Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • A critical look at BC’s new tax breaks and subsidies for LNG May 7, 2019
    The BC government has offered much more to the LNG industry than the previous government. Read the report by senior economist Marc Lee.  
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • The 2019 living wage for Metro Vancouver April 30, 2019
    The 2019 living wage for Metro Vancouver is $19.50/hour. This is the amount needed for a family of four with each of two parents working full-time at this hourly rate to pay for necessities, support the healthy development of their children, escape severe financial stress and participate in the social, civic and cultural lives of […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Time to regulate gas prices in BC and stop industry gouging April 29, 2019
    Drivers in Metro Vancouver are reeling from record high gas prices, and many commentators are blaming taxes. But it’s not taxes causing pain at the pump — it’s industry gouging. Our latest research shows that gas prices have gone up by 55 cents per litre since 2016 — and the vast majority of that increase […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • CCPA welcomes Randy Robinson as new Ontario Director March 27, 2019
    The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives is pleased to announce the appointment of Randy Robinson as the new Director of our Ontario Office.  Randy’s areas of expertise include public sector finance, the gendered rise of precarious work, neoliberalism, and labour rights. He has extensive experience in communications and research, and has been engaged in Ontario’s […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • 2019 Federal Budget Analysis February 27, 2019
    Watch this space for response and analysis of the federal budget from CCPA staff and our Alternative Federal Budget partners. More information will be added as it is available. Commentary and Analysis  Aim high, spend low: Federal budget 2019 by David MacDonald (CCPA) Budget 2019 fiddles while climate crisis looms by Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood (CCPA) Budget hints at priorities for upcoming […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

Investors Gouged by High Fees

Good coverage in the Globe for the CLC’s calculations on the huge negative impact of high management fees on investment returns from RRSPs and the like, as opposed to the low cost CPP.

Does anybody out there find the investment fund industry response (we are providing good advice) convincing? If so, you will just love PRPPs!

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from rcp
Time: December 6, 2011, 12:49 pm

And of course, you can avoid high fees by investing in low-cost ETF’s. That’s the obvious solution. Vanguard launched six Canadian ETF’s today and every one of them has a management fee of under 0.5%.

Comment from Andrew Jackson
Time: December 6, 2011, 4:08 pm

As I understand it a lot of ETFs are pretty risky since the seller does not always hold what are supposed to be the underlying assets. But good luck with them.

Comment from Andrew Jackson
Time: December 6, 2011, 4:13 pm

And you usually incur brokerage fees buying and selling ETFs

Comment from rcp
Time: December 6, 2011, 7:04 pm

Andrew, you have to read the prospectus: some ETF’s are risky and some are not. Almost all iShares, Claymore, and Vanguard ETF’s hold the actual underlying assets – the synthetic ETF’s that you might be thinking of are bigger in Europe than in Canada or the US.

A $9.99 brokerage fee (if that, some brokerages now offer free ETF trading) on say a $2000 investment amortized over five years is 0.1%.

The “high management fee” talking point is getting old. Nobody has to pay high management fees. It’s pretty simple, and the CLC does itself no favours by mindlessly repeating it. I feel sorry for people in high management fee mutual funds, but their obvious solution is to switch to low-cost ETF’s.

Comment from Eric Pineault
Time: December 6, 2011, 7:14 pm

On a strictly personal note, to avoid the paradoxes of self-contradiction, our savings are in held in the form of public debt sold here in Québec by the public provider “Épargne placement Québec” equivalent to canada savings bonds, difference being that their product line is much more complete, resembles what mutual fund managers and banks offer, and no fee’s. (they even have a stock index bond offer, tied to an index of 30 Québec based companies.) Anyhow, this personal solution keeps me out of mutual funds. But what I realized is that Épargne placement Québec does’t offer RESP’s, there is no public option for this type of savings plan, and a friend of mine who has a handicapped daughter informed me that the same goes for Registered Disability Savings Plan. Now both these regimes imply some level of public contribution to the savings plan, which in another way of looking at things given a 2% annual management fee is a direct 2% times X million $ to mutual funds and banks. Somebody should calculate this.

Comment from rcp
Time: December 6, 2011, 8:06 pm

Eric, you don’t have to pay 2% per year. It’s really that simple. If you’re paying more than 0.5% per year, think about switching.

Comment from Purple Library Guy
Time: December 6, 2011, 11:58 pm

Not sure it matters what people have to pay. That kind of financial instrument functions as what the Dilbert guy calls a “confusopoly”, much like cell phone plans.

Comment from rcp
Time: December 7, 2011, 1:18 am

PLG, I don’t agree. Read this and see if you find it confusing:

(http://www.thestar.com/article/1097969–roseman-vanguard-comes-to-canada-to-cut-costs)

It’s not a cell phone plan. Lower MER on a broad index is unambiguously better than high MER on the same index.

Comment from Paul Tulloch
Time: December 7, 2011, 11:24 am

Being on this subject I thought an article one of my FB freinds (Trish) posted today by George Monbiot – it kind dovetails into this subject. He cites a study that shows

“traders and fund managers across Wall Street receive their massive remuneration for doing no better than would a chimpanzee flipping a coin.”

Bottomline- I don’t know too many fund managers that are not well-off. At least starting at the middle of that food chain and on up. Whether it be fees, or other compensatory measures, investors get gouged for the services provided.

My favourite line in the piece is this little but massive tidbit- “If wealth was the inevitable result of hard work and enterprise, every woman in Africa would be a millionaire.”

http://www.monbiot.com/2011/11/07/the-self-attribution-fallacy/

Write a comment





Related articles