Last Friday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that could have a negative effect on retirement savings.

This order, another in a litany of executive commands, may not have captured the headlines like his controversial immigration ban. And it was paired with another order affecting the Dodd-Frank Act, which may have overshadowed it. 

But even though the Obama administration's fiduciary rule may not be a regular topic at one's dinner table, that doesn't mean that Trump's attempted repeal wouldn't have an impact on investors' futures.

Under former President Barack Obama, the Department of Labor crafted a change to the rules that govern financial advisers when it comes to helping clients save for retirement. The fiduciary rule, as it is known, was intended to prevent savers from becoming the victims of advisers who don't have their best interests in mind.

The rule, which is slated to take effect April 10, prohibits advisers from favoring investment products that give kickbacks over others that would have a better impact on investors' long-term yields, as well as other practices that profit investment professionals at the expense of retirement savers. It does this by classifying any adviser who receives compensation of any sort for retirement account investment advice as a fiduciary, thus falling under ethical and legal obligations.

Critics of the rule, including Trump's Wall Street cronies, argue that it would limit the amount and variety of advice that investors could be given and cost the advisory industry as much as $20 billion in lost profits. But this rule would have a positive impact on the retirement portfolios of millions of Americans, and his attempt to get rid of it clearly favors advisers over the country's middle class.

That didn't stop Trump from ordering the DoL to explore rescinding or revising the rule.

His press secretary, Sean Spicer, referred to the fiduciary rule as "a solution in search of a problem ... The Department of Labor exceeded its authority with this rule, and this is exactly the kind of government regulatory overreach the president was put in office to stop."

Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts defended the rule in a report released last week, saying, "It's far too easy for an adviser to sell just one more annuity, regardless of whether it is a prudent choice for the investor, when a free vacation or an international cruise is waiting for him on the other side of the sale."

She singled out annuities because they are popular among retirement savers looking for steady future income.

If you liked this article you might like

Crazy Weak U.S. Dollar Will Make These 10 Companies Huge Winners

Dow, S&P 500 Set New Records as Fed Moves to Unwind Balance Sheet

Stocks In Negative Territory as Chances for December Hike Surge

The Wait for 'Milestone' Fed Meeting Keeps Stocks in Flux

Stock Futures Trade Flat as Balance Sheet Decision From Fed Is Awaited