealers and investment advisers are systematically harming or disadvantaging customers; and 2) whether the adoption of uniform fiduciary standards of care would adversely impact customer access to personalized investment advice, recommendations about securities, or the availability of such advice and recommendations. H.R. 2374 further requires that if the SEC promulgates a rule relating to standards of conduct for broker-dealers, it publish in the Federal Register alongside the rule, formal findings that the rule would reduce customer confusion about the standards of conduct for broker-dealers and investment advisers. These provisions would ensure that any SEC rulemaking regarding changes to the standards of care governing broker-dealers and/or investment advisers is necessary.
According to CBO estimates, “implementing H.R. 2374 would not have a significant effect on federal spending. . . . Enacting H.R. 2374 would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.”
The House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.
So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference’s summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That’s because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.
We’ll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.
The bill contains the following citations to other parts of U.S. law:
The United States Code is the compilation of general and permanent laws enacted by Congress. Laws that are not permanent in nature, law that affect a single individual, family, or small group, regulations, case law, state law, and local law do not appear in the United States Code.