Morris,
I don't give investment advice, and my role is certainly not to help
the couple choose which stock or mutual fund to buy. I am there to
help them and their attorneys make good financial decisions, by
projecting the tax and cash flow consequences of various settlement
alternatives, and steering them clear of tax and other financial
land mines. The idea that I have to be a registered investment
advisor to do that is nonsensical, in my opinion.
--- In CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Morris Armstrong, CFP, ChFC,
CDFA" <divorceplanner@...> wrote:
of
Tom
One of the core requirements of Collaborative Practice and of the
IACP is that practitioners be licensed in their field. A reading
the 40 Act and many state statutes seem to indicate that if youare
discussing securiities for a fee, or using terms such as financialexempt
planning that you should be registered.
There are some exemptions to the 40 Act and as a CPA you are
if the advice given is incidental to your normal practice. Shouldanyone
you be retained to work on a divorce I am not sure fits into the
normal practice of a CPA, which is usually attestaion of documents.
Many of the commercial designations are simply that, commerical
designations.
In addition Washington State is considering legislation that
referring to themseles as financial planners be registered as anRIA.
other
Now, some people that I have spoken with have said " we arent
finacial planners, we are financial neutrals" and that may be well
and good however I attended a meeting where Rita Pollak was the
speaker and the only term that she used was financial planning or
planner.
Once you get by the base requirement of being registered then
designations may show some expertise.that
Then there is also the argument that could be made that the fact
the AICPA came out with the PFS designation is indicative of thefact
that they beleived that the CPA did not have the appropriatetraining
in personal fiancial issues and needed the specialization.is
--- In CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Tom Norton" <tom@> wrote:
and
So are you saying that a CPA/CDFA/CVA who does not sell product,
who therefore does not operate under the Investment Act of 1940,
wasnot a qualified financial advisor?
--- In CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Morris Armstrong, CFP, ChFC,
CDFA" <divorceplanner@> wrote:
I am working on a presentation under the above heading and I
royallyhoping
that people may supply some examples of where people err
Iin the
post divorce phase. I imagine, but have no evidence that theerrors
are more likely to occur in litigated divorces; so I dont mindhearing
stories from the past.
I also need to address using qualified financial advisors and
ampeople
going to be upfront and state that my belief is that only
aswho
can operate under the authority of the Investment Act of 1940
amended or its state equiavalent should be considered. I knowthat
radically differs from the IACP however that is the approach Iwill be
taking there. ( Comments welcome as well)
Please feel free to contact me directly at divorceplanner@
or post here if people dont mind
Thank you
Morris Armstrong CFP, ChFC, CDFA, AIF, EA
Armstrong Financial Strategies
57 North St
Danbury CT 06810
203 744 9297
www.armstrong-financial.com