Recently, a REIT sought to avoid using a broker-dealer in a distribution. Woe, onto those who seek to avoid the broker-dealer, especially when it leads to a SEC investigation and enforcement action.
The REIT charged a 3% commission as part of its sales process, and used its website, social media, and radio ads. These commissions
Most brokers despise the fact that they need to re-take their examinations if they are not employed with a broker-dealer for 2 years or if they are not associated with a member firm. Now, FINRA comes to the rescue with a new proposal to permit registered representatives to avoid re-taking their exams for up to
At Fox Rothschild, we are constantly advising clients regarding the peril of engaging in the securities industry without the proper license. In fact, we have developed materials to provide our clients with information about the process. See http://www.foxrothschild.com/content/uploads/2016/10/e-book-Horn-Badway-McCoy-Broker-Dealers-Registered-Investment-Advisers-and-Commodities-Futures-Registered-Entities-October-2016.pdf.
A recent case before the SEC has only confirmed this advice. The SEC barred a person
The SEC recently announced that an equity advisory firm and its owner agreed to pay more than $3.1 million to resolve charges that they improperly engaged in brokerage activity, as well as charging fees without registering as a broker-dealer. In other words, the firm acted like a broker-dealer but never bothered to register as one.
Over the years that I have defended broker-dealers and investment advisors, a more robust overview of outside business activity (OBA) disclosures would have gone a long way to disprove a number of claims. So where did these firms go wrong?
The biggest issue that I have seen is a firm’s willingness to take the OBA
As you may know, FINRA, last April, launched a senior helpline to address issues pertaining to senior investors. According to recent reports, FINRA received calls on many different issues such as how to read an account statement up fraud targeted to senior investors.
FINRA has reported that some of these calls resulted in follow-up calls
As of December 12, 2015, FINRA will release Form U-5s within three business days of a member firm’s submission, instead of the fifteen days currently provided for under Rule 8312. The current version of the rule was meant to provide the departing registered representative ample opportunity to comment on the disclosure either though a Form
FINRA has released for comment its proposed amendment to Rule 8312, otherwise known as the BrokerCheck Disclosure rule. As it currently stands, FINRA waits for 15 days before it releases information reported on Form U5. This delay was meant to give a registered representative adequate time to comment.
FINRA has proposed to change the waiting
New FINRA Rule 2040 became effective late last month, requiring broker-dealers who sell EB-5 securities disclose to investors the amount of finder fee payments to non-registered foreign persons and receive written acknowledgement from the investors that they are aware of the fees paid.
Additionally, FINRA only permits member firms to pay transaction-related compensation to non-registered
At least one New York City official would answer that question in the negative. The city comptroller released a proposal that would require a financial advisor to clearly state whether he or she must act in the investor’s best interests.
In other words, do what the SEC has yet to do through a uniform fiduciary