FICOM’s new commission disclosure proposal appears to be moving full steam ahead. And it leaves certain consequences to the imagination.
RBC Capital markets put out a report on this recently, and touched on some of those key questions.
The report asks the following (our comments are added in italics):
- “Will mortgage brokers lose market share to banks, given they will need to disclose how much they get compensated whereas bank personnel do not?”
- It’s tough to judge the overall outcome at this stage (mainly because the rules aren’t finalized), but one thing seems certain. The changes could cost full-commission brokers business from consumers who will use explicit compensation data as negotiating leverage. To the extent that FICOM’s rule eventually spurs more discounting and less advice (since some brokers won’t invest as much time with clients if they’re earning less), that too could have an adverse impact on the channel at large. The question remains, how much of any full-service volume losses will be offset by the volume gains of rate discounters?
- “Will other provinces adopt similar measures for mortgage brokers?”
- That seems highly likely based on the responses we’ve heard from regulators when asked this question. But there’s nothing to suggest all provinces will follow, and it will take time to become regulation in other jurisdictions.
- “Will similar measures be adopted by OSFI for federally regulated financial institutions and by the provinces for credit unions/caisse populaires?”
- No and no. Regulators do not see the same conflicts of interests and implied fiduciary duties with lender representatives as they do with brokers.
- “Will more informed consumers demand mortgage brokers use part of their commissions to “buy down rate” [i.e., to get the consumer a lower rate than what was being offered]…?”
- You bet your behind they will.
- “Does this potentially impact NIMs for mortgage lenders?”
- It will if the broker’s commission reduction doesn’t offset the lower yield earned by the lender. In time we may see lenders with more favourable broker buydown policies limit or increase their buydown ratios (i.e., make it more expensive to buy down rates).
RBC says, “The ultimate impact is unclear, but we think this is directionally negative for mortgage broker channel mortgage lenders/originators, directionally positive for banks and no impact to mortgage insurers.” This is objective support for the position that regulators are changing the game with this commission disclosure rule.
RBC concludes that, “For now, any impact is likely to be small, but it has the potential to become more significant if these measures expand geographically to other provinces.”
Give that time.
Last modified: April 26, 2017
Besides the point of the article, love the lingo used in the responses, seems like real answers.
Many industries have such disclosures in place. It would be nice to hear from experts on how brokers should handle this. For example, I used a real estate broker for couple of my personal transactions for his exemplary service, even though I knew people who could have charged much lower fees.
If this is coming soon, then it’s better to be ready.
Hi Sundar, Regarding how brokers should handle it. There’s potentially a lot to that little question. In what way did you mean?
Cheers…
Hi Rob
With respect to communication with client….
Regards,
The regulators need to go back to policy making school. All of this intuition-based knee-jerking creates needless burdens for mortgage brokers and increases the risk exposure of the public. While they are at it they should also go to survey taking school and take the bankers with them. Poor decisions based on faulty foundations do not become stronger by being supported by invalid and unreliable surveys. The public deserves oversight of the industry but the current model is very broken; having unqualified regulators who do not know the industry only makes things worse.
hello,
Could you please provide a link to the RBC report? I have searched RBC site and cannot find.
Thanks in advance
Hi Tom,
As far as we know this report is not published. We received our copy for internal use only.
Best regards,
Steve Huebl