Some firms charge an additional fee for financial planning on top of their asset‑management fee. To me, that’s backwards.
If you’re managing someone’s money, how are you not doing financial planning?
How are you not reviewing their tax situation, understanding their time horizon, mapping out their goals, or evaluating the future tax burden created by the investments you choose today?
If you skip those steps, how can you know whether the portfolio is even appropriate?
Now, it’s true that some clients don’t want to go deep. Some don’t share tax returns, don’t want to review their full financial picture, or simply prefer a lighter‑touch relationship. That’s fine every client is different.
But charging extra for planning makes it feel like an add‑on, when in reality it’s the foundation of good advice. Many firms that charge extra are already billing 1% or more for asset management alone. At that point, you have to ask:
What exactly is the client paying for?
And if planning is optional, what important details are being left out?
Most people who meet with a financial advisor are looking for more than a money manager. They want clarity, strategy, and guidance, not just someone picking investments behind the scenes. At some firms, advisors are treated more like salespeople: they gather assets, the firm manages the money in the background, and “planning” becomes an upsell.
Sometimes you have to ask yourself why financial planning is even an “extra” fee at certain firms. Is it because they want more revenue? Is it because they want to do less work? Those might play a role, but the real reason is simpler:
Most advisors at large firms are not trained to do real financial planning.
If planning isn’t part of their skill set, it’s not part of their workflow. If it’s not part of their workflow, they’re not going to do it unless the client specifically asks and pays for it.
This is why planning becomes an upsell.
Not because it’s a premium service, but because it’s additional labor that many advisors aren’t equipped or incentivized to perform.
And here’s the part most people don’t realize:
Advisors at these firms rarely bring up the extra planning fee at all.
Why?
Because the extra time it takes to do real planning doesn’t outweigh the incentive to prospect for the next client. Their compensation structure rewards gathering assets, not digging into tax returns, analyzing cash flow, or building multi‑year strategies.
So, planning becomes something they could do… but usually don’t.
It’s not built into the relationship.
It’s not built into the compensation.
It’s not built into the culture.
And when planning is optional, it’s treated like a product not a responsibility.
At my firm, the monthly planning fee includes investment management.
Because planning comes first.
The portfolio should tell the story of your goals, and you can’t write that story without understanding the full picture.
If you want to see what financial planning could look like book a 30 minute meeting here.
Frequently Asked Questions
Some firms charge an additional planning fee on top of their asset-management fee, treating planning as an optional add-on service. This approach allows them to offer different service tiers, though it can create confusion about what services are included in the base fee and what costs extra.
Core planning elements include reviewing a client's tax situation, understanding their time horizon, mapping out their financial goals, and evaluating the future tax impact of investment choices. These components are essential to determining whether a portfolio is actually appropriate for a client's circumstances.
A money manager primarily selects and manages investments, while a financial advisor provides broader guidance that includes strategy, clarity on goals, and comprehensive financial direction. Many clients seeking financial advice want more than just investment selection; they want holistic guidance on their financial situation.
When asset-management fees are already 1% or higher, additional planning fees can make it unclear what the client is paying for at each level. If planning is optional or charged separately, it may incentivize advisors to skip important planning steps that should be foundational to providing appropriate advice.