Retrocession Fees: Definition, Implications, and Real-world Examples

Retrocession, a practice prevalent in the financial industry, refers to the compensation paid by asset managers to advisers or distributors. While seemingly straightforward, retrocession raises ethical concerns regarding transparency, client trust, and the integrity of financial advice. This article aims to delve into the intricacies of retrocession, its implications, and the ongoing debates surrounding this controversial practice.

Retrocession fees, also known as kickbacks or trailer fees, represent the commissions that asset managers pay to advisers or distributors for recommending their products or services. These payments often occur discreetly and are not disclosed to clients, leading to questions about the impartiality and integrity of financial advice. Critics argue that retrocession fees may incentivize advisers to prioritize products that offer higher fees, rather than those that best suit their clients’ needs.

Retrocession fees come in various forms, each with its own implications for the financial industry:

Wealth managers receive compensation for bringing new clients to a custody institution. While this may benefit the manager financially, it raises concerns about the alignment of interests between the manager and the client.

Asset managers receive compensation for executing trading transactions, such as buying and selling securities. These fees, often tied to the volume of trades, may influence trading decisions and raise questions about the manager’s fiduciary duty to their clients.

These fees are embedded in the total expense ratio (TER) of investment products and are paid to client acquirers. While recurring in nature, they contribute to ongoing conflicts of interest and may compromise the objectivity of financial advice.

The case of JP Morgan’s settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2015 serves as a notable example of retrocession’s real-world implications. JP Morgan was accused of favoring hedge funds willing to provide fees to a bank affiliate, without disclosing this information to clients. This case underscored the ethical challenges associated with retrocession and its potential impact on investor trust and market integrity.

Retrocession fees are kickbacks or fees paid by asset managers to advisers or distributors for promoting specific financial products or services.

Retrocession fees raise concerns about impartiality in financial advice, as advisers may be influenced to recommend products based on the fees they receive rather than their clients’ best interests.

Retrocession fees can erode investor trust by creating perceived conflicts of interest between financial professionals and their clients. Clients may question the objectivity of advice when fees are involved.