IAQFP Contributions to the Profession

Writing Dated: 3/04

IAQFP Contributions to the Profession

Paul M. League, QFP, CFP^®

www.IAQFP.org /info@IAQFP.org

Financial Advisor editorial articles of January 2004 (“Parting Shot”, Wagner) & November 2003 (“Contest for the FPA’s Soul”, Simonoff) contain histories of the financial planning profession that surprisingly omit the seminal role provided by IAQFP (www.IAQFP.org). You include the eventful “CFP Lite” debacle (watering down the CFP^® mark via the CFP Boards ill advised backroom expansionist theory) but leave out the more insidious CFP PRACTITIONER controversy (chronicling the CFP Board’s over 4 year failure to disclose to stakeholders their pended CFP PRACTITIONER trade mark while uninformed certificants were exploited to promote it). The rouse spawned by a simple statement within the certificate renewal form that failed to state that the pended mark was anything more than a descriptive term. When exposed by IAQFP, then CFP Board Chairwoman Patricia Houlihan furthered the deception stating in writing, and open FPA Chapter forums, that it was nothing more than a harmless “descriptive term”. Our efforts resulted in withdrawal of the mark, which otherwise would have further divided the profession between “entry level” and, so envisioned, “elite planners”.

The CFP Board & FPA have foisted a dishonest proposition upon the public and profession; namely, that primarily (if not only), CFP^® Certificants, who represent under 1/3 the professions total, are qualified, while the other 2/3 (that they wish everyone would just forget about), are not. IAQFP efforts to counter this misleading and errant proposition are resulting in a unified Membership that includes CFP^® Certificants with ChFCs (who even the CFP Board wrote to us are equivalent to CFP^® but who they refuse to grant usage of the CFP^® mark), as well as PFS, MSFS & MS (the latter two with financial planning concentration). IAQFP efforts at uniting the profession include an Association run for & by its Members, with the clout of a Vote, thereby making IAQFP the professions only true Trade Association and resulting in realization of, One Profession-One Designation. It is the other 2/3 of financial planners, together with the 1/3 of CFP^® Certificants, that IAQFP unites, another historical accomplishment that shouldn’t be overlooked.

Mr. Wagner suggests that the “appropriate mission” of the CFP Board is as the professions regulator, a frightening outcome to many Certificants & thousands others that the CFP Board and FPA intentionally disenfranchise. Because of the structure of the CFP Board, and their history of self-created controversies, nothing Mr. Diesslin does with rewording a “mission statement”, can truly fix anything. The CFP Board makes its intentions clear – to become the professions SRO/PRO; however, in light of such tawdry history, the full universe of financial planners has every right to be concerned and downright resistant to such a “mission”. Further, their FPA “marketing arm” (as called by some), continues taking steps to disenfranchise the other 2/3 majorities of the professions professionals, as the CFP Board both directs and intends. Should honest CFP^® Certificants, or others, support such a dishonest proposition of permanent disenfranchisement & disunity?

Mr. Simonoff concludes “for an Association to succeed, it will need a more viable raison d’ etre than simply exploiting disgruntlement within various quarters of the FPA”. The FPA is largely unaware of such disgruntlement because it fails to poll its members and continues to self-appoint their Board. IAQFP is that “new Association” with programs rooted in precisely what the FPA and the CFP Board have refused; namely, a unification of the profession and its professionals under one profession, one designation.

IAQFP permanently addressed the disenfranchisement problem with the 2003 introduction of our unifying professional designation “QFP” (Qualified Financial Planner), and with the introduction of the QFP Registry, where the public can both verify (our user-friendly form of sensible regulation), and find, from the “designations alphabet soup”, those specifically educated & trained in the financial planning discipline with its integrative perspective. The CFP Board could have done so years ago, instead it has continued its history of disenfranchising qualified professionals, not listening to its Stakeholders, ignoring issues of concern until they grow into unwieldy controversies, and otherwise further splintering the profession.

Simply stated…you cannot disenfranchise thousands of equally qualified financial planners while fantasizing being the professions Regulator or Association. We appreciate your Magazines professional contributions and attempt to get the information right. It is time the public have a simple universal identifier to know who is a Qualified Financial Planner, and for the professionals of this laudable profession, to have representation rooted in democratic principals that afford both a voice & vote.