As noted previously, there is a stark contrast between the stated enthusiasm of the current administration for "FinTech" and the apparent significant skepticism of the New York State regulators. Compare, for example, with .

This letter is somewhat of a mixed bag of (i) selective quoting of Dodd-Frank, (ii) fair points as to the deficiencies of Regulation BI and (iii) regulatory and legislative proposals.

To start with the quoting of Dodd-Frank, paragraph (g) of begins with the words: "The Commission may promulgate rules . . . " The plain reading of the paragraph is that the discretion as to whether to adopt the rules was left to the determination of the SEC. In fact, Section 913(b) directs the SEC to…

The number of firms is down about 10% since 2014, with all of the losses concentrated in small firms. It would be good to learn the reasons why. Is it just that the business is moving to bigger firms, or are smaller broker-dealers converting to become investment advisers? If the latter, that would have significance for the SEC's consideration of Regulation Best Interest, as it would suggest that firms are moving away from the full-service brokerage model to providing likely higher cost…

The SIFMA letter aims to make limited improvements to Regulation Best Interest. Even if all of these improvements were made, it seems an open question whether so-called "full service brokerage" survives as to retail customers (however that term is defined). The concern remains that the industry would move toward a model of brokerage that provides advice only to customers who pay an express fee for a differentiated service and subject to the investment adviser regulatory regime, rather than…