Edward Jones History

95 replies [Last post]
lambda's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-07-20

For those who are interested...here is some history on Jones:
 
Edward Jones was founded by Edward Jones, Sr., in 1922. In 1948, when the firm was a small St. Louis brokerage, the founder’s son, Edward D. “Ted” Jones, Jr., joined the firm. He began his career as a broker in St. Louis but built a business journeying around the surrounding rural communities as a traveling salesman. In 1957 he supported the establishment of the firm’s first branch office, in Mexico, Missouri, and in 1960 an office in Pueblo, Colorado, even though it required a 1,500-mile telegraph wire to link to St. Louis. Although none of the national or regional firms, or even his father, believed that a town with a population below 25,000 could support a brokerage, Ted Jones proved them wrong. His success gave rise to the original Edward Jones strategy of placing onebroker offices in rural locations where the competition was primarily the local bank. It also moved the firm quickly from being the 9th- or 10th-largest brokerage in St. Louis to being the 2nd largest.
By 1970, Ted Jones had built a firm of 100 brokers, mostly in the region surrounding St. Louis. He had also laid the foundation for the principles by which the firm would be run. As a partnership, the firm was built on the power of individual entrepreneurs in offices with one financial advisor (FA) and one branch office assistant (BOA). He maintained that owners should be employees of the firm and even denied his sisters a share in the firm, as they did not work there. When asked after his retirement why he never sold out and became as rich as Sam Walton, Jones replied that he was the richest man in America: “I have a wife who loves me in spite of all my faults. I have four dogs. Two love only me. One loves everybody. One loves no one but is still very loyal. . . . I enjoy my business. I love my farm and my home. I have a few close friends, and money has never been my God.”
About this time, John Bachmann, a partner and FA hired in 1963, suggested to Ted Jones that the firm pursue an ambitious expansion strategy. The letter he wrote to Ted describing the key features of that strategy and suggesting a goal of 1,000 offices became part of the lore of the firm.
In the next 30 years, with Bachmann as managing partner after 1980, Edward Jones grew rapidly. Leveraging the insights of Peter Drucker, a consultant to the firm, Edward Jones focused on serving the individual investor in a personal relationship. It entered metropolitan areas after 1981 over the objections of Ted Jones, who believed that the firm should locate “where there is no competition.” Drucker countered that competition only demonstrated how different the firm was from most brokers and that metropolitan offices were actually more profitable. The firm faced occasional challenges, such as in the 1980s when real estate partnerships that the firm distributed turned out to be bad investments. This episode triggered the development of a product review department charged with the responsibility of approving new products and given authority to decline the firm’s participation in such investments if it deemed them too risky.
However, for the most part, the firm adhered to a straightforward business practice that allowed for geographic expansion through the replication of the standard Edward Jones office. In 1994, the firm opened its first office in Canada, modeled after a typical Edward Jones office in the U.S., and in 1997 it similarly entered the U.K. market.
During the boom of the 1990s, Edward Jones’s strategy paid dividends. The firm increased its market share of brokers threefold and outperformed the industry average profitability by 10%. In 2000 and 2001, Edward Jones was named the best place to work in America by Fortune magazine.
When Bachmann passed the position of Managing Partner to Doug Hill in 2004, his successor’s task appeared to be one of “steady as she goes.” Regulators, however, soon accused Edward Jones and other brokerages of accepting payments based on the volume of business placed with mutual fund companies (a practice known as revenue sharing). Regulators worried that this would influence brokers to recommend certain funds and they alleged that this potential conflict was not adequately disclosed to investors. The company, without admitting or denying any of the allegations, eventually agreed to settle regulatory actions and class action suits for $202 million. Doug Hill voluntarily retired as Managing Partner, and Jim Weddle took the reins in January 2006.

mydogisgoldie's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-06-11

And you point is what??????

Broker24's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-12

???????
 
Lambda, what's with that?

footsoldier's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-30

Spiff is proud of you. I think.

Jones99's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-06-07

That sure was a lot to type...you practicing a speech for the Summer Regional?

troll's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-29
uwec1986's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-05

Spiff, I guess my 200 million number was right on.

snaggletooth's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-07-13

Nice story.  It's too bad that after all "Ted" put into your firm, you still have brokers (not advisors) splitting breakpoints and what not.
 
 
 
No knock on you EDJ guys here that do the right thing.

footsoldier's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-30

Ahhh there is so much more to add Mr. Lambda.....
 
Question-
 
Anyone care to take a stab at why the General Parnters of EDJ have another broker dealer under their umbrella called Conestoga Securities? The key GP's are the principals according to the State filing.

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

footsoldier wrote:Ahhh there is so much more to add Mr. Lambda.....
 
Question-
 
Anyone care to take a stab at why the General Parnters of EDJ have another broker dealer under their umbrella called Conestoga Securities? The key GP's are the principals according to the State filing.
 
What no mention of EDJ Ventures, LHC, Boone National S&L,  Passport Research, or CIP?
 
Perhaps this will help with the conversation.  I doubt it, but I'm sure foot will espouse his conspiracy theory momentarily:
 
EDJ ownes 100% of the outstanding stock of Conestoga Secs, Inc who owns 100% of the outstanding stock of CIP Management, Inc who is the managing general partner of CIP Management, LP, LLLP who is the managing GP of Community Investment Partners II LP, LLLP, Community Investment Partners III, LP, LLLP, Community Investment Partners IV, LP, LLLP, and Community Investment Partners V, LP, LLLP business development companies.  EDJ also holds all the LP equity in EDJ Ventures, LTD.  Conestoga Secs, Inc is the GP of EDJ Ventures, LTC. 
 
Fire away with the conspiracy theory.  I'm sure you've got a good one. I'm sure at some point it ties in with the Knights Templar and Skull and Bones.     
 
   

Greenbacks's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-21

My name is lambda and I drank the koolaid

lambda's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-07-20

OK guys...looks like my attempt to provide some info backed fire and maybe I snuck into the fridge and drank the koolaid a little early !!! 

WestH's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-29

So where does the "Serving Individual Investors since 1871" comes from?

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

Comes from buying Whittaker & Co who WAS founded in 1871.  Common practice was to adopt the starting date of the oldest component of the company.  Jones hasn't been using that tagline for a few years now.   

footsoldier's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-30

Spiff-
 
Any idea what all the entities are or what they do? Or how the affect the company bottom line?
 
 

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

First, let me say thank you foot for giving me something to do today rather than make calls. 
 
According to Jonesnet, CIP is a business development company that was formed in the 1990's.  The majority of the investments the partnerships made were in the medical field.  All of the CIP dollars are currently invested, so no additional investments are being made. 
 
I have no idea how they affect or if they detract from the Jones Financial Companies bottom line.  I found a document that listed CIP along with some other STL based companies as a Venture Capitalist organization.  The gist was, STL companies, ie AGE or Stifel or Enterprise Leasing, investing in STL startup medical companies. 
 
There is a guy at HQ that Jonesnet says you can call if you have questions about CIP. 

Broker24's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-12

It probably has something to do with tax or risk/liability management.  When I worked at a major hotel company in finance, we were investing in some type of oil co-generation plants because we got these huge tax incentives.  Had nothing to do with the core business, it was just one of those tax shelters.  And this was just over the past 10 years (ended maybe 2006?), not in the go-go tax shelter days.  All big companies use creative financing structures for various purposes.  The last firm (non-financial firm) I worked for had over 100 LLC's, LLP's and C Corps all intertwined.  This was primarily because of tax reasons and partnership involvement.  Each LLC had different levels of participation by various individual and entity partners.  No cloak-and-dagger stuff, just pure above-the-board financial reasons.  It kept PWC and my team quite busy during tax season.

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

Man, that's no fun.  Not even the hint of a conspiracy theory.  Just boring tax stuff. 

footsoldier's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-30

Spiff-
How did Jones handle directed brokerage when it was a common practice? You were at home office then. Did they have a directed brokerage dept next to the bond desk? I remember the company montra was that there was only one profit center,  the IR/FA. How did that revenue get recognized?
Ah the conspiracy theorists are raising their heads now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

Yes, I was at the home office then, but had zero contact with the bond desk. 
 
You can spin that montra however you choose.  The reality is that there are several lines of revenue with revenue sharing agreements being one of the largest.  I'm sure there was something from directed brokerage.  Both of those things were common practice. 
 
That's a sad attempt at a conspiracy theory.  A good one would be that John Bachman is a member of Skull and Bones.  Conestoga was actually a private LP set up under his watch to fund "businesses" whose sole purpose was to influence the monetary system.  Their goal is to send our economy into a tailspin, collapse our financial system, and once it does, the shadow government that already exists will take power and reassert our world dominance. 
 
Now that's a conspiracy theory.  
 
PS - to my knowledge, there was no directed trading desk. 

Magician's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-19

That's a little far-fetched .

Everyone knows that Bachman was a puppet the whole time of Doug Hill. In fact, the only reason Doug Hill stepped down, was to devote more time to stealing money from mutual fund shareholders. Weddle is a pawn in his game to fleece the investing public of all of their money.

And they are not members of Skull and Bones - they are members of the Femurs and Tarsals. A much more sinister organization bent on making St. Louis the country's capital. Conestoga is a shell company used to funnel campaign money so that "saul4paul" (who is the brains behind "Ron Paul") can become this new "Jonesmerica's" all powerful King/Emperor/President/Emir/Pontiff/.

And remember ex-Jonesers, if you're part of the "saul4paul" solution, you're part of the problem.

Magician's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-05-19

So now you finally know who Saul4Paul is - Doug Hill. I'm afraid I'm going to have to go into witness protection now.

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

You're a much better theorist than I am. 

IndyEDJ's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-12-13

I got a peek at the summer regional tape and I am sad to say that did not know any of the top producers shown there.  After being gone 8 years I learned how quickly the firm changes!!
 
IndyEDJ

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

Eight years is a lifetime in this biz.  I'd bet a lot of the top producers you knew are either HQ GPs or just don't do the videos any longer.  Some of the big names are still there, but just not as prevalent anymore. 
 
EDJ has changed A LOT since you left in 2000.  

noggin's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-30

Here's a good one for you Spiff. I sent a nice letter to my old office requesting cost basis on accounts that had transferred to me at my new firm. It was signed by every client and requested that the rep supply that information directly to me their "new" advisor.... The person that took over my office sent a letter that was approved by compliance to all clients that said since your account is closed at jones, we have no responsibilty for cost basis. 
 
I would think that all firms have an inherent obligation to supply cost basis when an account transfers.

nestegg's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-06-14

WestH wrote:So where does the "Serving Individual Investors since 1871" comes from?They just wanted to sound older than AGE lol

footsoldier's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-30

Nogs-
 
I had the same problem 18 months ago. You should send the letter to headquarters. They are required to provide the info. But they won't mail it to you, only their ex-client. It's nothing but a pain in the ass. Most firms participated in the national electronic cost basis transfer process at the time of the transfer.
 
Just another example of the doublespeak on how the customer always comes first. 

MISS JONES's picture
Offline
Joined: 2007-08-28

noggin wrote:Here's a good one for you Spiff. I sent a nice letter to my old office requesting cost basis on accounts that had transferred to me at my new firm. It was signed by every client and requested that the rep supply that information directly to me their "new" advisor.... The person that took over my office sent a letter that was approved by compliance to all clients that said since your account is closed at jones, we have no responsibilty for cost basis. 
 
I would think that all firms have an inherent obligation to supply cost basis when an account transfers.
 
That's odd when I took over an office. The previous broker sent letters for cost basis directly to the home office and they provided the information within a month. Try that..
 
Miss J

now_indy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-28

Get ALL of your clients to request cost basis from Jones. I have been gone about two years, and just yesterday a CPA called me for cost basis. Well, because the Jones account has been closed over 18 months, I'm basically screwed, as Jones will just say "sorry." 
 
I've had to have clients bring in all of their Jones statements, and me and Excel spend some quality time together.  Thanks Jones!

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

I have the same issues when I transfer in accounts from other firms too.  So, it's not just a Jones issue. 
 
I don't believe there is any obligation to share info between firms.  Not saying it's right, just the reality of the way it is.  I know if a former client called my office I would do what I could to accomodate them.  But, once you leave, you are no longer MY client and you DON'T come first any longer.  Why should I or my BOA spend ANY time at all doing YOUR work?  If the home office wants to do the legwork for you, great.  Send them the request.       
 
I would think that would be something that should have been thought of before you left Jones. 

footsoldier's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-30

Spiffy-
 
You are conflicted with your own company. There is an obligation to share info with the clients and it is much more convenient to have that info transferred directly to the clients new advisor. What Jones is doing again, is saying one thing i.e., that the client always comes first...remember before the hard working FA according to management.
 
And what you are saying is that your ex client ( I thought Jones owns the client not you) don't receive that A++ service once they leave. The puddle gets more cloudy when outsiders recognize for you that YOU are an employee of the same company that tells anyone who will listen that when they are clients, the customer always comes first.
 
The reality is that Jones wants you to think independently, but acts as if you don't have a say in the matter. It ain't perfect anywhere, especially at EDJ.

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

I'm not conflicted.  And your statement is correct.  Once someone leaves my office, they no longer get my A++ service like they did when they were my client.  If it's easy info to get, then great, I'll do it.  Because I'm a nice guy.  But if  you think I'm going to waste any substantial time calculating something like cost basis, you're crazy.  I have no legal or ethical obligation to provide that info to anyone other than the advisor.  Signed letter or not. 
 
So, you're telling me also that if your client moved money to me (must have had a stroke that day) if they call you a year later and ask you for info,you're going to drop everything and help them out?  Really? 
 
I'd bet if you talk to someone at Jones HQ, they'd say they are more than willing to give that info to the client.  But they're not going to provide that info to the new advisor.  It's a confidentiality issue that Jones is trying to protect.
 
I do get to act independantly on a lot of things.  Some things I don't.  I understand the relationship and I'm willing to live with it.  You weren't, so you left.     
 
 
 
 
 

noggin's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-30

Spaceman Spiff wrote:I have the same issues when I transfer in accounts from other firms too.  So, it's not just a Jones issue. 
 
I don't believe there is any obligation to share info between firms.  Not saying it's right, just the reality of the way it is.  I know if a former client called my office I would do what I could to accomodate them.  But, once you leave, you are no longer MY client and you DON'T come first any longer.  Why should I or my BOA spend ANY time at all doing YOUR work?  If the home office wants to do the legwork for you, great.  Send them the request.       
 
I would think that would be something that should have been thought of before you left Jones. 
Spiff- According to the agreement that I signed with Jones, I couldn't take that information with me. I believe in legally and ethically keeping your word so to answer your question there was nothing i could have done about it before I left.  Every time I transferred an account from another firm I was supplied cost basis if I requested it. I think it is a Jones issue. You can't really believe that there is no obligation to share information do you?

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

I think we're having two different thought processes here.  Nog- I believe that if your client goes to EDJ HQ and asks for cost basis information on their accounts, then they have an obligation to give your client that info.  I'm sure they will provide that info. 
Now, at the branch level, if you send me the FA a letter asking me to provide you, the recently departed or account stealing FA, cost basis for a former client, I'm going to tell you to go jump in a lake.  My office has zero obligation to you as an advisor to give up that info.  Now, if my former client comes by the office or calls me, then I'll help.  I'll get him the info he needs.  And I'll do it with a smile.  Actually my BOA will do it.  I'll close the door to my office so I don't have to look at the guy.   
 
 

footsoldier's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-30

Now, at the branch level, if you send me the FA a letter asking me to provide you, the recently departed or account stealing FA, cost basis for a former client, I'm going to tell you to go jump in a lake.  My office has zero obligation to you as an advisor to give up that info. 
 
Spiff...did we strike a personal nerve. Perhaps a situation or two where people left and you took it personal....
 
Try working out at least three times a week for stress relief.

uwec1986's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-05

I gotta go with Spiff on this one...I handle it the same way.

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

No personal nerve.  It's just easy to get you guys going.  And we haven't had a good I hate Jones conversation in a while. 
 
I have only had one former client who really pissed me off this way.  He moved to Schwab, then called me asking for help with cost basis.  He was a putz anyway, so I told him to have Skippy at Schwab help him. 
 
You'll appreciate this one uwec - He's also the guy I sent a copy of Schwab's revenue sharing agreement to when he used that as the excuse for leaving my office.  Found it on the web, printed it, highlighted it, and stuck it in the mail in a blank envelope.  I see him at church every once in a while.  For some reason he doesn't acknowledge my existence. 

Broker24's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-12

I've had to explain revenue sharing a few times.  But once people understand that all firms do it - UBS, ML, Morgan Stanley, LPL, etc., it makes sense.  Most firms receive revenue sharing from far more funds as well.  Fortunately, with the Advisory account we rolled out, we rebate any revenue sharing income back to the client's account (and 12b-1's).  No double-dipping.

noggin's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-30

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
I think we're having two different thought processes here.  Nog- I believe that if your client goes to EDJ HQ and asks for cost basis information on their accounts, then they have an obligation to give your client that info.  I'm sure they will provide that info. 
Now, at the branch level, if you send me the FA a letter asking me to provide you, the recently departed or account stealing FA, cost basis for a former client, I'm going to tell you to go jump in a lake.  My office has zero obligation to you as an advisor to give up that info.  Now, if my former client comes by the office or calls me, then I'll help.  I'll get him the info he needs.  And I'll do it with a smile.  Actually my BOA will do it.  I'll close the door to my office so I don't have to look at the guy.   
 
You're incorrect on that my good friend Spiff. The only cost basis that the home office will supply is on the bond positions.  Apparently, they aren't capable of supplying the mutual fund positions or the stocks. Check it out and report back......
 
 

Broker24's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-12

Who cares already. Every firm has their quirks.

noggin's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-30

A quirk is a funny little amusing habit. Not being able to supply cost basis goes a little beyond quirkiness.  I wish you well.....

footsoldier's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-04-30

Reality is a copout for those who can't face drugs.....
 
or admissions that their company acts in a quirky matter...

onetimeuser's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-06-23

I made up my mind a long time ago I was never going to get involved in this forum because I find it is only used to bash Edward Jones and other companies and I happen to believe most companies in this  industry are good.
 

I decided to register today and will only respond to this whole thing about E.J. and cost basis. As a person that took over a competetive office I know all there is about providing cost basis info to former clients. The information that is being shared here is NOT true. The home office has a department that does nothing but research cost basis for ex-clients. I know this for a fact because we have used it when my boa could not find the information needed. This department can't even be used for present clients so I think we do a great job of helping former clients.
 
The ironic thing is that the only time we can't find the information needed it is because the account was transferred in from another firm and no information was provided. We have never had a situation where the cost basis wasn't provided for a past client and we have had several come back because of our helpful attitude.  
 
I will go back into hiding again now and leave the forum to you people that have more time than me to worry about what some other company is doing.

Broker24's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-10-12

O.T.U. -
Why don't you let everyone know the number they can call for former clients.  I assume it's an external number, not an internal # number??
 

now_indy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-28

onetimeuser wrote:... The home office has a department that does nothing but research cost basis for ex-clients. I know this for a fact because we have used it when my boa could not find the information needed. This department can't even be used for present clients so I think we do a great job of helping former clients. ...
 
We've been told by Jones that once the account has been gone for over 12 or 18 months, their job is done, no cost basis for you.
 
Here's my question. Why does jones supposedly employ a "department" to research cost basis when they could transfer the cost basis with the leaving account?  If they had transferred over cost basis during the ACAT, THEY WOULD NOT NEED AN ENTIRE DEPARTMENT TO RESEARCH COST BASIS FOR PAST CLIENTS!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry, that's a touchy subject with me.  I know that Jones likes to homegrow it's technology, but I think it could figure out how to transfer cost basis (like almost all other decent firms) fairly easily.

onetimeuser's picture
Offline
Joined: 2008-06-23

The only time finding a cost basis becomes an issue is when the "other decent firms" did not send the information when an account from transferred into Jones.  If we made the original sale we can find the cost basis in a matter of seconds.

now_indy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-07-28

onetimeuser wrote:The only time finding a cost basis becomes an issue is when the "other decent firms" did not send the information when an account from transferred into Jones.  If we made the original sale we can find the cost basis in a matter of seconds.
 
I don't think that you're grasping the issue. Let's use an example:
 
A client is with Smith Barney in 1995 and buys American Funds, in 1999 he transfers his mutual funds to Edward Jones.  In 2004 he transfers his American Funds to LPL (Jones does NOT forward costs basis data with the ACAT).  He then needs to buy a house and sells all of his American Funds in 2008. 
 
In this example, I would not expect Jones to give me the cost basis of the funds when they were held at Smith Barney. But, it would be nice to get cost basis for when they were at Jones.  However, Jones will simply throw up their hands because it has been over 2 years (or 18 months, or whatever) since the account left Jones.  VERY frustrating.
 
It would have been even nicer if the cost basis had simply come over with the funds at time of ACAT.

noggin's picture
Offline
Joined: 2004-11-30

onetimeuser wrote:The only time finding a cost basis becomes an issue is when the "other decent firms" did not send the information when an account from transferred into Jones.  If we made the original sale we can find the cost basis in a matter of seconds.
BZZZZZZZZ, wrong answer!!!
It just doesn't happen that way......
All of the cost basis that I submitted to the home office contained purchases only made at Jones and the only cost basis provided is for the bond holdings.

Soothsayer's picture
Offline
Joined: 2005-02-24

Again, does anyone know a phone number or contact to get that basis if accounts are within the 18 month window?  OTU says there is such a "department".  If so, give them up.  Plenty of us have some work that we would like them to do is this relatively sluggish economy. 

Spaceman Spiff's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-08

now_indy wrote:onetimeuser wrote:The only time finding a cost basis becomes an issue is when the "other decent firms" did not send the information when an account from transferred into Jones.  If we made the original sale we can find the cost basis in a matter of seconds.
 
I don't think that you're grasping the issue. Let's use an example:
 
A client is with Smith Barney in 1995 and buys American Funds, in 1999 he transfers his mutual funds to Edward Jones.  In 2004 he transfers his American Funds to LPL (Jones does NOT forward costs basis data with the ACAT).  He then needs to buy a house and sells all of his American Funds in 2008. 
 
In this example, I would not expect Jones to give me the cost basis of the funds when they were held at Smith Barney. But, it would be nice to get cost basis for when they were at Jones.  However, Jones will simply throw up their hands because it has been over 2 years (or 18 months, or whatever) since the account left Jones.  VERY frustrating.
 
It would have been even nicer if the cost basis had simply come over with the funds at time of ACAT. 
 
If SB didn't send that info to Jones in 1999, then how is Jones supposed to send it to LPL in 2004? 
 
Are you sure you're not confusing amount invested with cost basis?  In your example, Jones would be able to tell you about dividends and cap gains that had been reinvested, but not the cost basis of funds purchased at SB. 
 
At some point we have to put the client's responsibilty to keep track of their own financial affairs in question.  The fact that brokerage firms keep track of cost basis is a convenience for clients, but according to the IRS, not a requirement.       

Please or Register to post comments.

Industry Newsletters
Investment Category Sponsor Links

 

Careers Category Sponsor Links

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×