7.5 考研英语真题源外刊阅读模拟试题【难度7.9】

Section II Reading Comprehension 

Part A 

Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on the ANSWER SHEET. 

Text 2

The UK’s wealth management industry still has “incredibly complex” fees and some firms even use “deliberate obfuscation” to disguise their true costs, according to the founder and chief executive of Netwealth.

Charlotte Ransom established the discretionary wealth manager a decade ago with a focus on offering lower and clear charges to attract customers seeking financial advice and investment management.

But she said the industry has not properly addressed the issue of complicated and hidden fees during this time, deterring many people from investing or leaving them unable to make comparisons in the market.

“I do think there is a level of deliberate obfuscation . . . in order to make it harder for clients to understand,” she added.

Her comments came as the Financial Conduct Authority issued proposals on Thursday to simplify how platforms, advisers and wealth managers communicate the costs of investing and ensure that they use “plain English” for clients.

The FCA said it will consult on simplified rules for how firms communicate the costs involved in investing, from product charges to advice. The regulator added that it would ban “double dipping”, where wealth managers or investment sites take some of the interest on clients’ deposits, while also charging a fee for holding the cash balance.

The issue of jargon and charges has long clouded the industry and left customers in the dark, despite sweeping regulation over the years aimed at tackling the problem, Ransom said.

Even though the UK financial watchdog unveiled rules under the Retail Distribution Review (RDR) in 2013 to help customers receive financial advice with more transparency over fees, Ransom said that the wealth management industry has not properly addressed the problem.

“More than 10 years in [from RDR] this simply hasn’t materially changed,” she said, referring to complicated structures and hidden fees.

Certain wealth managers have come under scrutiny for their charging structures to ensure that clients receive a fair deal, as the recent Consumer Duty regulation has sharpened focus on the issue.

St James’s Place, the UK’s largest wealth manager, overhauled its fees last August and removed a punitive “exit” charge for new clients, although those who joined before that month are still subject to this fee.

Last month, wealth manager Rathbones said it was halting investments from high-risk clients following a review by the regulator. It noted in the same announcement that it would stop charging fees on cash sitting in clients’ discretionary accounts from July.

Chris Bredin, consultant at research firm The Lang Cat, said: “It helps to separate two things: what an adviser or wealth manager charges for their advice and ongoing service, and what sits underneath that, the platform, investment and cash interest retention that come with any portfolio.

“Both are disclosed reasonably well in isolation, but meaningful comparison is very challenging.”

Netwealth, which has just over £1.5bn in assets and just under 3,000 clients, typically runs portfolios worth £500,000. The wealth manager is chaired by Edward Bonham Carter, the former chief executive of Jupiter and veteran City fund manager.

For clients receiving both investment management and financial advice, Netwealth charges 0.7—1.1 per cent, depending on the size of a client’s portfolio, plus investment fees ranging from 0.1 per cent to 0.45 per cent.

The company notes on its website that even a saving of 1 per cent on fees on £250,000 over two decades equates to £114,000.

“You can’t control what markets do, but you can stay invested and keep an eye on costs,” Ransom said.

Gina Miller, who has long campaigned for transparency over fees, said: “More than a decade after RDR, it’s shameful that investors still can’t see what they’re really paying when they invest. That isn’t complexity — that’s a choice.”

26. What is Charlotte Ransom's primary accusation against the UK wealth management industry?
[A] It intentionally employs convoluted pricing structures to hinder clients' comprehension.
[B] It charges exorbitant fees primarily to compensate for the market's unpredictable fluctuations.
[C] It discourages potential investors by frequently altering the baseline of investment returns.
[D] It fails to provide discretionary management services for clients seeking financial advice.

27. According to the FCA, the practice of "double dipping" involves ________.
[A] extracting extra profits by repeatedly charging clients for the same investment portfolio
[B] simultaneously collecting interest on clients' cash deposits and charging them a retention fee
[C] illegally transferring clients' cash balances between different investment platforms
[D] requiring clients to pay for both product charges and advisory services independently

28. Why have previous regulations like the 2013 RDR failed to achieve their ultimate goal?
[A] The strict enforcement of these rules inadvertently forced many wealth managers out of business.
[B] Major firms deliberately ignored the directives by introducing punitive exit charges for new clients.
[C] Consumers lacked the financial literacy required to interpret the "plain English" mandated by the FCA.
[D] The intrinsic complexity of evaluating combined costs across different platforms remains a formidable hurdle.

29. The recent adjustments made by St James's Place and Rathbones demonstrate that ________.
[A] established wealth managers are voluntarily leading the campaign for financial transparency
[B] high-risk clients are gradually being phased out by top-tier wealth management institutions
[C] mounting regulatory pressure is compelling major firms to rectify their questionable fee practices
[D] the abolition of exit charges has successfully restored public trust in the investment market

30. Gina Miller's remark at the end of the text implies that the lack of fee transparency is ________.
[A] a calculated industry strategy rather than an unavoidable operational difficulty
[B] a direct consequence of the outdated regulations established before the RDR
[C] an inevitable byproduct of managing diverse and sophisticated investment portfolios
[D] a minor technical issue that can be swiftly resolved by standardizing industry jargon

附注：根据历年考研英语真题阅读题源外刊等，摘选最新文章，模拟仿真出题。

参考答案见以下。

Quick look: ABDCA

26.【正确答案】A
【解析】题型：事实细节题
定位： 第一段至第四段。“...some firms even use ‘deliberate obfuscation’ to disguise their true costs... I do think there is a level of deliberate obfuscation... in order to make it harder for clients to understand.”
分析： 原文明确指出，Ransom 指控部分公司使用“蓄意混淆（deliberate obfuscation）”来掩盖真实成本，其目的就是“让客户更难理解（make it harder for clients to understand）”。选项 A“它故意采用令人费解的定价结构来阻碍客户的理解（intentionally employs convoluted pricing structures to hinder clients' comprehension）”是对原文意图的完美同义替换（intentionally employs 对应 deliberate；convoluted 对应 obfuscation；hinder comprehension 对应 make it harder to understand）。
干扰项：[B] 它收取高昂费用主要是为了补偿市场不可预测的波动（强加因果，第十八段提到无法控制市场波动，但并未说这是收取高昂费用的原因）；[C] 它通过频繁更改投资回报的基准来阻碍潜在投资者（无中生有，原文未提及更改投资回报基准）；[D] 它未能为寻求财务建议的客户提供全权委托管理服务（事实相反，第二段明确指出Ransom建立的正是提供此类服务的公司，并非指控整个行业不提供服务）。

27.【正确答案】B
【解析】题型：事实细节题
定位： 第六段第二句“...ban ‘double dipping’, where wealth managers or investment sites take some of the interest on clients’ deposits, while also charging a fee for holding the cash balance.”
分析： 原文通过 where 引导的从句清晰界定了“双重收费（double dipping）”的含义：一方面拿走客户存款的利息（take some of the interest），另一方面又收取持有现金的费用（charging a fee for holding the cash balance）。选项 B“同时收取客户现金存款的利息并向他们收取保留费（simultaneously collecting interest... and charging them a retention fee）”精准复刻了这一行为特征。
干扰项：[A] 通过对同一投资组合向客户重复收费来榨取额外利润（偷换概念，双重收费特指“吃利息+收代持费”，而不是泛泛的“对投资组合重复收费”）；[C] 非法将客户的现金余额在不同投资平台之间转移（无中生有，文中未提及转移现金余额）；[D] 要求客户独立支付产品费用和咨询服务费用（张冠李戴，这是第六段第一句提到的两种不同的费用构成，而非“双重收费”的定义）。

28.【正确答案】D
【解析】题型：因果推断题
定位： 第七段至第九段以及第十三、十四段。“...the wealth management industry has not properly addressed the problem... ‘Both are disclosed reasonably well in isolation, but meaningful comparison is very challenging.’”
分析： 文章指出，尽管2013年就出台了 RDR 规定，但问题并未实质改变。第十三、十四段分析师的话给出了深层原因：各项费用“孤立来看披露得还算合理（disclosed reasonably well in isolation）”，但要进行“有意义的比较却非常具有挑战性（meaningful comparison is very challenging）”。选项 D“评估不同平台上综合成本的内在复杂性仍然是一个难以克服的障碍（The intrinsic complexity of evaluating combined costs across different platforms remains a formidable hurdle）”深刻地提炼了这一行业痼疾。
干扰项：[A] 这些规则的严格执行无意中迫使许多财富管理机构破产（无中生有，文章并未提及机构破产）；[B] 大型公司通过引入惩罚性的退出费用来故意无视这些指令（修饰错位/时间倒置，第十一段提到圣詹姆斯广场“取消了（removed）”退出费用，而不是为了无视指令而“引入”）；[C] 消费者缺乏理解FCA强制要求的“通俗英语”所需的金融素养（张冠李戴，“通俗英语”是目前 FCA 新提出的提案（第五段），而非导致过去法规失败的原因）。

29.【正确答案】C
【解析】题型：例证推断题
定位： 第十段至第十二段。“Certain wealth managers have come under scrutiny... as the recent Consumer Duty regulation has sharpened focus on the issue. St James’s Place... overhauled its fees... Rathbones said it was halting investments... following a review by the regulator.”
分析： 第十段指出，由于近期的《消费者责任》法规（Consumer Duty regulation）加强了对该问题的关注，某些财富管理公司受到了审查（come under scrutiny）。随后第十一、十二段举出了 St James's Place 取消退出费和 Rathbones 停止对现金收费的例子。这说明巨头们的整改并非出于自愿，而是迫于监管压力。选项 C“不断增加的监管压力正迫使大型公司纠正其有问题的收费做法（mounting regulatory pressure is compelling major firms to rectify their questionable fee practices）”是对这一因果关系的高度抽象还原。
干扰项：[A] 老牌财富管理机构正自愿领导金融透明度运动（正反颠倒，原文强调是“在监管审查下（following a review / Consumer Duty regulation）”做出的改变，并非“自愿/voluntarily”）；[B] 顶级财富管理机构正逐步淘汰高风险客户（局部细节/以偏概全，Rathbones 暂停高风险客户投资只是细节之一，不能概括整段“调整收费结构”的核心主旨）；[D] 退出费的废除已成功恢复了公众对投资市场的信任（过度推断，原文并未得出公众信任已恢复的结论，文章基调依然是批判不透明）。

30.【正确答案】A
【解析】题型：句意推断题
定位： 第十九段（最后一段）“Gina Miller... said: ‘...That isn’t complexity — that’s a choice.’”
分析： 文章结尾引用 Gina Miller 的话：“那不是复杂性——那是一种选择。”这句话掷地有声地揭示了财富管理行业收费不透明的本质：它不是因为金融产品本身太过复杂而难以说清，而是行业为了隐瞒成本而“故意做出的策略选择（a choice）”。选项 A“一种经过算计的行业策略，而不是不可避免的运营困难（a calculated industry strategy rather than an unavoidable operational difficulty）”完美破译了这句格言背后的商业批判逻辑。
干扰项：[B] RDR之前制定的过时法规的直接后果（时间错位，Miller 说的是“在RDR出台十多年后（More than a decade after RDR）”，指责的是当下的现状，而非过去的法规）；[C] 管理多样化和复杂的投资组合必然产生的副产品（反面诱导，这正是行业用来推脱的借口（complexity），被 Miller 的那句“That isn't complexity”直接反驳）；[D] 一个可以通过标准化行业术语迅速解决的微小技术问题（程度篡改，文章通篇在强调这是一个根深蒂固、利益交织的重大问题，绝非“微小的技术问题/minor technical issue”）。

【词汇注释】

【长难句】The regulator added that it would ban “double dipping”, where wealth managers or investment sites take some of the interest on clients’ deposits, while also charging a fee for holding the cash balance.

拆解：

1. 句子主干为 The regulator added that...（监管机构补充说……）。

2. that 引导的宾语从句主干是 it would ban "double dipping"（它将禁止“双重收费”）。

3. 逗号后是由 where 引导的非限制性定语从句，详细解释了什么是 double dipping。在从句中，主语是 wealth managers or investment sites，谓语动词有两个动作的对比：一是 take some of the interest on clients' deposits（拿走客户存款的部分利息），二是 while also charging a fee for holding the cash balance（同时还对持有这些现金余额收取费用）。
   

监管机构补充称，它将禁止“双重收费”行为，即财富管理公司或投资网站拿走客户存款产生的部分利息，同时又对为客户代持现金余额收取费用。

【参考译文】

Netwealth的创始人和首席执行官表示，英国财富管理行业的收费仍然“极其复杂”，一些公司甚至使用“蓄意混淆”的手段来掩盖其真实成本。

十年前，夏洛特·兰塞姆（Charlotte Ransom）创立了这家全权委托财富管理公司，其重点是提供更低、更清晰的收费，以吸引那些寻求财务建议和投资管理的客户。但她表示，在此期间，该行业并未妥善解决收费复杂和隐蔽的问题，这阻碍了许多人进行投资，或者使他们无法在市场上进行比较。

“我确实认为存在一定程度的蓄意混淆……目的是让客户更难理解，”她补充道。

她发表此番言论之际，英国金融行为监管局（FCA）于周四发布了提案，旨在简化平台、顾问和财富管理机构传达投资成本的方式，并确保他们对客户使用“通俗易懂的英语”。

FCA表示，它将就企业如何沟通投资相关成本（从产品收费到咨询费用）的简化规则进行磋商。该监管机构补充称，它将禁止“双重收费”行为，即财富管理公司或投资网站拿走客户存款产生的部分利息，同时又对代持现金余额收取费用。

兰塞姆表示，尽管多年来为解决这一问题出台了全面的监管规定，但专业术语和收费问题长期以来一直笼罩着该行业，让客户一头雾水。

尽管英国金融监管机构在2013年根据《零售分销审查》（RDR）颁布了规则，以帮助客户在收费更透明的情况下获得财务建议，但兰塞姆表示，财富管理行业并未妥善解决这一问题。“（RDR出台）10多年过去了，这根本没有发生实质性的改变，”她在提及复杂的收费结构和隐藏费用时说道。

由于最近的《消费者责任》法规加强了对该问题的关注，某些财富管理公司的收费结构受到了严格审查，以确保客户获得公平的待遇。

英国最大的财富管理公司圣詹姆斯广场（St James’s Place）去年8月对其收费进行了彻底改革，取消了对新客户征收的惩罚性“退出”费，尽管在那个月之前加入的客户仍需缴纳这笔费用。

上个月，财富管理公司Rathbones表示，在接受监管机构审查后，该公司正暂停接受高风险客户的投资。该公司在同一份公告中指出，从7月起，将停止对存放在客户全权委托账户中的现金收取费用。

研究公司The Lang Cat的顾问克里斯·布雷丁（Chris Bredin）表示：“将两件事区分开来是有帮助的：一是顾问或财富管理机构为其建议和持续服务收取的费用；二是这背后的东西，即任何投资组合都伴随的平台费、投资费和现金利息截留。”

“孤立来看，两者的披露都算合理，但要进行有意义的比较却非常具有挑战性。”

Netwealth拥有刚刚超过15亿英镑的资产和不到3000名客户，通常管理的投资组合价值在50万英镑左右。这家财富管理公司的董事长是木星基金（Jupiter）前首席执行官、资深伦敦城基金经理爱德华·博纳姆·卡特（Edward Bonham Carter）。对于同时接受投资管理和财务建议的客户，Netwealth根据客户投资组合的规模收取0.7%至1.1%的费用，外加0.1%至0.45%不等的投资费。

该公司在其网站上指出，即使在20年内为25万英镑的投资节省1%的费用，也相当于省下了11.4万英镑。“你无法控制市场走势，但你可以保持投资并密切关注成本，”兰塞姆说。

长期以来一直致力于推动收费透明化的吉娜·米勒（Gina Miller）表示：“在RDR出台十多年后，投资者在投资时仍然不知道自己到底付了什么钱，这是可耻的。那不是复杂性——那是一种选择。”

附注：