Because if you are in a position where you might plausibly give investment advice, and you make a statement that could conceivably be construed as investment advice by the authorities, you may find yourself running afoul of the law. So just like a lawyer making comments about legal choices, you make it explicit that you're not acting as a professional advisor.

I am your lawyer and investment advisor, and this is legal and investment and skincare advice.

Short APPL, pay your taxes, wear sunscreen.

Congrats, that's 3 years in jail†. Enjoy your time!

†I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.

How much money do you want to bet against me, that he will not actually end up in jail for 3 years because of this off the cuff statement?

I'll give you 10 to 1 odds, up to 10K.

Hahahaha, this is comedy gold.

I have no idea how important the disclaimers really are, but they are definitely popular. Maybe just paranoia.

Edit: it was funnier before you edited it and made it more serious...

Ugg, I know. Sometimes I get too involved in explaining a concept, and that ruins the joke. Ive Editted it back.

Is there any precedent for this kind of short disclaimer saving someone's legal rear as a defense?

In order for there to be a history, there would first be a few obstacles to get over: "What are you, stupid? I said it wasn't investment advice. Sue if you want, good luck finding a lawyer to take the case."

Okay, potential plaintiff found a lawyer who will take the case. It would still need to go before a judge who didn't immediately laugh it out of the court room.

After all that, then you might find a court case recorded somewhere. Let us know what you find.

It might work more like a fence. It's hard for me to get a count of how many not-dogs are in my yard right now that my fence successfully kept out.

I'm not sure of any precedent, but the disclaimer isn't just a "don't hold me to it" liability insurance. There are certain certifications required related to various types of products and recommendations (primarily Series 6, 7, 65, and 66). If they don't have that certification and act in that role, it's not just oops-you-can-sue-me liability, it's an actual possibility of jail time.

Because relationships between investors and their financial advisors are regulated, and you don't want to create even the appearance of such a relationship when you write a column for mass consumption.

It's the same CYA reason that people will respond to a question about law with "Here's what the law says, but I am not your lawyer and this is not legal advice".

Taken charitably, it's shorthand for "talk to your actual investment adviser before doing this, please."

To add to the other two responses: I can't find it, but there was a great post on HN about how if you are a lawyer, it is important that you never create as much as an impression that you are giving someone legal advice in your capacity as a lawyer, because it can create liabilities. No exchange of money, no contract required.

I don't know if investing is the same, but that's the answer for lawyers.

Worth noting: Matt Levine used to be a practicing attorney.

The CYA stuff makes a lot more sense in light of that.

Yeah, simple as that, Levine is a trained lawyer. Whenever he talks about his rules of insider trading, it's peppered with "now this is definitely not legal advice, but..."

It's more like common sense.