Compliance Risk Concepts https://compliance-risk.com/ Compliance Risk Concepts: Senior Compliance Consultants & Executives. Thu, 18 Apr 2024 12:09:36 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.2 https://compliance-risk.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/crc-favicon-225x225.jpg Compliance Risk Concepts https://compliance-risk.com/ 32 32 SEC Charges Five More Investment Advisers for Marketing Rule Violations https://compliance-risk.com/sec-charges-five-more-investment-advisers-for-marketing-rule-violations/ Thu, 18 Apr 2024 12:09:35 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14794

Last week the SEC announced that it had settled charges against five more registered investment […]

The post SEC Charges Five More Investment Advisers for Marketing Rule Violations appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Last week the SEC announced that it had settled charges against five more registered investment advisers for Marketing Rule violations, resulting in $200,000 in combined penalties (with one firm making up half the total on its own). This latest round of cases resulted from an ongoing targeted sweep concerning the Marketing Rule, and it follows another group of cases from September 2023 against nine other advisory firms.

In the present actions, the SEC’s orders found that the five firms advertised hypothetical performance to the general public on their websites without adopting and implementing policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the hypothetical performance was relevant to the likely financial situation and investment objectives of each advertisement’s intended audience, as required by the Marketing Rule. Four of the five firms received reduced penalties because of the corrective steps they undertook in advance of being contacted by the SEC staff.

According to the SEC’s order, the fifth firm also violated other regulatory requirements, including by making false and misleading statements in advertisements, advertising misleading model performance, being unable to substantiate performance shown in its advertisements, and failing to enter into written agreements with people it compensated for endorsements. In addition, the SEC also found that the firm committed recordkeeping and compliance violations and made misleading statements about its performance to a registered investment company client and that the misleading statements were included in the client’s prospectus filed with the SEC.

Compliance Risk Concepts believes that the best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of actions by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet | p. (646) 346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post SEC Charges Five More Investment Advisers for Marketing Rule Violations appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monthly Regulatory Summary (March 2024) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-march-2024/ Thu, 04 Apr 2024 11:53:34 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14738

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (March 2024) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of various FINRA, SEC, NFA, and FinCEN publications to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 24-06, FINRA has adopted amendments to disseminate individual transactions in active U.S. Treasury securities at the end of the day and historically, and to set related fees for members and other professionals who choose to subscribe to the new data set. This new transaction-level data will be publicly available and free of charge on FINRA’s website for non-professionals’ personal, non-commercial purposes on a next-day basis.

The amendments relating to the end-of-day data product take effect on March 25, 2024, and the amendments relating to the historic data product take effect on April 1, 2024.

The rule text is available in the online FINRA manual.

Per Regulatory Notice 24-07, FINRA established an accounting support fee (GASB Accounting Support Fee) in February 2012 pursuant to an SEC order to adequately fund the annual budget of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The GASB Accounting Support Fee is collected on a quarterly basis from member firms that report trades to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB). Each member firm’s assessment is based on its portion of the total par value of municipal securities transactions reported by all FINRA member firms to the MSRB during the previous quarter. FINRA will assess and collect a total of $18,582,100 to adequately fund GASB’s annual budget by collecting $4,645,525 from its member firms each calendar quarter beginning in April 2024.

Per Regulatory Notice 24-08, FINRA has amended FINRA Rule 4210 (Margin Requirements) to establish a specified exception under the margin rules with respect to certain short option or warrant positions on indexes that are written against products that track the same underlying index. Referred to as “protected” option or warrant positions, the new exception conforms with similar provisions Cboe recently adopted. The amendments are effective as of the date of issuance of this Notice.

This Notice provides an overview of the amendments. The text of the amendments is included as Attachment A. In this Notice, all references to provisions of the amendments are to the rule text as shown in Attachment A.

Per Trade Reporting Notice 3/22/24, FINRA is providing advance notice of future updates to its equity trade reporting guidance in connection with upcoming enhancements to the FINRA equity trade reporting facilities to support reporting of fractional share quantities. Under the updated guidance, members engaged in fractional share trading will be required to report fractional share quantities up to six digits after the decimal.

The effective date of the updated trade reporting guidance will be no earlier than the first calendar quarter of 2025. FINRA will announce the specific effective date of the updated guidance in a future Notice.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11275, the SEC is adopting amendments to its rules under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that will require registrants to provide certain climate-related information in their registration statements and annual reports. The final rules will require information about a registrant’s climate-related risks that have materially impacted, or are reasonably likely to have a material impact on, its business strategy, results of operations, or financial condition. In addition, under the final rules, certain disclosures related to severe weather events and other natural conditions will be required in a registrant’s audited financial statements.

These final rules are effective on May 28, 2024.

Per Release No. 34-99679, the SEC is adopting amendments to a rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that requires disclosures for order executions in national market system (“NMS”) stocks. First, the amendments expand the scope of reporting entities subject to the preexisting rule that requires market centers to make available to the public monthly execution quality reports to encompass broker-dealers with a larger number of customers. Next, the amendments modify the definition of “covered order” to include certain orders submitted outside of regular trading hours and certain orders submitted with stop prices. In addition, the amendments modify the information required to be reported under the rule, including changing how orders are categorized by order size as well as how they are categorized by order type. The amendments, as part of the changes to the order size categories, modify the rule to capture execution quality information for fractional share orders, odd-lot orders, and larger-sized orders. Additionally, the amendments modify reporting requirements for non-marketable limit orders (“NMLOs”) in order to capture more relevant execution quality information for these orders by requiring statistics to be reported from the time such orders become executable. The amendments modify time-to-execution categories and require average time to execution to be measured in increments of a millisecond or finer and calculated on a share-weighted basis for all orders. The amendments require that the time of order receipt and time of order execution be measured in increments of a millisecond or finer, and that realized spread be calculated at multiple time intervals. Finally, the amendments enhance the accessibility of the reported execution quality statistics by requiring all reporting entities to make a summary report available.

The amendments to Rule 605 discussed herein shall become effective 60 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register (“Effective Date”). The compliance date shall be 18 months after the Effective Date (“Compliance Date”).

Per Release No. 33-11277, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system Filer Manual (“EDGAR Filer Manual” or “Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. EDGAR Release 24.1 will be deployed in the EDGAR system on March 18, 2024.

Per Release No. 34-99778, the SEC is adopting technical amendments to various rules and forms under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) to reflect a Federal court’s vacatur of rule amendments that the Commission adopted on May 3, 2023, to modernize and improve disclosure about repurchases of an issuer’s equity securities that are registered under the Exchange Act (“Repurchase Rule”). The court’s vacatur of the Repurchase Rule was effective as of December 19, 2023, and had the legal effect of reverting to the rules and forms that existed prior to the effective date of the Repurchase Rule. These technical amendments revise the Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) to reflect the court’s vacatur of the Repurchase Rule.

Per Release No. IA-6578, the SEC is adopting amendments to the rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 that exempts certain investment advisers that provide advisory services through the internet (“internet investment advisers”) from the prohibition on SEC registration, as well as related amendments to Form ADV. The amendments are designed to modernize the rule’s conditions to account for the evolution in technology and the investment advisory industry since the initial adoption of the rule in 2002.

The compliance date for the amended rule is March 31, 2025.

Proposed Rules

There were no proposed rules in March.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in March.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in March.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in March.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-24-07

March 11, 2024

FCM and IB Members—FinCEN updates its list of FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies

On February 29, 2024, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a news release informing U.S. financial institutions of the Financial Action Task Force's (FATF) recent public statement. The statement reiterates that the Russian Federation remains suspended from FATF membership and further warns jurisdictions to remain alert and vigilant to the risks Russia poses to the international financial system.

The release also announced that the FATF reissued its list of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. NFA Member futures commission merchants (FCM) and introducing brokers (IB) should review this release to ensure that their AML programs have the most current information on FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies and revise their AML programs accordingly. A copy of the news release is available on FinCEN's website.

NFA News Releases

There were NFA news releases in March.

FinCEN

FinCEN News Releases

March 04, 2024

Updated March 11, 2024

On March 1, 2024, in the case of National Small Business United v. Yellen, No. 5:22-cv-01448 (N.D. Ala.), a federal district court in the Northern District of Alabama, Northeastern Division, entered a final declaratory judgment, concluding that the Corporate Transparency Act exceeds the Constitution’s limits on Congress’s power and enjoining the Department of the Treasury and FinCEN from enforcing the Corporate Transparency Act against the plaintiffs. The Justice Department, on behalf of the Department of the Treasury, filed a Notice of Appeal on March 11, 2024. While this litigation is ongoing, FinCEN will continue to implement the Corporate Transparency Act as required by Congress, while complying with the court’s order. Other than the particular individuals and entities subject to the court’s injunction, as specified below, reporting companies are still required to comply with the law and file beneficial ownership reports as provided in FinCEN’s regulations.

FinCEN is complying with the court’s order and will continue to comply with the court’s order for as long as it remains in effect. As a result, the government is not currently enforcing the Corporate Transparency Act against the plaintiffs in that action: Isaac Winkles, reporting companies for which Isaac Winkles is the beneficial owner or applicant, the National Small Business Association, and members of the National Small Business Association (as of March 1, 2024). Those individuals and entities are not required to report beneficial ownership information to FinCEN at this time.

Update [March 11, 2024]: This notice was updated on March 11, 2024, to reflect that a Notice of Appeal has been filed regarding this case.

March 28, 2024

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is issuing a request for information (RFI) related to existing requirements for banks under the Customer Identification Program (CIP) Rule to collect a taxpayer identification number (TIN) from a customer prior to opening an account. Generally, for a customer who is an individual and a U.S. person, banks are required to collect a full Social Security number (SSN) from a customer. The RFI is being issued in consultation with staff at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

“The requirement for banks to collect identifying information from a customer prior to opening an account has been a long-standing component of a bank’s anti-money laundering program,” said FinCEN Director Andrea M. Gacki. “However, FinCEN recognizes the significant changes in technology and financial services that have taken place since promulgation of the CIP Rule, and we welcome comments from interested parties as we explore ways to modernize the U.S. anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism regime.” FinCEN recognizes that since the adoption of the CIP Rule there has been significant innovation in customer identifying information collection and verification tools available to banks and other financial institutions. This RFI will inform FinCEN’s understanding in this area and evaluate the risks, benefits, and safeguards if banks were permitted to collect partial SSN information from a customer and subsequently use reputable third-party sources to obtain the full SSN prior to account opening. This RFI also reminds banks of the requirement to collect identifying information from the customer prior to opening an account.

In addition, this RFI supports FinCEN’s ongoing efforts to implement section 6216 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020, which requires FinCEN to, among other things, identify regulations and guidance that may be outdated, redundant, or otherwise do not promote a risk-based AML/CFT regime.

FinCEN strongly encourages all interested parties to submit written comments. Comments to the RFI will be accepted for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.

Hot Issue

FINRA member firms are in the final stretches of time before several consequential changes take effect this summer. Earlier this year, FINRA announced May 31, 2024 as the end date of the COVID-related regulatory relief set forth in Regulatory Notice 20-08 with respect to the obligation of firms to maintain current information for employment addresses and branch offices on specified uniform registration forms. In addition, the new residential supervisory location (RSL) designation becomes available beginning on June 1, 2024 and that is followed by the new remote inspections pilot program that becomes effective on July 1, 2024. Firm should not delay in evaluating the impact of the changes on their business and the preparations that will be necessary for compliance. For example, firms should be aware that risk assessments must be completed prior to using the RSL designation and conducting remote inspections under the pilot program respectively.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Releases
  • NFA Notices
  • FinCEN News Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (March 2024) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: SEC Charges Investment Advisers with Advisers Act Violations for AI Statements https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sec-charges-investment-advisers-with-advisers-act-violations-for-ai-statements/ Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:59:45 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14666

What: The SEC announced that it settled charges against two investment advisers for making false […]

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Charges Investment Advisers with Advisers Act Violations for AI Statements appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

What: The SEC announced that it settled charges against two investment advisers for making false and misleading statements about their purported use of artificial intelligence (AI). The firms agreed to settle the SEC’s charges and pay $400,000 in total civil penalties.

Who: Delphia (USA) Inc. and Global Predictions Inc.

When: March 18, 2024

Why: The SEC’s concerns stem from firms selling AI solutions that they cannot deliver on or where the use or benefits of AI are overstated as part of an investment advisory service. Gary Gensler notes “[w]e’ve seen time and again that when new technologies come along, they can create buzz from investors as well as false claims by those purporting to use those new technologies. Investment advisers should not mislead the public by saying they are using an AI model when they are not. Such AI washing hurts investors.”

How: In the case of Delphia, the SEC found that the firm made false and misleading statements in its SEC filings, in a press release, and on its website regarding its purported use of AI and machine learning that incorporated client data in its investment process. The SEC determined that the statements were false and misleading because Delphia did not in fact have the AI and machine learning capabilities that it claimed. Similarly, the SEC found that Global Predictions made false and misleading claims in 2023 on its website and on social media about its purported use of AI. The charges against both firms included violations of the SEC’s Marketing Rule.

Why it matters: At CRC, we have seen an influx of AI-driven investment advisory business. This uptick has been seen across both internet-based advisers and traditionally registered advisers incorporating AI and technology into their recommendation generation and delivery. While these settlements were IA-specific, the regulatory signaling is widely applicable. There is a continued focus on ethical marketing, and heightened scrutiny on the use of AI is going to leach into other areas of regulatory focus.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Charges Investment Advisers with Advisers Act Violations for AI Statements appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2024) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-february-2024/ Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:42:33 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14617

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2024) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of various FINRA, SEC, NFA, and FinCEN publications to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 24-03, FINRA has amended its Codes of Arbitration Procedure (Codes) to make: (1) changes to the arbitrator list selection process in response to recommendations in the report of independent counsel Lowenstein Sandler LLP (Report) and (2) clarifying and technical changes to requirements in the Codes for holding prehearing conferences and hearing sessions, initiating and responding to claims, motion practice, claim and case dismissals, and providing a hearing record. The amendments are effective for arbitration cases filed on or after March 4, 2024.

Per Regulatory Notice 24-04, FINRA has adopted amendments to conform its rules to the SEC’s amendments to Rule 15c6-1 and adoption of Rule 15c6-2 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to shorten the standard settlement cycle for most broker-dealer transactions from two business days after the trade date (T+2) to one business day after the trade date (T+1). The amendments revise provisions in the following FINRA rules:

  • FINRA Rule 2341 (Investment Company Securities)
  • FINRA Rule 4515 (Approval and Documentation of Changes in Account Name or Designation)
  • FINRA Rule 6282 (Transactions Reported by Members to the ADF)
  • FINRA Rule 6380A (Transaction Reporting)
  • FINRA Rule 6380B (Transaction Reporting)
  • FINRA Rule 6622 (Transaction Reporting)
  • FINRA Rule 7140 (Trade Report Processing)
  • FINRA Rule 7240A (Trade Report Processing)
  • FINRA Rule 7340 (Trade Report Processing)
  • FINRA Rule 11140 (Transactions in Securities “Ex-Dividend,” “Ex-Rights” or “Ex-Warrants”)
  • FINRA Rule 11150 (Transactions “Ex-Interest” in Bonds Which Are Dealt in “Flat”)
  • FINRA Rule 11210 (Sent by Each Party)
  • FINRA Rule 11320 (Dates of Delivery)
  • FINRA Rule 11620 (Computation of Interest)
  • FINRA Rule 11860 (COD Orders)
  • FINRA Rule 11893 (Clearly Erroneous Transactions in OTC Equity Securities)
  • FINRA Rule 11894 (Review by the Uniform Practice Code (“UPC”) Committee)

The amendments to these rules will become operative on May 28, 2024, which is the compliance date the SEC announced for amended Rule 15c6-1 and new Rule 15c6-2, or such later date as the SEC may announce for compliance with such rules.

The amended rule text is available in the online FINRA Manual.

Per Regulatory Notice 24-05, FINRA is adopting new Rule 6151 (Disclosure of Order Routing Information for NMS Securities) to require members to submit to FINRA for centralized publication the order routing reports required under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Rule 606(a) (Rule 606(a) Reports). These amendments will take effect on June 30, 2024. Therefore, members will be required to submit their Q2 2024 Rule 606(a) Reports to FINRA no later than July 31, 2024.

The text of the new rule is available in the online FINRA manual.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-99477, the SEC is adopting new rules to further define the phrase “as a part of a regular business” as used in the statutory definitions of “dealer” and “government securities dealer” under sections 3(a)(5) and 3(a)(44), respectively, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”).

Per Release No. IA-6546, the CFTC and SEC are adopting amendments to Form PF, the confidential reporting form for certain SEC-registered investment advisers to private funds, including those that also are registered with the CFTC as a commodity pool operator (“CPO”) or commodity trading adviser (“CTA”). The amendments are designed to enhance the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s (“FSOC’s”) ability to monitor systemic risk as well as bolster the SEC’s regulatory oversight of private fund advisers and investor protection efforts. In connection with the amendments to Form PF, the SEC is amending a rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) to revise instructions for requesting a temporary hardship exemption.

Per Release No. 34-99582the SEC with the concurrence of the Office of Government Ethics (“OGE”), is adopting jointly issued amendments to the Commission’s existing Supplemental Standards of Ethical Conduct for Members and Employees of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Supplemental Standards”). This rule amends the existing Supplemental Standards jointly issued by SEC and OGE, supplements the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch (“OGE Standards”) issued by OGE, and is necessary and appropriate to address ethical issues unique to the SEC. Specifically, the SEC is prohibiting employee ownership of sector funds that have a stated policy of concentrating their investments in entities directly regulated by the SEC; revising transaction and reporting requirements for certain assets that pose a low risk of conflicts of interest or appearance concerns; permitting employees to comply with reporting obligations by authorizing their financial institutions to transmit information on behalf of employees about their covered securities transactions and holdings data through an approved automated compliance system; clarifying that the limitation on purchasing securities that are part of an initial public offering (IPO) until seven days after the IPO also applies to direct listings of securities; correcting certain technical matters; and adjusting its transaction and reporting requirements to provide the flexibility necessary to implement an automated compliance system. This final rule is effective March 29, 2024.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. IC-35129, the SEC is proposing a rule that would adjust for inflation the dollar threshold used in defining a “qualifying venture capital fund” under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act” or “Act”). The proposed rule also would allow the SEC to adjust for inflation this threshold amount by order every five years and specify how those adjustments would be determined. Comments should be submitted on or before March 22, 2024.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in February.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in February.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in February.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-24-03

February 12, 2024

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for FCM, FDM and IB Members

NFA is committed to providing its Members with the resources they need to meet their regulatory obligations as efficiently as possible. This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Futures Commission Merchants (FCM)

Forex Dealer Members (FDM)

Introducing Brokers (IB)

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes several regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations of Member FCMs for which NFA is the DSRO, FDMs and IBs.

Self-Examination Questionnaire: NFA Members must annually review their operations using NFA's Self-Examination Questionnaire. This Questionnaire is designed to aid Members in recognizing potential problem areas and to alert them to procedures that need to be revised or strengthened. A common deficiency in this area includes failing to review the Questionnaire on an annual basis. NFA encounters firms with deficient policies and procedures, indicating an inadequate review of the Self-Examination Questionnaire. Thorough Questionnaire completion and review ensures firms are alerted to deficient policies and procedures that should be updated to comply with NFA Rules.

Supervision: FCM, FDMs and IBs Members must have written supervisory policies and procedures to address the manner, frequency and results of monitoring written and oral communications. Such supervision includes, when required1, maintaining a record of all oral and written communications provided or received concerning quotes, solicitations, bids, offers, instructions, trading and prices that lead to the execution of a transaction in a commodity interest and related cash or forward transaction, whether communicated by telephone, voicemail, facsimile, instant messaging, chat rooms, electronic mail, mobile device or other digital or electronic media. Common deficiencies in this area include firms not maintaining all required communications, failing to identify brokers using unapproved and unrecorded communication methods and permitting unregistered individuals to act as associated persons.

Digital Assets: Members engaging in activities related to digital assets or digital asset derivatives must comply with the customer disclosure requirements established in NFA's Interpretive Notice 9073.

Third Party Service Providers: Members that outsource regulatory functions must adopt and implement a written supervisory framework over outsourced functions to mitigate outsourcing-related risks pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9079. The supervisory framework must address activities the firm will undertake with respect to initial risk assessment, onboarding due diligence, ongoing monitoring, termination and recordkeeping. Appendix E of the Self-Examination Questionnaire includes several questions to help Members understand these requirements. Firms must also maintain records demonstrating that they have addressed the items outlined in the Interpretive Notice and are following their procedures.

Cybersecurity: FCM, FDM and IB Members must adopt a written information systems security program (ISSP) pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9070 to address the risk of unauthorized access to or attack of their information technology systems and to respond appropriately should unauthorized attacks occur. Members are also required to notify NFA of certain cybersecurity incidents related to their commodity interest activities via NFA's Cyber Notice Filing System. One common deficiency in this area is failure to provide cybersecurity training to employees upon hiring and annually thereafter.

Members that fail to establish and implement an ISSP may be subject to disciplinary action.

Financial Reporting: FCM, FDM and IB Members must periodically file financial reports. Each financial report filed late will be subject to a fee of $1,000 for each business day it is late. Firms that fail to file financial reports in a timely manner may be subject to disciplinary action.

Subordinated Loan Agreements: FCMs and IBs that are also SEC registered broker-dealers are required to submit SLAs and any corresponding amendments to NFA when they are submitted to the firm's designated examining authority (i.e., FINRA), pursuant to CFTC Regulation 1.17.

Eligibility for Membership: If a Member fails to have at least one principal that is registered as an associated person, NFA shall deem that Member's failure to be a request to withdraw from NFA Membership in accordance with NFA Bylaw 301.

Ongoing Updates

On an ongoing basis, each NFA Member must update its Annual Questionnaire in the event of a material change to its operations. For example, if a Member begins doing business or begins soliciting for digital asset or micro contract products, the Member must immediately update its Annual Questionnaire. Doing so ensures that NFA's BASIC system displays correct information about the firm's business activities and ensures the firm receives all applicable notices relating to its reporting requirements in a timely manner.

Recent Amendments and Reminders

The following links contain Notices to Members regarding reminders and recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Notice I-23-18: CPOs and IBs—NFA enhances notice filing user experience

Notice I-23-15: Effective date for repeal of NFA Interpretive Notice regarding reduced NFA assessment fee for diminutive notional value-designated contracts

Notice I-23-13: Effective date of amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws to implement changes to NFA's governance structure

Notice I-23-10: Effective date for NFA rule establishing requirements for Members engaged in digital asset commodity activities

Notice I-23-08: Immediate attention required—Financial Requirements Section 12—Increases in required minimum security deposits for forex transactions

Notice I-24-02: Member obligations under NFA Bylaw 1101 and Compliance Rule 2-36(d) with respect to CPOs/CTAs exempt from registration

Notice I-24-04

February 12, 2024

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for CPO and CTA Members

NFA is committed to providing its Members with the resources they need to meet their regulatory obligations as efficiently as possible. This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Commodity Pool Operators (CPO)

Commodity Trading Advisors (CTA)

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes a number of regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations of CPO and CTA Members.

Self-Examination Questionnaire: NFA Members must annually review their operations using NFA's Self-Examination Questionnaire. This Questionnaire is designed to aid Members in recognizing potential problem areas and to alert them to procedures that need to be revised or strengthened. A common deficiency in this area includes failing to review the Questionnaire on an annual basis. NFA encounters firms with deficient policies and procedures, indicating an inadequate review of the Self-Examination Questionnaire. Thorough Questionnaire completion and review ensures firms are alerted to deficient policies and procedures that should be updated to comply with NFA Rules.

Digital Assets: Members engaging in activities related to digital assets or digital asset derivatives must comply with the customer disclosure requirements established in NFA's Interpretive Notice 9073.

Third Party Service Providers: Members that outsource regulatory functions must adopt and implement a written supervisory framework over outsourced functions to mitigate outsourcing-related risks pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9079. The supervisory framework must address activities the firm will undertake with respect to initial risk assessment, onboarding due diligence, ongoing monitoring, termination and recordkeeping. Appendix E of the Self-Examination Questionnaire includes several questions intended to help Members understand these requirements. Firms must also maintain records demonstrating that they have addressed the items outlined in the Interpretive Notice and are following their procedures.

Cybersecurity: CPO and CTA Members must adopt a written information systems security program (ISSP) pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9070 to address the risk of unauthorized access to or attack of their information technology systems and to respond appropriately should unauthorized attacks occur. Members are also required to notify NFA of certain cybersecurity incidents related to their commodity interest activities via NFA's Cyber Notice Filing System. One common deficiency in this area is failure to provide cybersecurity training to employees upon hiring and annually thereafter.

4.7 Exemption: CPO Members who operate pools pursuant to CFTC Regulation 4.7 must file notice of claim for exemption with NFA prior to the offer or sale of participation in the exempt pool, if the claimed relief includes that provided under 4.7(b)(1). If the relief claimed is limited to that provided under 4.7(b)(2), (3) and (4), however, the notice of claim for relief must be submitted to NFA before the pool first enters into a commodity interest transaction.

CTA Members who want to avail themselves of the relief available in CFTC Regulation 4.7, with respect to qualified eligible persons, must file the notice of claim for exemption before the Member enters into an agreement to direct or guide the customer's commodity interest account.

Eligibility for Membership: If a Member fails to have at least one principal that is registered as an associated person, NFA shall deem that Member's failure to be a request to withdraw from NFA membership pursuant to NFA Bylaw 301.

Pool Financial Reporting— Notification Requirements

Notice Filing Requirements: CPOs are required to file notice with NFA when a market or other event affects a commodity pool's ability to fulfill its participant obligations. Notice must be filed by 5:00 p.m. CT the next business day following one of the events outlined in Compliance Rule 2-50 and Interpretive Notice 9080.

Changes in Fiscal Year End: If a CPO elects a fiscal year end other than the calendar year end for a pool, it must give written notice of the election to all participants and file notice with NFA via EasyFile pursuant to CFTC Regulation 4.22(g) within 90 calendar days after the pool's formation. If this notice is not given, the CPO will be deemed to have elected the calendar year end as the pool's fiscal year end. The CPO must continue to use the elected fiscal year end for the pool unless it provides written notice of any proposed change to all participants and files such notice with NFA via EasyFile at least 90 days before the change.

Changes in Certified Public Accountant (CPA): In the event that a CPO changes the independent CPA engaged to audit a pool's financial statements, the CPO must file notice with NFA via EasyFile pursuant to CFTC Regulation 1.16(g) no more than 15 days after the CPA's resignation or dismissal by the CPO.

Extension Requests: If a CPO requests an extension to file an annual pool financial statement, the extension must be filed with NFA via EasyFile prior to the due date of the filing.

Cessation of Trading: When a pool ceases trading, the CPO must promptly update the Annual Questionnaire. With few exceptions, a CPO must also distribute to participants a final Annual Report and file the Annual Report with NFA. This Annual Report is due within 90 days after the pool ceases trading, absent an extension.

Calculation of Financial Ratios

CPO and CTA Members must compute financial ratios using the accrual method of accounting and in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles or another internationally recognized accounting standard as outlined in Interpretive Notice 9071. Members should consult Notice I-18-20 for additional guidance on calculating these ratios.

Financial Reporting: With few exceptions, each CPO Member must distribute an Annual Report, certified by an independent public accountant, to pool participants within 90 days of the pool's fiscal year end or the permanent cessation of trading, whichever is earlier. Each CPO must also report to NFA on a quarterly basis specific information about the firm and the pools it operates. These pool quarterly reports (PQRs) are due within 60 days of each calendar quarter end. Each PQR filed after its due date will be subject to a late filing fee of $200 for each business day it is late.

CTA Members that direct trading of commodity interests are required to file a quarterly CTA Form PR report within 45 days of the quarter end. Each Form PR report filed after its due date will be subject to a late filing fee of $200 for each business day it is late. CTAs that commence trading client accounts during a quarter must update the Annual Questionnaire immediately to receive timely reporting notifications.

As a reminder, NFA views late filings as a serious rule violation, and we have taken disciplinary action against Member firms in the past for filing reports after the due date.

Ongoing Updates

On an ongoing basis, each NFA Member must update its Annual Questionnaire in the event of a material change to its operations. For example, if a Member begins doing business or begins soliciting for digital asset or micro contract products, the Member must immediately update its Annual Questionnaire. Doing so ensures that NFA's BASIC system displays correct information about the firm's business activities and ensures the firm receives all applicable notices relating to its reporting requirements in a timely manner.

Pool Relationships: A CPO Member who operates an umbrella-series structure (i.e., a single legal entity that has several distinct sub-funds which, in effect, are traded as individual funds) needs to list the umbrella entity with NFA through the Annual Questionnaire and mark it as such. CPOs may also identify the series funds that are tied to that umbrella through the questionnaire. Exemptions must be claimed at the umbrella level and must apply to the structure as a whole.

CPOs should take special care when establishing relationships in the Annual Questionnaire between master funds and feeder funds, umbrella funds and series, registered investment companies (RIC) and controlled foreign corporations (CFC), and parent pools and trading subsidiaries. See the Annual Questionnaire User Guide for assistance.

CPO Beneficial Ownership Reporting Requirements: Beginning January 1, 2024, subject to certain exemptions, reporting companies are required to file a report with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) identifying their beneficial ownership information (BOI). Generally, BOI refers to identifying information about individuals who directly or indirectly own or control a reporting company. A pooled investment vehicle (PIV) such as a commodity pool is generally considered a reporting company and, therefore, required to file BOI information with FinCEN unless it qualifies for an exemption under the Corporate Transparency Act. See Notice I-23-23 for additional details and FinCEN dedicated resources.

Pool Account Statements: With few exceptions, CPO Members must distribute monthly or quarterly account statements to pool participants within 30 days of month or quarter-end. See CPO Reporting Requirements for details.

Recent Amendments and Reminders

The following links contain Notices to Members regarding reminders and recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Notice I-23-03: Member obligations under NFA Bylaw 1101 and Compliance Rule 2-36(d) with respect to CPOs/CTAs exempt from registration

Notice I-23-23: CPO Members— Effective date of FinCEN's beneficial ownership reporting rule

Notice I-23-18: CPOs and IBs— NFA enhances notice filing user experience

Notice I-23-15: Effective date for repeal of NFA Interpretive Notice regarding reduced NFA assessment fee for diminutive notional value-designated contracts

Notice I-23-13: Effective date of amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws to implement changes to NFA's governance structure

Notice I-23-10: Effective date for NFA rule establishing requirements for Members engaged in digital asset commodity activities

Notice I-24-02: Member obligations under NFA Bylaw 1101 and Compliance Rule 2-36(d) with respect to CPOs/CTAs exempt from registration

Notice I-24-05

February 12, 2024

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for SD Members

NFA is committed to providing its Members with the resources they need to meet their regulatory obligations as efficiently as possible. This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, swap dealer (SD) Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes several regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations.

Required Records: SD Members are required to make and keep records of all its swaps activity, including daily trading records for all swaps executed, as well as other transaction, position and business records, pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.201 and CFTC Regulation 23.202. SD Members should ensure required records are both complete and accurate. Additionally, SD Members should consider taking preventative measures against the use of unauthorized or unrecorded channels for pre-execution trade communications.

Business Conduct Standards: SD Members are required to obtain and retain a record of essential facts to accurately categorize their counterparties to facilitate compliance with various regulatory requirements pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.402. The failure to properly identify and classify counterparties may result in non-compliance with other transaction-specific requirements. Additionally, SD Members are required to make several disclosures to non-SD counterparties pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.431. A common deficiency in this area is a failure to disclose material information and pre-trade mid-market marks to counterparties prior to entering into uncleared swap transactions.

Market Practice: SD Members are required to have a supervisory program to diligently supervise all activities relating to their business pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.602 and must implement policies and procedures designed to prevent fraud, manipulation and other abusive practices prohibited by CFTC Regulation 23.410. Additionally, SD Members are required to communicate with counterparties in a fair and balanced manner as detailed in CFTC Regulation 23.433. Common deficiencies in this area include:

  • Failure to conduct adequate trade surveillance to detect fraud, manipulation and abusive practices; and
  • Failure to reasonably tailor communication surveillance procedures based on approved communication methods, including foreign languages, to ensure fair and balanced communications and the prohibition of fraud, manipulation and other abusive practices.

Swap Data Reporting: SD Members must report swap transaction data to swap data repositories pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.204 and CFTC Regulation 23.205. To ensure the accuracy and completeness of reporting, once every 30 calendar days, SD Members must reconcile all open swap positions in its internal records to that maintained by the relevant swap data repository. Errors should be corrected within seven business days after discovery. If an error is not timely corrected, the SD Member must notify the Division of Market Oversight. Common deficiencies in this area include:

  • Failure to report required regulatory messages, either at all or within the regulatory timeframes;
  • Failure to report accurately required data fields to the SDR;
  • Failure to remediate errors and omissions ASATP after discovery;
  • Failure to perform complete reconciliations of open swap positions in internal records to that maintained by the relevant trade repository; and
  • Failure to notify the Division of Market Oversight timely after determining that an error will not be remediated within seven business days after discovery.

Calculation of Initial Margin Using Risk-based Models: SD members using NFA-approved risk-based models to calculate initial margin (IM) must conform to the model requirements pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.154, and NFA requirements detailed in the IM Model Approval Letter and the IM Model Oversight program. As part of these requirements, each SD must monitor its model performance by employing, at a minimum, all of the tests required by CFTC Regulation 23.154 and NFA. Test results must be assessed with clearly established and justified thresholds for acceptable model performance and remediation procedures for each type of testing.

Each SD must re-validate the IM model on a periodic basis, and at least annually. SD Members must adopt procedures and processes enabling them to implement the new version of the IM model in production on a semi-annual or ad-hoc basis. Each new version of the IM Model must be opined on by the internal Model Risk Management function prior to release into production. Furthermore, the IM Model framework must be subject to annual internal audit activities, responsive to requirements in CFTC Regulation 23.154.

SDs must have controls in place to ensure that the information submitted to NFA on a quarterly and annual basis as part of the IM Model Oversight program is accurate, consistent across various regulatory filings and responsive to NFA requirements. All IM model performance issues reported to NFA must be adequately analyzed, and root causes of deteriorated performance must be assessed. Furthermore, each SD's Model Risk Management team must review, assess, and opine on the ongoing monitoring testing results and reports, in a timely manner on a quarterly basis before submitting them to NFA.

Finally, SDs must notify the CFTC and NFA of certain events related to an NFA-approved IM model. Common deficiencies in this area include:

  • Failure to adequately monitor model performance and timely report material model performance issues. Notifications must be made upon identification of the issue, and later, upon the remediation;
  • Failure to have adequate documentation supporting monitoring activities; and
  • Failure to notify CFTC and NFA in writing 60 days prior to an event specified under CFTC Regulation 23.154 (see Notice 1-22-18).

Capital Requirements: SD Members subject to CFTC minimum capital requirements must maintain regulatory capital as defined under the bank holding company regulations in 12 CFR Part 217 as if the SD itself were a bank holding company or as defined in SEC Regulation 240.18a-1 as if the SD were a security-based SD registered with the SEC. Certain SDs that are predominately engaged in non-financial activities may instead choose to maintain tangible net worth in an amount equal to or in excess of minimum capital requirements. Regulatory capital, tangible net worth and minimum capital requirements are determined at the legal entity level. Additionally, when internal models are used to determine regulatory capital or minimum capital requirements, including those used to determine the risk margin amount, the SD must demonstrate independent model validation and ongoing performance monitoring of the SD's own use of the internal models. Validation and monitoring activities must be conducted at the legal entity level.

The SD with NFA-approved capital models must focus on meeting milestones required in the Approval Letters and update the internal processes in line with the timelines required for quarterly model performance submissions to NFA.

Recent Notices to Members

Notice I-23-13: Effective date of amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws to implement changes to NFA's governance structure

Notice I-23-10: Effective date for NFA rule establishing requirements for Members engaged in digital asset commodity activities

Notice I-24-06

February 22, 2024

NFA's Board of Directors elects Gerald F. Corcoran to serve as Chair

At its February meeting, NFA's Board of Directors elected Gerald F. Corcoran, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of R.J. O'Brien & Associates LLC, to serve a one-year term as Chair.

Public Directors

Additionally at its February meeting, the Board elected the following individuals to serve as Public Directors:

  • Ana Beskin, Amazon People Experience and Tech
    (Term expiring 2026);
  • Michael C. Dawley, Bluefin Partners LLC
    (Term expiring 2025);
  • Ronald H. Filler, New York Law School
    (Term expiring 2026);
  • Arthur W. Hahn
    (Term expiring 2026);
  • Mary M. McDonnell, McDonnell & Associates
    (Term expiring 2026);
  • Ronald S. Oppenheimer
    (Term expiring 2025); and
  • Todd E. Petzel, Offit Capital Advisors LLC
    (Term expiring 2025).

Executive Committee

The Board also appointed the following individuals to serve one-year terms on NFA's Executive Committee:

  • Ana Beskin, Amazon People Experience and Tech;
  • Michael T. Burke, HighGround Trading LLC;
  • Gerald F. Corcoran, R.J. O'Brien & Associates LLC;
  • Arthur W. Hahn;
  • Julie Holzrichter, CME Group;
  • Ernest L. Jaffarian, Efficient Capital Management LLC;
  • Mary M. McDonnell, McDonnell & Associates; and
  • Don Thompson, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

NFA's Permanent Special Advisor Leo Melamed and NFA's President also serve on the Executive Committee.

During its meeting, the Board, pursuant to Article VII, Section 3, elected the following nominees to the Board and Nominating Committee:

Board of Directors

FCM Category:

  • Scott Andersen
    SG Americas Securities LLC
    (Term expiring 2026)
  • Gerald F. Corcoran
    R.J. O'Brien & Associates LLC
    (Term expiring 2026)
  • Alicia Crighton
    Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC
    (Term expiring 2025)
  • Thomas R. Kadlec
    ADM Investor Services, Inc.
    (Term expiring 2025)

IB Category:

  • Michael T. Burke
    HighGround Trading LLC
    (Term expiring 2025)

CPO/CTA Category:

  • Ernest L. Jaffarian
    Efficient Capital Management LLC
    (Term expiring 2025)
  • Martin Lueck
    Aspect Capital Limited
    (Term expiring 2025)
  • Constance R. Wick
    Crabel Capital Management LLC
    (Term expiring 2026)

SD/MSP/RFED Category:

  • Seth P. Bender
    HSBC Bank USA, NA
    (Term expiring 2025)
  • Mark L. Maurer
    StoneX Markets LLC
    (Term expiring 2026)
  • Charlotte B. McLaughlin
    PNC Capital Markets LLC
    (Term expiring 2025)
  • Don Thompson
    JPMorgan Chase & Co.
    (Term expiring 2026)

2024 NFA Member Category Nominating Committee

FCM Category:

  • Ruth Arnould
    BofA Securities, Inc.

IB Category:

  • Steven L. Petillo
    Paragon Investments LLC

CPO/CTA Category:

  • Dede Welles
    PDT Partners LLC

SD/MSP/RFED Category:

  • Dan Dan Liu
    Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank

The terms of NFA's Board of Directors and Member Category Nominating Committee began on February 15, 2024.

Member Category Nominating Committee members serve three-year terms.

A complete list of NFA's Board of Directors, Executive Committee, and Member Category Nominating Committee can be found on NFA's website.

NFA News Releases

February 6, 2024

NFA orders New York, N.Y. futures commission merchant Lime Trading Corp. to pay a $100,000 fine

February 6, Chicago—NFA has ordered Lime Trading Corp. (Lime Trading) to pay a $100,000 fine. Lime Trading is a futures commission merchant Member of NFA located in New York, N.Y.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Lime Trading, in which the firm neither admitted nor denied the allegations of the Complaint. The Complaint charged Lime Trading with failing to file various required financial reports and notifications timely with NFA, in apparent violation of NFA Financial Requirements Sections 1(e) and 16(e). The Complaint also charged Lime Trading with a failure to supervise, in apparent violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(a).

In its Decision, the BCC found that Lime Trading violated NFA Financial Requirements Sections 1(e) and 16(e), and NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(a). The BCC's Decision further ordered Lime Trading to cease and desist from violating NFA Financial Requirements Sections 1(e) and 16(e) and NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(a).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

February 8, 2024

NFA permanently bars Florida-based commodity pool operator Bit5ive Mining Fund Advisor, LLC from membership

February 8, 2024, Chicago—NFA has permanently barred Bit5ive Mining Fund Advisor, LLC (Bit5ive Advisor), an NFA Member commodity pool operator (CPO) located in Doral, Florida, from NFA membership and from acting or being listed as a principal of an NFA Member.

The default Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and Bit5ive Advisor's failure to file an Answer. Among other findings, the BCC found that Bit5ive Advisor willfully submitted materially false or misleading information to NFA about the operations of the firm and its commodity pool, failed to comply with CPO reporting requirements, and failed to cooperate promptly with NFA during an examination.

In September 2023, NFA issued an emergency enforcement action against Bit5ive Advisor, which suspended the firm from NFA membership and imposed restrictions on the firm's operations (e.g., prohibited the firm from soliciting or accepting any funds). This action was taken to protect customers, the derivatives industry and other NFA Members due to Bit5ive Advisor's failure to cooperate with NFA during an examination.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.  

FinCEN

FinCEN News Releases

February 01, 2024

WASHINGTON—Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued an alert related to the financing of Israeli extremist settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. The alert provides select red flags to assist U.S. financial institutions in identifying and reporting suspicious activity that finances such violence.

“Financial institutions can play a critical role in detecting and reporting potential suspicious activity related to the financing of Israeli extremist settler violence,” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki. “The U.S. financial system should be protected from those who seek to support or perpetrate violence and bring further instability to the West Bank.”

While the alert highlights the potential involvement of certain nonprofit organizations (NPOs) in facilitating payments to fund violence in the West Bank, FinCEN continues to emphasize that legitimate charities should have access to financial services and can transmit funds through legitimate and transparent channels. FinCEN is also reminding financial institutions to apply a risk-based approach to Customer Due Diligence (CDD) requirements when developing the risk profiles of charities and other non-profit customers. No specific customer types, including charities and NPOs, automatically presents a higher risk of illicit activity. Additionally, as no single red flag is necessarily indicative of illicit or suspicious activity, U.S. financial institutions are encouraged to consider all the surrounding facts and circumstances before determining whether a specific transaction is suspicious or associated with potential Israeli violent extremist groups or campaigns.

Finally, through the alert, Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is highlighting for members of the public that under the Executive Order of February 1, 2024, “Imposing Certain Sanctions on Persons Undermining Peace, Security, and Stability in the West Bank,” the U.S. government is authorized to impose sanctions on foreign persons that are responsible for or complicit in, or have directly or indirectly engaged or attempted to engage in (1) actions that threaten the peace, security, or stability of the West Bank; or (2) planning, ordering, otherwise directing, or participating in specified actions affecting the West Bank, such as violence targeting civilians and property destruction. The United States seeks to impose tangible and significant consequences on those engaged in such activities, as well as to protect the U.S. financial system from abuse.

The full notice is available online at FIN-2024-Alert001.

February 05, 2024

LOS ANGELES—Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) convened a FinCEN Exchange—a voluntary public-private partnership—to share strategic and operational information to combat illicit financial networks that enable fentanyl trafficking. In addition to other lines of effort, the Exchange supports Treasury’s Counter-Fentanyl Strike Force, which launched in December 2023 to bring together personnel, expertise, intelligence, and resources across key Treasury offices to combat the flow of deadly fentanyl into communities throughout the United States. It is the third fentanyl-related FinCEN Exchange in a series specifically aimed at engaging with regional financial institutions across the United States.

Co-hosted by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, the FinCEN Exchange included representatives from the financial industry, as well as regional and national law enforcement agencies such as the U.S. Department of Justice, the Drug Enforcement Administration, Homeland Security Investigations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, IRS – Criminal Investigation, the United States Postal Inspection Service, the Los Angeles Police Department, and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department.

FinCEN and law enforcement representatives highlighted the significant value that suspicious activity reports contribute to law enforcement efforts to combat fentanyl trafficking. They also shared views on ways the financial industry can further increase the effectiveness of suspicious activity reporting involving suspected fentanyl trafficking and related money laundering in Southern California and beyond. Similarly, financial institutions shared information on money laundering flows and tactics used by narcotraffickers and their enablers. All participants discussed ways to deepen collaboration and to enhance the value of suspicious activity reporting to counter this threat.

This event continues a series of FinCEN Exchanges on fentanyl trafficking and related funds flows, including two in 2023, in San Antonio, Texas and Cincinnati, Ohio. The Treasury Department has long recognized the threat from money laundering linked to drug trafficking. The Department is a key implementer of the President’s National Drug Control Strategy, which identifies countering illicit finance as a critical pillar to degrade and disrupt transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) that traffic these drugs. In December, Secretary Yellen traveled to Mexico City, Mexico to further close cooperation with Mexican government counterparts on fentanyl trafficking.

FinCEN continues to call on financial institutions to monitor for and report suspicious activity related to the trafficking of fentanyl, fentanyl analogues, and other synthetic opioids, including on the basis of its 2019 advisory to financial institutions on the subject.

February 07, 2024

WASHINGTON—Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to combat and deter money laundering in the U.S. residential real estate sector by increasing transparency.

The proposed rule would require certain professionals involved in real estate closings and settlements to report information to FinCEN about non-financed transfers of residential real estate to legal entities or trusts. FinCEN’s proposal is tailored to target residential real estate transfers considered to be high-risk for money laundering, while minimizing potential business burden, and it would not require reporting of transfers made to individuals.

“Illicit actors are exploiting the U.S. residential real estate market to launder and hide the proceeds of serious crimes with anonymity, while law-abiding Americans bear the cost of inflated housing prices,” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki. “Today marks an important step toward not only curbing abuse of the U.S. residential real estate sector, but safeguarding our economic and national security.”

The proposed rule describes the circumstances in which a report would be filed; who would file a report; what information would need to be provided, including information about the beneficial owners of the legal entities and trusts; and when a report about the transaction would be due. Data from the reports would assist the Department of the Treasury and its law enforcement and national security partners in addressing vulnerabilities that leave the U.S. residential real estate market exposed to abuse by illicit actors.

The proposed rule is consistent with the Bank Secrecy Act’s longstanding directive to extend anti-money laundering measures to the real estate sector and builds on the success of FinCEN’s Real Estate Geographic Targeting Order program, which has demonstrated the need for increased transparency and further regulation of this sector nationwide. Under the proposed rule, persons involved in real estate closings and settlements would continue to be exempt from the anti-money laundering compliance program requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act.

FinCEN strongly encourages the public to submit written comments in response to the proposed rule. Comments will be accepted for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.

A Fact Sheet on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is available on FinCEN’s website.

February 13, 2024

WASHINGTON—Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to keep criminals and foreign adversaries from exploiting the U.S. financial system and assets through investment advisers. This proposed rule, which complements Treasury’s other recent actions to combat the illicit finance risks from anonymous companies and all-cash real estate transactions, will add further transparency to the U.S. financial system and help assist law enforcement in identifying illicit proceeds entering the U.S. economy.

The proposed rule would require certain investment advisers to apply Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) requirements pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), including implementing risk-based AML/CFT programs, reporting suspicious activity to FinCEN, and fulfilling recordkeeping requirements. Treasury today also published its risk assessment of this sector, which identifies illicit finance threats and vulnerabilities in the sector, including how the uneven application of AML/CFT requirements across the sector allows both legitimate and illicit investors to “shop around” for an adviser who does not need to inquire into their source of wealth.

“Investment advisers are important gatekeepers to the American economy, overseeing the investment of tens of trillions of dollars. The current patchwork of AML/CFT requirements creates regulatory gaps that criminals and foreign adversaries exploit to launder money, hide illicit wealth, and compromise American innovation,” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki. “This proposed rule would level the regulatory playing field, protect U.S. economic and national security, and safeguard American businesses.”

The proposed rule would add investment advisers to the list of businesses classified as “financial institutions” under the BSA. Investment advisers registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), as well as those that report to the SEC as exempt reporting advisers, would be required to implement AML/CFT programs. They would also be required to file suspicious activity reports, fulfill certain recordkeeping requirements, and fulfill other obligations applicable to financial institutions subject to the BSA and FinCEN’s implementing regulations.

The proposed rule would also apply information-sharing provisions between and among FinCEN, law enforcement government agencies, and certain financial institutions, along with special measures that have been applied under Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act. Finally, FinCEN is proposing to delegate examination authority for this rule to the SEC given the SEC’s expertise in the regulation of investment advisers and experience in examining other financial institutions with respect to AML/CFT responsibilities.

The proposed rule builds on the 2021 U.S. Strategy on Countering Corruption, which recommended that Treasury assess the risks posed by the investment adviser industry, and to reexamine a 2015 NPRM that similarly proposed to extend AML/CFT requirements to certain investment advisers. Recognizing the importance of the investment adviser sector to legitimate investors and the U.S. economy, the proposed rule is tailored towards addressing material risks and strengthening financial transparency while minimizing potential business burden as much as possible.

FinCEN strongly encourages the public to submit written comments in response to the proposed rule. Comments will be accepted until April 15, 2024.

Fact Sheet: Anti-Money Laundering Program and Suspicious Activity Report Filing Requirements for Registered Investment Advisers and Exempt Reporting Advisers Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

February 13, 2024

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a Financial Trend Analysis (FTA)  today reflecting an increase in Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) reporting associated with the use of convertible virtual currency (CVC) and online child sexual exploitation (OCSE) and human trafficking. This FTA is based on BSA reporting filed between January 2020 and December 2021.

“Human traffickers and perpetrators of related crimes despicably exploit adults and children for financial gain,” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki. “Financial institutions’ vigilance and timely reporting is critical to providing law enforcement agencies with the information needed to investigate potential cases of human trafficking, sexual crimes against children, and related crimes. This reporting ultimately helps law enforcement protect and save innocent lives.”

The analysis detailed in this FTA furthers Treasury efforts to combat human trafficking as well as the illicit uses of CVC. For example, Brian Nelson, Treasury’s Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, announced at the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking that FinCEN has joined the Canadian financial intelligence unit’s Project Protect—a flagship public-private partnership on human trafficking. In addition, in June 2021, FinCEN identified human trafficking and cybercrime as among the “Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism National Priorities” issued pursuant to the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020. More recently, in October 2023, FinCEN issued a finding pursuant to Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act that CVC mixing is a class of transactions of primary money laundering concern and proposed reporting requirements to increase transparency in connection with CVC mixing.

FinCEN’s analysis highlights the value of BSA reporting filed by regulated financial institutions. Key findings in the FTA include:

  • The total number of OCSE- and human trafficking-related BSA reports involving CVC increased from 336 in 2020 to 1,975 in 2021.
  • BSA filers specifically reported child sexual abuse material (CSAM) or human trafficking and CSAM in 95 percent of the OCSE- and human trafficking-related BSA reports involving CVC.
  • BSA reports overwhelmingly identified bitcoin as the primary CVC used for purported OCSE- and human trafficking-related activity, however, this does not necessarily mean that other types of CVC are not used for such crimes.
  • FinCEN identified four typologies (i.e. the use of darknet marketplaces that distribute CSAM, peer-to-peer exchanges, CVC mixers, and CVC kiosks) that describe common trends within BSA reports related to OCSE and human trafficking.

If you suspect OCSE or human trafficking is occurring or has occurred, please immediately contact law enforcement. To report suspicious activity indicative of OCSE or human trafficking to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Tip Line, call 1-866-DHS-2-ICE (1-866-347-2423) 24 hours a day, seven days a week, every day of the year. The Tip Line is also accessible outside the United States by calling 802-872-6199.

February 29, 2024

WASHINGTON—The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is informing U.S. financial institutions that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an intergovernmental body that establishes international standards for anti-money laundering, countering the financing of terrorism, and countering the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (AML/CFT/CPF), issued an additional public statement at the conclusion of its plenary meeting this month reiterating how the Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine continues to run counter to FATF’s principles, and, thus, the suspension of the membership of the Russian Federation continues to stand. The FATF highlighted the potential risks to the international financial system, including growing financial connectivity of Russia with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and Iran, and risks of proliferation financing, malicious cyber activities, and ransomware attacks. In order to protect the international financial system, the FATF continues to urge all jurisdictions to remain vigilant to these risks.

The FATF also updated its lists of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT/CPF deficiencies. U.S. financial institutions should consider the FATF’s stance toward these jurisdictions when reviewing their obligations and risk-based policies, procedures, and practices.

On February 23, 2024, the FATF added Kenya and Namibia to its list of Jurisdictions Under Increased Monitoring and removed Barbados, Gibraltar, Uganda, and the United Arab Emirates from that list.

The FATF’s list of High-Risk Jurisdictions Subject to a Call for Action remains the same, with Iran, DPRK, and Burma subject to calls for action. Iran and DPRK are still subject to the FATF’s countermeasures, while Burma is still subject to the application of enhanced due diligence, but not countermeasures.

As part of the FATF’s listing and monitoring process to ensure compliance with its international standards, the FATF issued two statements: (1) Jurisdictions Under Increased Monitoring, which publicly identifies jurisdictions with strategic deficiencies in their AML/CFT/CPF regimes that have committed to, or are actively working with, the FATF to address those deficiencies in accordance with an agreed upon timeline; and (2) High-Risk Jurisdictions Subject to a Call for Action, which publicly identifies jurisdictions with significant strategic deficiencies in their AML/CFT/CPF regimes and calls on all FATF members to apply enhanced due diligence, and, in the most serious cases, apply countermeasures to protect the international financial system from the money laundering, terrorist financing, and proliferation financing risks emanating from the identified countries.

Jurisdictions Under Increased Monitoring

With respect to theFATF-identified Jurisdictions Under Increased Monitoring, U.S. covered financial institutions are reminded of their obligations to comply with the due diligence obligations for foreign financial institutions (FFI) under 31 CFR § 1010.610(a) in addition to their general obligations under 31 U.S.C. § 5318(h) and its implementing regulations. As required under 31 CFR § 1010.610(a), covered financial institutions should ensure that their due diligence programs, which address correspondent accounts maintained for FFIs, include appropriate, specific, risk-based, and, where necessary, enhanced policies, procedures, and controls that are reasonably designed to detect and report known or suspected money laundering activity conducted through or involving any correspondent account established, maintained, administered, or managed in the United States. Furthermore, money services businesses (MSBs) have parallel requirements with respect to foreign agents or foreign counterparties, as described in FinCEN Interpretive Release 2004-1, which clarifies that the AML program regulation requires MSBs to establish adequate and appropriate policies, procedures, and controls commensurate with the risk of money laundering and the financing of terrorism posed by their relationship with foreign agents or foreign counterparties. Additional information on these parallel requirements (covering both domestic and foreign agents and foreign counterparts) may be found in FinCEN’s Guidance on Existing AML Program Rule Compliance Obligations for MSB Principals with Respect to Agent Monitoring. Such reasonable steps should not, however, put into question a financial institution’s ability to maintain or otherwise continue appropriate relationships with customers or other financial institutions, and should not be used as the basis to engage in wholesale or indiscriminate de-risking of any class of customers or financial institutions. Financial institutions should also refer to previous interagency guidance on providing services to foreign embassies, consulates, and missions.

The United Nations (UN) continues to adopt several resolutions implementing economic and financial sanctions. Member States are bound by the provisions of these UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs), and certain provisions of these resolutions are especially relevant to financial institutions. Financial institutions should be familiar with the requirements and prohibitions contained in relevant UNSCRs. In addition to UN sanctions, the U.S. Government maintains a robust sanctions program. For a description of current Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctions programs, please consult OFAC’s Sanctions Programs and Country Information.

High-Risk Jurisdictions Subject to a Call for Action

With respect to the FATF-identified High-Risk Jurisdictions Subject to a Call for Action, Burma remains in this category and the FATF urges jurisdictions to apply enhanced due diligence proportionate to the risks. As a general matter, FinCEN advises U.S. financial institutions to apply enhanced due diligence when maintaining correspondent accounts for foreign banks operating under a banking license issued by a country designated by an intergovernmental group or organization of which the United States is a member, as noncooperative with respect to international anti-money laundering principles or procedures, and with which designation the U.S. representative to the group or organization concurs. U.S. financial institutions should continue to consult existing FinCEN and OFAC guidance on engaging in financial transactions with Burma.

With respect to the FATF-identified High-Risk Jurisdictions Subject to a Call for Action, specifically, countermeasures, in the case of DPRK and Iran, U.S. financial institutions must comply with the extensive U.S. restrictions and prohibitions against opening or maintaining any correspondent accounts, directly or indirectly, for North Korean or Iranian financial institutions. Existing U.S. sanctions and FinCEN regulations already prohibit any such correspondent account relationships.

The Government of Iran and Iranian financial institutions remain persons whose property and interests in property are blocked under E.O. 13599 and section 560.211 of the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations (ITSR), 31 CFR Part 560. U.S. financial institutions and other U.S. persons continue to be broadly prohibited under the ITSR from engaging in transactions or dealings with Iran, the Government of Iran, and Iranian financial institutions, including opening or maintaining correspondent accounts for Iranian financial institutions. These sanctions impose obligations on U.S. persons that go beyond the relevant FATF recommendations. In addition to OFAC-administered sanctions, on October 25, 2019, FinCEN found Iran to be a Jurisdiction of Primary Money Laundering Concern and issued a final rule, pursuant to Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act, imposing the fifth special measure available under Section 311. This rule prohibits U.S. financial institutions from opening or maintaining correspondent accounts for, or on behalf of, an Iranian financial institution, and the use of foreign financial institutions’ correspondent accounts at covered United States financial institutions to process transactions involving Iranian financial institutions (31 CFR § 1010.661).

For jurisdictions removed from the FATF listing and monitoring process, U.S. financial institutions should take the FATF’s decisions and the reasons behind the delisting into consideration when assessing risk, consistent with financial institutions’ obligations under 31 CFR § 1010.610(a) and 31 CFR § 1010.210.

If a financial institution knows, suspects, or has reason to suspect that a transaction involves funds derived from illegal activity or that a customer has otherwise engaged in activities indicative of money laundering, terrorist financing, or other violation of federal law or regulation, the financial institution must file a Suspicious Activity Report.

Hot Issue

FINRA published the results of its crypto asset communications sweep in late January. More than 500 crypto asset-related retail communications were reviewed, and FINRA identified potential violations of FINRA Rule 2210 (Communications with the Public) in 70 percent of the communications. The sweep update included questions for firms to consider if they produce retail communications concerning crypto assets as well as initial themes from the exam.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA Notices
  • FINRA January 2024 Sweep Update
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Releases
  • NFA Notices
  • FinCEN News Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2024) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: Deadline Approaching for Certain Proprietary Trading Broker-Dealers to Join FINRA via the Short-Form Membership Application Process https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-deadline-approaching-for-certain-proprietary-trading-broker-dealers-to-join-finra-via-the-short-form-membership-application-process/ Thu, 07 Mar 2024 15:10:21 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14606

As detailed more fully in Regulatory Notice 23-19, FINRA has adopted a short-form membership application […]

The post Regulatory News Update: Deadline Approaching for Certain Proprietary Trading Broker-Dealers to Join FINRA via the Short-Form Membership Application Process appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As detailed more fully in Regulatory Notice 23-19, FINRA has adopted a short-form membership application process for certain firms that must become FINRA members due to the recent amendments to Rule 15b9-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The amendments to Rule 15b9-1 eliminated the de minimis allowance and proprietary trading exclusion. Rescinding these provisions generally eliminated (subject to the exemptions in the amended rule) the ability for proprietary trading dealer firms to rely on Rule 15b9-1 to effect off-member-exchange securities transactions without joining FINRA.

This short-form membership application process is available only to SEC-registered, non-FINRA member firms that must become FINRA members due to the amendments to SEA Rule 15b9-1 and, as of August 23, 2023, had been a member of a national securities exchange with which FINRA has had a regulatory service agreement for the 12-month period prior to August 23, 2023.

Unlike the typical FINRA new membership application (NMA) process that involves a more extensive application and a longer time horizon for a decision (180 days after a substantially complete application), the short-form membership application process is a truncated application and process that is intended to result in a faster membership decision (generally around 60 days). Additionally, firms that apply for membership pursuant to the new process will be assessed one-half of the applicable membership application fee (unless FINRA ultimately determines that the firm must go through the full NMA process).

The SEC’s compliance date for the amended rule is September 6, 2024, but the deadline to participate in FINRA’s short-form membership process is 120 days earlier than the compliance date. The last day to submit a short-form application to FINRA is May 9, 2024.

Even so, FINRA is encouraging firms not to wait until May 9th to submit their short-form application to allow time to work through additional information requests and to provide sufficient time should FINRA determine that the firm must instead proceed through the full NMA process. The additional buffer can also offer firms time to address potential new obligations in areas such as trade reporting and registrations. Firms that miss the May 9th deadline will have to go through the full NMA process.

CRC has extensive experience with navigating the FINRA new member process and is also familiar with the new short-form process. Regardless of which path to FINRA membership is best for your firm, CRC has the knowledge and expertise to help you execute. Although time remains, the window for the short-form application is quickly closing. Reach out today to discuss how we can help you. Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: Deadline Approaching for Certain Proprietary Trading Broker-Dealers to Join FINRA via the Short-Form Membership Application Process appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2024) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-january-2024/ Thu, 29 Feb 2024 14:44:25 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14574

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2024) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of various FINRA, SEC, NFA, and FinCEN publications to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 24-01, FINRA’s Renewal Program supports the collection and disbursement of fees related to the renewal of broker-dealer (BD) and investment adviser (IA) registrations, exempt reporting and notice filings with participating self-regulatory organizations (SRO) and jurisdictions. During this program, FINRA announces renewal fees BD and IA firms owe via Preliminary Statements issued in November. FINRA publishes Final Statements in January to confirm or reconcile the actual renewal fees BD and IA firms owe after Jan. 1, 2024.

FINRA is issuing this Notice to help firms review, reconcile and respond to their Final Statements in E-Bill as well as view the reports that are currently available in the Central Registration Depository (CRD) and Investment Adviser Registration Depository (IARD) systems for the annual registration renewal process.

The deadline to remit payment for any additional amounts owed and to report any discrepancies to FINRA is Jan. 26, 2024. It is critical that firms ensure they pay in full or report discrepancies by this deadline. More information about reporting discrepancies, as well as key dates, is provided below.

Firms should also refer to the following web pages for additional information and resources:

Questions concerning this Notice should be directed to the FINRA Support Center at (301) 869-6699.

Per Regulatory Notice 24-02, FINRA is issuing this Notice to announce the effective dates of two new supplementary materials under FINRA Rule 3110 (Supervision) as follows:

  • Rule 3110.19 (Residential Supervisory Location) becomes effective on June 1, 2024; and
  • Rule 3110.18 (Remote Inspections Pilot Program) becomes effective on July 1, 2024.

FINRA expects to publish additional guidance outlining in greater detail operational processes for compliance with the data and information requirements of Rules 3110.18 and 3110.19.

The rule text for Rules 3110.18 and 3110.19 is available in Attachment A. In addition, FINRA is announcing May 31, 2024, as the end date of the regulatory relief set forth in Regulatory Notice 20-08 (March 2020) (Notice 20-08 Relief) with respect to the obligation of firms to maintain current information for employment addresses and branch offices on specified uniform registration forms. In light of these changes, firms are encouraged to consult with FINRA’s Membership Application Program (MAP) Group as they consider the materiality of any potential increase in the number of offices or locations.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11265, the SEC is adopting rules intended to enhance investor protections in initial public offerings by special purpose acquisition companies (commonly known as SPACs) and in subsequent business combination transactions between SPACs and private operating companies (commonly known as de-SPAC transactions). Specifically, the SEC is adopting disclosure requirements with respect to, among other things, compensation paid to sponsors, conflicts of interest, dilution, and the determination, if any, of the board of directors (or similar governing body) of a SPAC regarding whether a de-SPAC transaction is advisable and in the best interests of the SPAC and its shareholders. The SEC is adopting rules that require a minimum dissemination period for the distribution of security holder communication materials in connection with de-SPAC transactions. The SEC is adopting rules that require the re-determination of smaller reporting company (“SRC”) status in connection with de-SPAC transactions. The SEC is also adopting rules that address the scope of the safe harbor for forward-looking statements under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Further, the SEC is adopting a rule that would deem any business combination transaction involving a reporting shell company, including a SPAC, to be a sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s shareholders and are adopting amendments to a number of financial statement requirements applicable to transactions involving shell companies. In addition, the SEC is providing guidance on the status of potential underwriters in de-SPAC transactions and adopting updates to the SEC’s guidance regarding the use of projections in SEC filings as well as requiring additional disclosure regarding projections when used in connection with business combination transactions involving SPACs. Finally, the SEC is providing guidance for SPACs to consider when analyzing their status under the Investment Company Act of 1940.

Proposed Rules

There were no proposed rules in January.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in January.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in January.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in January.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-24-01

January 4, 2024

Notice of Annual Meeting of NFA Members and Board and Nominating Committee election

Notice of Annual Meeting

NFA will hold its Annual Meeting of Members on Tuesday, February 6, 2024, at 12:00 p.m. CT, via videoconferencing. The agenda of the meeting is:

  1. Opening remarks.
  2. Members' questions regarding NFA-related topics.
  3. Any other business that may properly come before the Annual Meeting (or any adjournment or postponement thereof).

To register for the Annual Meeting of Members, please email your name, NFA ID and contact email to MemberMeeting2024@nfa.futures.org. Registration is due by Wednesday, January 31, 2024. NFA will then provide you with an invitation to the Annual Meeting.

Board and Nominating Committee Election

On October 23, 2023, NFA notified all Members of the candidates that the 2023 Nominating Committee nominated for election to NFA's Board of Directors and 2024 Nominating Committee and advised Members of the procedures by which additional candidates could petition to be nominated for election. No Members have petitioned for nomination of a candidate for election to the Board of Directors or Nominating Committee. Accordingly, NFA's Board of Directors, pursuant to Article VII, Section (3)(a) and NFA Bylaw 709 (effective February 15, 2024), will elect the nominees to the Board and Nominating Committee in February 2024.

Notice I-24-02

January 25, 2024

Member obligations under NFA Bylaw 1101 and Compliance Rule 2-36(d) with respect to CPOs/CTAs exempt from registration

The CFTC requires any person that claims an exemption from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3), 4.13(a)(5), an exclusion from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.5 or an exemption from CTA registration under 4.14(a)(8) (collectively, exemption) to annually affirm the applicable notice of exemption within 60 days of the calendar year end. Persons that fail to file the affirmation notice by February 29, 2024, will be deemed to have requested a withdrawal of the exemption and, therefore, may be required to be registered and NFA Members.

Since exempt CPOs/CTAs have until February 29, 2024, to complete the affirmation process, NFA recognizes that it may be difficult for a Member to conclusively determine prior to that date whether a previously exempt CPO/CTA continues to be eligible for a current exemption.

Therefore, Members who take reasonable steps to determine the registration and membership status of these previously exempt persons will not be in violation of NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d) if, between January 1 and March 31, 2024, they transact customer business with a previously exempt person that fails to become registered and an NFA Member, file a notice affirming its exemption from CPO/CTA registration, or provide a written representation as to why the person is not required to register or file the notice affirming the exemption.

How to identify whether an exempt CPO/CTA has affirmed its exemption

Members should compare their list of exempt CPO/CTAs with which the Member transacts customer business to the information NFA makes available to assist Members in determining whether an exempt CPO/CTA has affirmed its exemption(s). Members can review exemption information in two ways. Members can view individual persons or entities by navigating to NFA's BASIC System, opening the person or entity's record, and, if applicable, clicking 'View All' in the Firm Exemptions box and/or the Pools & Pool Exemptions box. The Firm Exemptions page and/or the Pools & Pool Exemptions page will reflect an affirmation date if an exempt person or entity has properly filed a notice affirming an exemption, if applicable. Any exemption that was not affirmed in the previous year will no longer appear in BASIC as of March 1, 2024.

Alternatively, Members can access a spreadsheet that includes a list of all persons or entities that have exemptions on file with NFA that must be affirmed on an annual basis. This spreadsheet, which is updated nightly, can be found in the Member's Annual Questionnaire which can be accessed by logging into the system. The spreadsheet includes all persons or entities with an exemption(s) that requires an annual affirmation, as well as the most recent affirmation date, if applicable, and the affirmation due date. If the affirmation due date is February 29, 2024, the exemption has not yet been affirmed. Once the exemption has been affirmed, the affirmation due date will change to March 1, 2025. Any exemptions not affirmed after February 29, 2024, will be withdrawn.

Expectations for Members transacting customer business with an exempt CPO/CTA that has not affirmed its exemption

NFA expects any Member transacting customer business with a person that previously claimed an exemption from CPO/CTA registration under the regulations listed above, and that has not filed a notice in NFA's Exemption System affirming the exemption, not filed a notice of exemption for another available exemption, or not properly registered and become an NFA Member by December 31, 2023, to promptly contact the person to determine whether the person intends to file a notice affirming the exemption.

If the Member learns that the person does not intend to file a notice affirming the exemption, or the person does not file a notice affirming the exemption by February 29, 2024, then the Member must promptly obtain a written representation as to why the person is not required to register or file a notice of exemption and evaluate whether the representation appears adequate. If the Member determines that this written representation is inadequate and the person is required to be registered, then the Member must put a plan in place (e.g., liquidation-only trades) to cease transacting customer business with the person or risk violating NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d). Any Member that acts in accordance with the information provided in this Notice will not be charged with violating NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d). Members should be aware, however, that this Notice does not relieve their regulatory obligations pursuant to the Commodity Exchange Act and the CFTC's Regulations.

NFA News Releases

There were no NFA News Releases in January.

FinCEN

FinCEN News Releases

U.S. Beneficial Ownership Information Registry Now Accepting Reports

January 01, 2024

Existing Companies Have One Year to File; New Companies Must File Within 90 Days of Creation or Registration

WASHINGTON -- Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) began accepting beneficial ownership information reports. The bipartisan Corporate Transparency Act, enacted in 2021 to curb illicit finance, requires many companies doing business in the United States to report information about the individuals who ultimately own or control them.

Filing is simple, secure, and free of charge. Companies that are required to comply (“reporting companies”) must file their initial reports by the following deadlines:

  • Existing companies: Reporting companies created or registered to do business in the United States before January 1, 2024 must file by January 1, 2025.
  • Newly created or registered companies: Reporting companies created or registered to do business in the United States in 2024 have 90 calendar days to file after receiving actual or public notice that their company’s creation or registration is effective.

Beneficial ownership information reporting is not an annual requirement. A report only needs to be submitted once, unless the filer needs to update or correct information. Generally, reporting companies must provide four pieces of information about each beneficial owner:

  • name;
  • date of birth;
  • address; and
  • the identifying number and issuer from either a non-expired U.S. driver’s license, a non-expired U.S. passport, or a non-expired identification document issued by a State (including a U.S. territory or possession), local government, or Indian tribe. If none of those documents exist, a non-expired foreign passport can be used. An image of the document must also be submitted.

The company must also submit certain information about itself, such as its name(s) and address. In addition, reporting companies created on or after January 1, 2024, are required to submit information about the individuals who formed the company (“company applicants”).

FinCEN is committed to providing America’s small businesses with the resources and information they need to make filing as quick and easy as possible. FinCEN’s Small Entity Compliance Guide walks small businesses through the requirements in plain language. Filers can also view informational videos and webinars, find answers to frequently asked questions, connect to the contact center, and learn more about how to report at www.fincen.gov/boi.

FinCEN Issues Analysis of Identity-Related Suspicious Activity

January 09, 2024

Report examines suspicious activity tied to the exploitation of identity processes during account creation, account access, and transaction processing

WASHINGTON—Today, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a Financial Trend Analysis (FTA) on information linked to identity-related suspicious activity in Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) reports filed in calendar year 2021. FinCEN’s analysis found that approximately 1.6 million reports (42% of the reports filed that year) related to identity—indicating $212 billion in suspicious activity.

“This report reveals the existence of significant identity-related exploitations through a large variety of schemes,” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki. “Robust customer identity processes are foundational to the security of the U.S. financial system, and critical to the effectiveness of financial institutions’ programs to combat money laundering and counter the financing of terrorism. Financial institutions are encouraged to work across their internal departments to address these schemes.”

The report, which is part of what FinCEN has previously referred to as its Identity Project, explores how bad actors exploit identity-related processes involved in processing transactions as well as opening and accessing accounts. FinCEN identified over 14 typologies commonly indicated in identity-related BSA reports. The most frequently reported were fraud, false records, identity theft, third-party money laundering, and circumvention of verification standards. These top five typologies accounted for 88% of identity-related BSA reports and 74% of the total identity-related suspicious activity amount reported during calendar year 2021.

Trends found in the BSA reporting include:

  • Although identity-related suspicious activity impacted all types of financial institutions, depository institutions filed the most identity-related BSA reports, around 54% of all identity-related filings.
  • While most financial institutions in the identity-related BSA dataset reported impersonation as their top identity exploitation, money services businesses most often reported circumvention of verification.
  • The report found that compromised credentials have a disproportionate financial impact as compared to other types of identity exploitation.

FinCEN’s FTAs highlight the value of information filed by financial institutions in accordance with the BSA. Additional reports on a variety of topics are located on FinCEN’s website.

FinCEN is committed to using its authorities to assist financial institutions with detecting, reporting, and preventing criminals from circumventing these processes to victimize customers. In line with the 2022 National Strategy for Combating Terrorist and Other Illicit Financing, Treasury and FinCEN recognizes that innovations in digital identity can strengthen anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism compliance and help banks and other financial institutions more effectively and efficiently identify and report illicit financial activity.

To advance responsible innovation, FinCEN has engaged with the private and public sectors to assess opportunities and to explore the risks and challenges emerging technologies present to financial institutions—including through the Bank Secrecy Act Advisory Group, FinCEN Exchanges, and Innovation Hours. The bureau has partnered with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in a digital identity-focused Tech Sprint, and with other regulators and law enforcement to support the U.S.-UK Privacy Enhancing Technologies Prize Challenges. FinCEN has also served as the Department of the Treasury’s point for the Federal Identity Forum and Expo or FedID conference, the U.S. government’s annual public-private identity conference. These efforts served as a forum for stakeholders to both embrace responsible innovation and leverage innovation to mitigate risks, as well as identify threats and opportunities to protect the American people and the financial sector from illicit finance.

FinCEN Finds Iraq-based Al-Huda Bank to be of Primary Money Laundering Concern and Proposes a Rule to Combat Terrorist Financing

January 29, 2024

WASHINGTON — Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a finding and notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that identifies Al-Huda Bank, an Iraqi bank that serves as a conduit for terrorist financing, as a foreign financial institution of primary money laundering concern. Along with its finding, FinCEN proposed imposing a special measure that would sever the bank from the U.S. financial system by prohibiting domestic financial institutions and agencies from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for or on behalf of Al-Huda Bank.

Bad actors like Al-Huda Bank and its foreign sponsors fuel violence that threatens the lives of U.S. and Iraqi citizens alike while diverting funds that could otherwise support legitimate business and the economic aspirations of the Iraqi people. Treasury remains committed to its longstanding shared work with the Government of Iraq to strengthen the Iraqi economy and protect both the U.S. and Iraqi financial systems from abuse.

“Iraq has made significant progress in rooting out illicit activity from its financial system, but unscrupulous actors continue to seek to take advantage of the Iraqi economy to raise and move money for illicit activity,” said Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Brian E. Nelson. “By identifying Al-Huda Bank as a key money laundering channel for destabilizing terrorist activity by Iran, proposing a special measure that will sever its correspondent banking access, and imposing sanctions on their CEO, we can protect the Iraqi financial system and its legitimate businesses, as well as the international financial system, from abuse by Iran and other illicit actors.”

“Evidence available to FinCEN has demonstrated that Al-Huda Bank served as a significant conduit for the financing of foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs),” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki. “We will continue to leverage the full range of our authorities to target terrorist financing while simultaneously supporting the legitimate use of the international financial system.”

As described in the finding, for years, Al-Huda Bank has exploited its access to U.S. dollars to support designated FTOs, including Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and IRGC-Quds Force (IRGC-QF), as well as Iran-aligned Iraqi militias Kata’ib Hizballah (KH) and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq (AAH). Moreover, the chairman of Al-Huda Bank is complicit in Al-Huda Bank’s illicit financial activities including money laundering through front companies that conceal the true nature of and parties involved in illicit transactions, ultimately enabling the financing of terrorism.

Since its establishment, Al-Huda Bank has been controlled and operated by the IRGC and the IRGC-QF. After establishing the bank, the Al-Huda Bank chairman began money laundering operations on behalf of the IRGC-QF and KH. Additionally, Al-Huda Bank affords access to the U.S. financial system to actors known to use fraudulent documentation, fake deposits, identity documents of the deceased, fake companies, and counterfeit Iraq dinar, providing opportunities to obscure the identities of the transaction counterparties to correspondent banking relationship providers.

To protect U.S. banks from Al-Huda Bank’s illicit activity, FinCEN is taking this action pursuant to Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act (section 311). Section 311 actions alert the U.S. financial sector to foreign institutions, such as Al-Huda Bank, that are of primary money laundering concern and through the public rulemaking process, if necessary, prevent direct and indirect access to the U.S. financial system. FinCEN has proposed a rule that would impose special measure five, which would prohibit domestic financial institutions and agencies from opening or maintaining a correspondent account for or on behalf of Al-Huda Bank.

This finding and NPRM are issued today alongside complementary Treasury actions to disrupt funding for Iran-aligned terrorist groups. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Hamad al-Moussawi, the owner and chairman of Al-Huda Bank, for having materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, the IRGC-QF. Previously, on November 17, 2023, OFAC designated six key individuals affiliated with KH following the group’s attacks against United States personnel and partners in Iraq and Syria. On January 22, 2024, OFAC designated three additional key individuals affiliated with KH, a business used by KH to generate revenue and launder money, as well as an Iraqi airline that the IRGC-QF and its proxies in Iraq used to transport fighters, weapons, and money to Syria and Lebanon. Additionally, since the brutal attacks against Israel in October, OFAC has imposed five rounds of sanctions targeting Hamas-linked operatives and financial facilitators.

SECTION 311 SPECIAL MEASURES

Section 311 grants the Secretary of the Treasury authority, upon finding that reasonable grounds exist for concluding that one or more financial institutions operating outside of the United States is of primary money laundering concern, to require domestic financial institutions and domestic financial agencies to take certain “special measures.” The five special measures set out in section 311 are safeguards that may be employed to defend the United States financial system from money laundering and terrorist financing risks. The Secretary may impose one or more of these special measures in order to protect the U.S. financial system from such threats. Through special measure one, the Secretary may require domestic financial institutions and domestic financial agencies to maintain records, file reports, or both, concerning the aggregate amount of transactions or individual transactions. Through special measures two through four, the Secretary may impose additional recordkeeping, information collection, and reporting requirements on covered domestic financial institutions and domestic financial agencies. Through special measure five, the Secretary may prohibit, or impose conditions on, the opening or maintaining in the United States of correspondent or payable-through accounts for or on behalf of a foreign banking institution, if such correspondent account or payable-through account involves the foreign financial institution found to be of primary money laundering concern. The authority of the Secretary to administer the Bank Secrecy Act, including, but not limited to, section 311, codified at 31 U.S.C. § 5318A, has been delegated to the Director of FinCEN.

The NPRM as submitted to the Federal Register is currently available here. Written comments on the NPRM may be submitted within 30 days of publication of the NPRM in the Federal Register.

FinCEN Assesses $100,000 Civil Money Penalty against Gyanendra Kumar Asre for Violations of the Bank Secrecy Act

January 31, 2024

WASHINGTON—Today, the United States Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) assessed a $100,000 civil money penalty on Gyanendra Kumar Asre (Asre) for willful violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and its implementing regulations. FinCEN’s action also imposes a five-year ban on Asre’s participation in the conduct of the affairs of any financial institution subject to the BSA.

“Asre allowed millions of dollars in high-risk transactions to be processed without required anti-money laundering controls or reporting to FinCEN,” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki. “Today’s action serves as a reminder that FinCEN will not hesitate to take action against individuals when their conduct jeopardizes the integrity of our financial system.”

Asre admitted to willfully violating the BSA. Asre failed to register his money services business (MSB) with FinCEN and, in his capacity as the BSA Compliance Officer of a credit union, failed to maintain an effective AML program and failed to detect and report suspicious transactions. During Asre’s tenure as BSA Compliance Officer, the credit union’s risk profile drastically increased, including by providing services to Asre’s unregistered MSB. Despite these elevated risks, Asre failed to implement adequate AML controls. As a result, hundreds of millions of dollars in high-risk and suspicious funds—including substantial bulk cash deposits—moved through the credit union without proper monitoring or reporting to FinCEN.

FinCEN appreciates the close collaboration with its partners at the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) on this matter and thanks the Department of Justice Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section (MLARS) for its work on the parallel criminal matter. Today, Asre entered into a guilty plea with MLARS for criminally violating the BSA.

Hot Issue

FINRA has finally announced an end date to the pandemic reporting relief under Notice 20-08. Starting on June 1, 2024, firms must resume their continuing obligation to:

  • Maintain updated Form U4 information regarding the office of employment address for registered persons who relocated due to COVID-19; and
  • Submit or update branch office applications on Form BR for any office locations or space-sharing arrangements established as a result of COVID-19 that have not otherwise been registered or updated with FINRA through Form BR.

Now that a timeline has been established, CRC recommends that firms not wait until June to evaluate the potential increase in registered or unregistered offices because of the need to consider whether changes may trigger a “material change in business operations” under Rule 1017 and related guidance.

Our Perspective

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Releases
  • NFA Notices
  • FinCEN News Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2024) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: FinCEN Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Registered Investment Advisers and Exempt Reporting Advisers https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-fincen-notice-of-proposed-rulemaking-for-registered-investment-advisers-and-exempt-reporting-advisers/ Thu, 15 Feb 2024 14:59:41 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14509

What: The proposed rule would require some investment advisers to apply certain anti-money-laundering and countering […]

The post Regulatory News Update: FinCEN Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Registered Investment Advisers and Exempt Reporting Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

What: The proposed rule would require some investment advisers to apply certain anti-money-laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) requirements pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA).

Who: SEC-registered investment advisers and investment advisers that report to the SEC as exempt reporting advisers (ERAs) would be included in the definition of “financial institution” under the BSA.

When: Proposed rule announced on February 13, 2024 (Federal Register publish date expected February 15, 2024). The comment period for the proposed rule is open until April 15, 2024.

Why: A risk assessment conducted by the Department of the Treasury identified that criminal actors have used investment advisers as a point of entry to invest in U.S. securities, real estate, and other assets and found that the lack of comprehensive AML/CFT requirements across the investment adviser sector contributed to its vulnerability to illicit finance activity.

How: The proposed rule would require SEC-registered investment advisers and ERAs to:

  • implement an AML/CFT program;
  • file certain reports, such as Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs), with FinCEN;
  • keep records such as those relating to the transmittal of funds (i.e., comply with the Recordkeeping and Travel Rule); and
  • fulfill other obligations applicable to financial institutions subject to the BSA and FinCEN’s implementing regulations.

The proposed rule would also apply information-sharing provisions between and among FinCEN, law enforcement government agencies, and certain financial institutions, along with Section 311 special measures.

The proposed rule does not include a customer identification program (CIP) requirement or a requirement to collect beneficial ownership information (BOI) for legal entities. However, FinCEN plans to address these separately in future rulemaking. The proposed rule would also not require the covered investment advisers to apply AML/CFT and SAR reporting requirements to mutual funds they advise.

Why it matters: Although some investment advisers have adopted voluntary AML/CFT measures, this proposal represents a significant set of potential new mandatory obligations for covered investment advisers. With plans for subsequent rulemaking regarding CIP and BOI requirements, this proposal appears to be simply an opening salvo in what is an extended regulatory push for more consistency between broker-dealers and investment advisers as access points to the US financial system.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: FinCEN Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Registered Investment Advisers and Exempt Reporting Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
10-Year Anniversary Letter From Mitch Avnet https://compliance-risk.com/10-year-anniversary-letter-from-mitch-avnet/ Sat, 03 Feb 2024 15:53:23 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14486

To All our Amazing Clients: No matter how you measure it, we want to express […]

The post 10-Year Anniversary Letter From Mitch Avnet appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

To All our Amazing Clients:

No matter how you measure it, we want to express our profound gratitude as we mark our 10th Anniversary. Without your support throughout this transformative journey, Compliance Risk Concepts would not be what it is today.

CRC began as a one-person operation with a unique approach to compliance professional services: understanding each client’s needs and model, and then tailoring our solutions to suit them. We grew by underpinning our clients’ commercial success with a balanced, measured understanding of regulation and compliance. Today, we stand as a team of  50+ of the industry’s best and brightest, humbled by our growth and collective accomplishments. Through it all, we’ve strived to be a true partner – functioning as a seamless extension of your team.

Our proudest milestones include not only thriving in a remote environment during the pandemic, but also balancing our serious commitment to compliance with teamwork and fun. This balance is key to our culture and vision, making it possible for our team to achieve results we only dreamed were possible.

As we look into the future of a constantly evolving regulatory landscape, areas like digital currencies, alternative investments, best interest standards, cyber-threats, and off-channel communications all pose new and significant challenges. Rest assured, we will continue providing the insightful guidance and support you need to confidently navigate these emerging trends – and stay ahead of the pack.

To mark our first 10 years, we’ve refreshed our logo and educational materials. On behalf of everyone at CRC, thank you for entrusting us with your compliance programs and regulatory wellness. It’s an honor to partner with you, and we look forward to contributing to your success story in the decade to come.

With sincere thanks,

Mitch Avnet
Founder and Managing Partner

The post 10-Year Anniversary Letter From Mitch Avnet appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Risk Concepts Receives Strategic Investment from MidOcean Partners https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-risk-concepts-receives-strategic-investment-from-midocean-partners/ Tue, 30 Jan 2024 14:17:57 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14451

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”), through its parent company, Re-Sourcing Group, has received a significant investment […]

The post Compliance Risk Concepts Receives Strategic Investment from MidOcean Partners appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”), through its parent company, Re-Sourcing Group, has received a significant investment from MidOcean Partners to advance its position as a valued compliance partner to the financial services industry. This investment will support the continued growth of CRC’s unique brand of business-focused compliance and risk management advisory services.

The compliance and risk management industry has evolved in recent years, amid new regulations, rule modifications and heightened government oversight. These changes come amid consolidation in the outsourced compliance space, resulting in fewer options for clients seeking expertise coupled with exceptional service.

CRC has thrived as a provider of senior-level compliance advisory services for financial organizations. The firm delivers expert-driven advice and strategy for its clients, which include broker-dealers, investment advisers, fintech and digital asset firms, banks and credit unions, in helping them navigate the ever-changing regulatory landscape. Recognizing CRC’s strong position in the market, MidOcean Partners, a premier middle-market private equity firm focused on the business services and consumer sectors, anticipates CRC’s continued success in delivering compliance solutions to a diverse clientele.

“Market demand for outsourced solutions in the compliance advisory arena has grown significantly in recent years,” said Mitch Avnet, founder of CRC. “At the same time, consolidation has left clients with fewer premier options. CRC has over 50 senior compliance professionals on our team, and we can deliver the guidance, insight and day-to-day execution support that firms in the financial services market are seeking. We are known for our ‘in-the-seat’ approach to compliance and risk management support, and we plan to leverage this growth investment to extend our reach within the industry.”

The confluence of talent shortages and increasingly complex requirements for managing businesses on the legal and compliance front has led to a continued surge in demand for outsourced solutions. For example, in the investment adviser sector, an estimated 59%1 of firms outsourced some or all of their compliance and legal work. Avnet and his partners at MidOcean see this as an opportunity for further growth.

Avnet added: “We are business people that know compliance and we are fully invested in helping our clients achieve great commercial outcomes while remaining regulatorily compliant. Our partnership with MidOcean is integral to our overall business thesis and we look forward to leveraging the impact of MidOcean’s investment to extend our reach within the industry.”

“There is incredible upside for a firm of CRC’s caliber to fill the void that firms have in meeting their compliance needs and having the support they want to help them make sound business decisions. We feel that the consolidation happening that has absorbed some boutique players has spurred the opportunity for CRC even more, and we’re eager to see how our investment can be a catalyst for Mitch and his team,” shared Elias Dokas, Managing Director at MidOcean Partners.

1 Source: https://www.assetmark.com/blog/advisors-front-middle-back-office-outsourcing

About Re-Sourcing Group

Re-Sourcing is a leading professional services firm, offering staffing, consulting and direct hire services that specialize in finance & accounting, legal & compliance and information technology. Re-Sourcing serves clients through its distinguished portfolio of premium brands, including Compliance Risk Concepts, Conexus, JW Michaels, ExecuSource, Perennial Resources, Partnership Employment and Technology Navigators. Founded in 2003, Re-Sourcing and its brands are strategically located in 20 offices across 10 markets nationwide. Re-Sourcing’s differentiated operating partner model enables a strong focus on building direct relationships with clients to bolster retention and deepen understanding of client needs.

For more information, visit https://www.myresourcing.com/.

About MidOcean Partners

MidOcean Partners is a premier New York-based alternative asset manager specializing in middle-market private equity and alternative credit investments. Since its inception in 2003, MidOcean Private Equity has targeted investments in high-quality middle-market companies in the consumer and business services sectors. MidOcean Credit was launched in 2009 and manages a series of alternative credit strategies, collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) and customized separately managed accounts.

For more information, visit https://www.midoceanpartners.com/.

The post Compliance Risk Concepts Receives Strategic Investment from MidOcean Partners appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: Proposed Amendment to FINRA 3240 (Borrowing From or Lending to Customers) https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-proposed-amendment-to-finra-3240-borrowing-from-or-lending-to-customers/ Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:54:38 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14385

What: FINRA has proposed to amend Rule 3240 to strengthen the general prohibition against borrowing […]

The post Regulatory News Update: Proposed Amendment to FINRA 3240 (Borrowing From or Lending to Customers) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

What: FINRA has proposed to amend Rule 3240 to strengthen the general prohibition against borrowing and lending arrangements between registered persons and customers.

Who: FINRA member broker-dealers.

When: The proposal to the SEC was initially filed on January 2, 2024. If the SEC approves the change, FINRA will announce the effective date in a Regulatory Notice.

Why: FINRA cited anecdotal evidence from member firms, law clinics, and previous enforcement cases as well as its experience in examining and enforcing for compliance with Rule 3240 that it believed suggests that there is some ambiguity about the scope of Rule 3240 and certain risks to investors due to conflicts of interest and the superior information that registered persons have about potential risks and returns.

How: Among various changes, the proposal adds several new limitations: 1) clarifying that the prohibition applies to arrangements that precede a new broker-customer relationship, 2) extending the rule to arrangements entered into within six months following the end of broker-customer relationship, and 3) to arrangements with parties related (family and businesses) to the registered person and customer. The proposal also narrows existing exceptions based on certain personal and business relationships.

Why it matters: Firms should monitor further developments with this proposal. If the SEC ultimately approves the requested rule change, written supervisory procedures and controls related to this topic will need to be reviewed and may require modifications for compliance with the final requirements. In addition, assuming the final rule change tracks with the proposal, there may be potential operational and training considerations (e.g., account opening and pre-existing arrangements, account terminations and subsequent arrangements, and related-party arrangements).

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: Proposed Amendment to FINRA 3240 (Borrowing From or Lending to Customers) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Highlight: FINRA Issues 2024 Regulatory Oversight Report https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-highlight-finra-issues-2024-regulatory-oversight-report/ Wed, 10 Jan 2024 15:16:47 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14376 FINRA (1)

Today FINRA issued its latest iterative report on its examination and risk monitoring program. This […]

The post Compliance Highlight: FINRA Issues 2024 Regulatory Oversight Report appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
FINRA (1)

Today FINRA issued its latest iterative report on its examination and risk monitoring program. This article focuses on the new topics and material introduced this year, specifically selected examination findings. It also covers topics that FINRA noted in the report as “Emerging Risks,” which represent potentially concerning practices that may pose new or additional risk. Lastly, several targeted exam or sweep updates are referenced from the report.

New Topics for 2024 – Selected Examination, Surveillance, Investigation, or Enforcement Findings

  1. Crypto Asset Developments
    1. Failing to appropriately and accurately address relevant risks and include appropriate disclosures in communications with the public.
    1. Disseminating promotional materials that contain material misstatements or omissions in connection with securities offerings.
    1. Failing to conduct appropriate due diligence on crypto asset private placements recommended to customers.
    1. Failing to establish and implement AML programs reasonably designed to detect and cause the reporting of:
      1. suspicious crypto asset transactions occurring by, at or through the broker-dealer; and
      1. suspicious trading involving issuers with a purported involvement in crypto asset-related activities.
    1. Related new crypto asset communications findings:
      1. Failing to clearly differentiate in communications, including those on mobile apps, between crypto assets offered through an affiliate of the member or another third party, and products and services offered directly by the member itself.
      1. Making false statements or implications that crypto assets functioned like cash or cash-equivalent instruments, or making other false or misleading statements or claims regarding crypto assets.
      1. Comparing crypto assets to other assets (e.g., stock investments or cash) without providing a sound basis to compare the varying features and risks of these investments.
      1. Providing misleading explanations of how crypto assets work and their core features and risks.
      1. Failing to provide a sound basis to evaluate crypto assets by omitting explanations of how crypto assets are issued, held, transferred or sold.
      1. Misrepresenting the extent to which the federal securities laws or FINRA rules apply to crypto assets.
      1. Making misleading statements about the extent to which certain crypto assets are protected by SIPC under the SIPA.
  • OTC Quotations in Fixed Income Securities
    • Not maintaining controls and procedures reasonably designed to monitor quoting activity in fixed income securities; and not reviewing the firm’s activity to determine applicability of the Exchange Act Rule 15c2-1.
    • Stating that the firm only quotes in exempt securities without conducting an analysis.
    • Not implementing procedures and controls—including a process for complying with the Exchange Act Rule 15c2-1—to ensure that the firm does not quote a covered security prior to confirming the availability of public financial information (unless an exception under Exchange Act Rule 15c2-1 is available).
  • Advertised Volume
  • Overstating, or inflating, the firm’s trading volume due to technological or procedural failures or errors.
  • Failing to establish and maintain supervisory systems that are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with Rule 5210, including with respect to trading information disseminated by third-party service providers.
  • Market Access Rule
    • Not establishing pre-trade order limits, pre-set capital thresholds and duplicative and erroneous order controls for accessing ATSs, including those that transact fixed income transactions.
      • Setting pre-trade order limits at unreasonable thresholds based on a firm’s business model.
      • Not demonstrating, and failing to maintain, documentation demonstrating the reasonability of assigned capital, credit and erroneous order pre-trade financial controls.
      • Not establishing adequate policies and procedures to govern intra-day changes to firms’ credit and capital thresholds, including requiring or obtaining approval prior to adjusting credit or capital thresholds, documenting justifications for any adjustments and ensuring thresholds for temporary adjustments revert back to their pre-adjusted values.
    • Failing to consider a firm’s business model when setting pre-trade order limits or other regulatory requirements (e.g., Limit Up-Limit Down (LULD) thresholds and exchanges’ Limit Order Price Protection thresholds), as well as historical and available liquidity, and the time required for liquidity replenishment, when determining erroneous price and size control thresholds.
    • Excluding certain orders from a firm’s pre-trade erroneous controls based on order types (e.g., excluding limit on close orders from a firm’s price controls).
    • For firms with market access, or those that provide it, unreasonable capital thresholds for trading desks and unreasonable aggregate daily limits or credit limits for institutional customers and counterparties.
    • Relying on third-party vendors’ tools, including those of an ATS or exchange, to apply their financial controls without performing adequate due diligence, not understanding how vendors’ controls operate, or both; and not maintaining direct and exclusive control over controls by allowing the ATS to unilaterally set financial thresholds for firms’ fixed income orders without the involvement of the firm, instead of establishing their own thresholds.
    • Failure to document the firm’s review, conducted at least annually, of the effectiveness of its risk management controls and supervisory procedures (e.g., no inventory of the specific systems, controls, thresholds or functionality that were reviewed), including the reasonableness of the firm’s market access controls applicable to each business/product line in which the firm provides market access.

Emerging Risks That May Receive Increased Scrutiny by FINRA

  1. Artificial Intelligence (AI)

FINRA noted that the development of AI tools has been marked by concerns about accuracy, privacy, bias and intellectual property, among others. FINRA encouraged member firms to be mindful of how these new technologies, including generative AI tools, may implicate their regulatory obligations.

  • Before deploying AI technologies member firms may consider paying particular attention to the following areas:
    • Anti-Money Laundering
    • Books and Records
    • Business Continuity
    • Communications With the Public
    • Customer Information Protection
    • Cybersecurity
    • Model Risk Management (including testing, data integrity and governance, and explainability)
    • Research
    • SEC Regulation Best Interest
    • Supervision
    • Vendor Management
  • New Account Fraud

FINRA has observed an increase in suspicious and fraudulent activity related to new account fraud (NAF), which occurs when a bad actor uses stolen or synthetic identification14 information to fraudulently open an account.

  • NAF may be a precursor to other fraud schemes. Examples observed in FINRA examinations and investigations include, but are not limited to:
    • fraudulent requests to the ACATS to steal securities and other assets from an investor;
    • fraudulent ACH transfers and wire transfers, including instances in which accounts opened through NAF were used as conduits to steal money from customers at other financial institutions; and
    • deposit or movement of fraudulently obtained funds from government benefit programs (e.g., fraudulently obtained COVID-relief funds).
  • FINRA encourages firms, especially those that offer fully online account opening services and rely on automated account opening or customer verification services, to:
    • evaluate their review of red flags of NAF during the account opening process;
    • evaluate their monitoring of ongoing customer account activity for NAF and other known fraud schemes; and
    • enhance these processes, as needed, to ensure compliance with Regulation S-ID and other applicable rules.

FINRA Targeted Exam (Sweep) Mentions & Updates

  1. FINRA Provides Update on Sweep: Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs)
  2. FINRA’s review focuses on a cross-section of firms that participated in SPAC offerings and included, among other things, reasonable investigation, best interest, disclosure of outside activities or potential conflicts, net capital and supervision.
  3. The update highlights several initial themes from our reviews of firms’ offering of, and services provided to, SPACs and their affiliates (e.g., sponsors, principal stockholders, board members and related parties), and includes questions for firms to consider as they evaluate whether their supervisory systems are reasonably designed to address risks of their SPAC-related activities, including:
    1. reasonable investigation of the issuers and the securities they recommend, including SPACs;
    1. underwriting compensation and disclosures;
    1. identifying, addressing and disclosing potential or actual conflicts of interest when underwriting or
    1. recommending transactions in SPACs; and
    1. firms’ supervisory systems, procedures, processes and controls for underwriting and recommending transactions in SPACs.

In September 2021, FINRA launched a sweep to review firms’ practices related to their acquisition of customers through social media channels, as well as firms' sharing of customers’ usage information with affiliates and non-affiliated third parties. The first part of the review focuses on firms’ use of social media influencers and referral programs to promote their products and services and recruit new customers. The second part of the review addresses firms’ privacy notices (and options to opt-out) regarding the collection and sharing of their usage information.

In August 2021, FINRA launched a sweep to review firms’ practices and controls related to the opening of options accounts and related areas, including account supervision, communications and diligence. FINRA’s review focuses on a cross-section of retail and diversified firms that offer options trading to their customers.

  • Sweep Letter: Crypto Asset Communications
  • Crypto asset-related retail communications reviewed by FINRA’s Advertising Regulation Department have had a non-compliance rate that is significantly higher than that of other products.
  • As a result, in November 2022, FINRA launched a targeted exam to review practices of certain member firms that actively communicate with retail customers concerning crypto assets and crypto asset-related services.
  • FINRA is working to complete this review and publish an update on findings and effective practices.

The post Compliance Highlight: FINRA Issues 2024 Regulatory Oversight Report appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-december-2023/ Fri, 05 Jan 2024 15:10:42 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14373 regulatorynews update

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
regulatorynews update

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 23-20, FINRA discusses the guidance and other resources available to assist members with their compliance efforts in connection with the SEC’s Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI). In particular, FINRA highlights the SEC’s series of Staff Bulletins (Bulletins) reiterating standards of conduct for broker-dealers (BDs or members) and investment advisers (IAs): SEC Staff Bulletin: Standards of Conduct for Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers Account Recommendations for Retail Investors; SEC Staff Bulletin: Standards of Conduct for Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers Conflicts of Interest; and SEC Staff Bulletin: Standards of Conduct for Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers Care Obligations. FINRA encourages members to review these Bulletins closely, along with the Reg BI Adopting Release and the other guidance and resources identified in this Notice, as part of their ongoing efforts to meet their best interest obligations.

This Notice does not create new legal or regulatory requirements or new interpretations of existing requirements, nor does it relieve firms of any existing obligations under federal securities laws and regulations.

Per Regulatory Notice 23-21, FINRA has observed instances of non-compliance with SEA Rule 15c3-1, SEA Rule 17a-3 and SEA Rule 17a-5 resulting from misapplication of the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s Accounting Standard Codification 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“ASC 606”). This Notice provides guidance regarding potential compliance issues with respect to these rules that may result from the misapplication of ASC 606.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-99149, the SEC is adopting rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to amend the standards applicable to covered clearing agencies for U.S. Treasury securities to require that such covered clearing agencies have written policies and procedures reasonably designed to require that every direct participant of the covered clearing agency submit for clearance and settlement all eligible secondary market transactions in U.S. Treasury securities to which it is a counterparty. In addition, the SEC is adopting additional amendments to the Covered Clearing Agency Standards with respect to risk management. These requirements are designed to protect investors, reduce risk, and increase operational efficiency. Finally, the SEC is amending the broker-dealer customer protection rule to permit margin required and on deposit with covered clearing agencies for U.S. Treasury securities to be included as a debit in the reserve formulas for accounts of customers and proprietary accounts of broker-dealers (“PAB”), subject to certain conditions.

Per Release No. 34-99193, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system Filer Manual (“EDGAR Filer Manual” or “Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. EDGAR Release 23.4 will be deployed in the EDGAR system on December 18, 2023.

Proposed Rules

There were no proposed rules in December.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in December.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in December.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in December.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-23-22

December 4, 2023

Guidance on the annual affirmation requirement for entities currently operating under an exemption from CPO or CTA registration

The CFTC requires any person that claims an exemption from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3), 4.13(a)(5), an exclusion from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.5 or an exemption from CTA registration under 4.14(a)(8) (collectively, exemption) to annually affirm the applicable notice of exemption within 60 days of the calendar year end, which is February 29, 2024, for this affirmation cycle.

Persons re-affirming an exemption under 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3) and 4.13(a)(5) will be required to attest that neither the person nor its principals has in its background any statutory disqualifications listed under Section 8a(2) of the Commodity Exchange Act.

Failure to affirm an active exemption from CPO or CTA registration will result in the exemption being withdrawn on March 1, 2024. For registered CPOs or CTAs, withdrawal of the exemption will result in the entity being subject to Part 4 Requirements regardless of whether the entity otherwise remains eligible for the exemption. For non-registrants, the withdrawal of the exemption may subject the person or entity to enforcement action by the CFTC, if either continues to operate without registration or exemption.

See the Notice for details on how to complete the affirmation process.

Notice I-23-23

December 5, 2023

CPO Members—Effective date of FinCEN's beneficial ownership reporting rule

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has issued a final rule establishing beneficial ownership information (BOI) reporting requirements for existing and newly formed corporations, limited liability companies and similar entities (collectively referred to as a "reporting company"). As of January 1, 2024, subject to certain exemptions, reporting companies will be required to file a report with FinCEN identifying their BOI. Generally, BOI refers to identifying information about the individuals who directly or indirectly own or a control a reporting company.

FinCEN's final rule implements the Corporate Transparency Act's (Act) beneficial ownership reporting provisions. Under the Act, CFTC-registered entities are exempt from the reporting requirement. However, a pooled investment vehicle (PIV), such as a commodity pool, will be required to comply with FinCEN's reporting rule unless it qualifies for another exemption under the Act. Importantly, the Act exempts from the BOI reporting requirement any PIV operated or advised by an SEC-registered broker dealer (BD) or investment advisor (IA). As a result, a commodity pool operated or advised by an SEC-registered BD or IA is exempt from the reporting requirement.

However, NFA Member commodity pool operators (CPO) which operate a commodity pool that does not qualify for an exemption under the Act will be required to report BOI to FinCEN for any commodity pools they operate in accordance with the following deadlines.

For a commodity pool created or registered to do business before January 1, 2024, a CPO must file a BOI report with FinCEN by January 1, 2025.

For a commodity pool created or registered on or after January 1, 2024, a CPO must file a BOI report with FinCEN within 90 days from the time the CPO receives actual notice that the commodity pool's creation or registration is effective. In addition, for any commodity pool created or registered on or after January 1, 2024, a CPO will need to report the commodity pool's company applicants. A company applicant is the individual who directly files the document that creates or registers the company.

FinCEN will not accept any BOI reports prior to January 1, 2024, and FinCEN has emphasized that reporting companies should not submit any BOI reports prior to that date.

Notice I-23-24

December 14, 2023

FCM and RFED filing requirements for Christmas and New Year's Day—Reminder for upcoming holidays

This is a reminder that the following futures commission merchant (FCM) and retail foreign exchange dealer (RFED) regulatory filings will be impacted as follows by the Christmas and New Year's Day holidays:

Christmas Day—Monday, December 25, 2023

Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Friday, December 22, 2023, are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, December 26, 2023; and

Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements are required to be prepared as of Monday, December 25, 2023, and are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, December 26, 2023.

New Year's Day—Monday, January 1, 2024

Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Friday, December 29, 2023, are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, January 2, 2024;

Daily segregated, 30.7 secured and cleared swaps customer collateral statements are not required to be prepared as of Monday, January 1, 2024; and

Daily forex statements are required to be prepared as of Monday, January 1, 2024, and are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, January 2, 2024.

Any information filed by FCMs or RFEDs after its due date must be accompanied by a fee for each business day that it is late.

Holiday Filing Schedule

Visit NFA's website to view a complete schedule of daily filing requirements for upcoming holidays and an updated calendar of Segregated Investment Detail Report (SIDR) due dates. NFA recommends viewing the calendars and keeping this Notice as a reference for the upcoming 2024 holiday filing requirements.

For more information about filing financial reports, visit NFA's website.

Questions concerning the requirements should be directed to NFA's Information Center (800-621-3570 or 312-781-1410 or information@nfa.futures.org).

Notice I-23-25

December 14, 2023

SD holiday filing requirements

Visit NFA's website to view schedules of 2024 swap dealer (SD) holiday filings, risk data and margin monitoring filings and financial reporting due dates. We recommend viewing the schedules and keeping this Notice as a reference for the upcoming 2024 holiday filing requirements.

For more information about SD filing requirements visit NFA's website.

Questions concerning the requirements should be directed to NFA's Information Center (800-621-3570 or 312-781-1410 or information@nfa.futures.org).

NFA News Releases

There were no NFA News Releases in December.

FinCEN News Releases

December 07, 2023

WASHINGTON—During its ninth annual Law Enforcement Awards Program, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) recognized agencies that used Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) data to successfully pursue and prosecute criminal investigations.

“While these awards recognize our law enforcement partners who have effectively used BSA data in their investigations, it is important to emphasize that these investigations and prosecutions may not have been possible without financial institutions’ efforts to identify and report suspicious activity,” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki during the ceremony. “Safeguarding the financial system and promoting national security is a collective effort.”

Financial industry representatives and law enforcement officials participated in the ceremony. FinCEN will post summaries of all case nominations to its website in the coming weeks. Brief descriptions of the award-receiving cases follow:

Fraud: Internal Revenue Service–Criminal Investigation, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General

Investigators used BSA filings to identify more than 150 loans totaling approximately $21 million in a massive pandemic relief fraud ring. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California and the Department of Justice’s Fraud Section prosecuted this case.

Drug Trafficking Organization Activity: Federal Bureau of Investigation

Forensic accountants used complex analytics to review BSA data and other financial records to identify suspicious transactions in U.S. bank wire entries and trace illicit proceeds across three continents. The United States Attorney’s Offices for the Southern District of New York and the Southern District of Florida prosecuted the cases, with assistance from the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas.

Transnational Criminal Organization Activity: Drug Enforcement Administration

Investigators made extensive use of FinCEN’s programs and resources to aid this investigation, resulting in the seizure of approximately 4.5 metric tons of cocaine hydrochloride in South America bound for the United States. While searching BSA filings on one of the primary subjects, investigators identified additional information that led to the discovery of a money laundering, poly-drug trafficking, and human smuggling empire. This case was jointly prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia and the Department of Justice’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section.

Proliferation Financing: Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, Defense Criminal Investigative Service, and Homeland Security Investigations

Information received from BSA filings as well as FinCEN’s 314(a) program led to nine defendants being charged with, among other things, conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. As a result of this investigation and prosecution, law enforcement recovered approximately $3 million worth of electronics and communications. This case was prosecuted by the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland.

Cybercrime: U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Postal Inspection Service

This investigation focused on individuals laundering the proceeds from a business email compromise scheme. BSA information was crucial in identifying accounts and co-conspirators, ultimately leading to successful convictions. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia prosecuted this case.

Corruption: Internal Revenue Service–Criminal Investigation and Global Illicit Financial Team and Homeland Security Investigations

While investigating third-party money laundering, the Internal Revenue Service–Criminal Investigation and Global Illicit Financial Team identified a money remitter who was an investment advisor controlling several U.S. and foreign companies. BSA data revealed that Homeland Security Investigations had also initiated a separate investigation; the agencies were able to merge their efforts. The Department of Justice’s Fraud Section is prosecuting the criminal cases. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida is handling the asset forfeiture case.

Human Trafficking/Human Smuggling: Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section

BSA reporting provided critical leads during this multi-year investigation. Several law enforcement agencies and non-profit entities worked together to bring justice to the 17 victims who cooperated with law enforcement and hundreds of other victims who were subjected to the defendants’ abuse. The United States Attorney’s Office, Middle District of Florida and the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division prosecuted the case.

December 11, 2023

REGISTRATION CLOSED

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network will host a virtual information session on beneficial ownership information reporting requirements on Wednesday, December 13 at 2 p.m. Eastern Time.

Beginning January 1, 2024, a new law will require many companies doing business in the United States to report information to the U.S. government about who ultimately owns and controls them. This webinar will cover beneficial ownership information reporting requirements and how to comply with the law, followed by a Q&A session.

After registering, participants will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

Update: Due to high demand, registration for Wednesday’s beneficial ownership webinar has closed. Information will be forthcoming on additional webinars, which will take place in the coming weeks.

Update, 12/21/23: A recording of the webinar is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJN6eB_Sm0U.

December 20, 2023

Please join U.S. Treasury Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Under Secretary Brian Nelson and Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) Director Andrea Gacki for a briefing on the final rule that establishes parameters for access to and protection of beneficial ownership information. This briefing will cover key requirements for how authorized users will be able to access beneficial ownership information, mechanisms for protecting this sensitive data, and the differences between the proposed rule and the final rule. To attend the briefing, please visit https://www.youtube.com/@fincentreasury at 11 a.m. ET on Thursday, December 21.

December 21, 2023

WASHINGTON—Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) took another major step in support of U.S. Government efforts to crack down on illicit finance and enhance corporate transparency by issuing a final rule that establishes the framework for access to and protection of beneficial ownership information (BOI). Issued pursuant to the bipartisan Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), this final rule prescribes the circumstances under which BOI reported in compliance with FinCEN’s September 30, 2022 final BOI Reporting Rule may be disclosed to Federal agencies; state, local, tribal, and foreign governments; and financial institutions, and how it must be protected. FinCEN will also issue today two interagency statements to give banks and non-bank financial institutions guidance on the interplay between the final rule and FinCEN’s existing Customer Due Diligence Rule.

“This final rule is a significant step forward in our efforts to protect our financial system and curb illicit activities,” said FinCEN Director Andrea Gacki. “BOI can provide essential information to law enforcement, intelligence, and national security professionals as they work to protect the United States from bad actors who exploit anonymous shell companies to engage in money laundering, corruption, sanctions and tax evasion, drug trafficking, fraud, and a host of other criminal offenses with impunity, while legitimate businesses suffer from their misdeeds.”

The final rule is the second of three key rulemakings planned to implement the CTA. The first of these rulemakings, the BOI Reporting Rule, requires certain corporations, limited liability companies, and other similar entities created or registered to do business in the United States to report information about their beneficial owners to FinCEN. Those reporting requirements take effect on January 1, 2024, the same day that FinCEN will launch its beneficial ownership information technology system to securely collect, process, and store that information. FinCEN will undertake a third rulemaking to revise FinCEN’s Customer Due Diligence rule, as required by the CTA.

The final rule regarding access to BOI is effective on February 20, 2024. Starting in 2024, FinCEN will begin to provide access to BOI in phases to authorized government agencies and financial institutions that meet the requirements of the final rule.

Beneficial Ownership Information Access and Safeguards Final Rule Fact Sheet

Hot Issue

In early December, FINRA sanctioned four firms—M1 Finance LLC, Open to the Public Investing, Inc., SoFi Securities LLC, and SogoTrade, Inc.—a combined $2.6 million, including over $1 million in restitution to retail customers enrolled in fully paid securities lending programs and fines of $1.6 million for the firms’ related supervisory and advertising violations. All four firms offered retail customers self-directed trading through their respective mobile applications and websites. The firms failed to establish, maintain, and enforce written supervisory procedures reasonably designed to supervise their fully paid securities lending offerings. The firms also provided customers with disclosure documents that contained misrepresentations that customers would receive compensation for the lending of their securities, but the customers did not receive any compensation.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA Notices
  • FINRA Press Release
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Releases
  • NFA Notices
  • FinCEN News Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: SEC Adopts New Rule Enhancing Short Sale Disclosure https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sec-adopts-new-rule-enhancing-short-sale-disclosure/ Thu, 04 Jan 2024 01:42:47 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14368

What: The SEC recently adopted new Rule 13f-2 and related Form SHO and an amendment […]

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Adopts New Rule Enhancing Short Sale Disclosure appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

What: The SEC recently adopted new Rule 13f-2 and related Form SHO and an amendment to the national market system plan governing the consolidated audit trail (CAT) to provide greater transparency of short sale-related data.

Who: Institutional investment managers (“Managers”). Managers are any person, other than a natural person, investing in or buying and selling securities for its own account, and any person exercising investment discretion with respect to the account of any other person - typically includes brokers and dealers, investment advisers, banks, insurance companies, pension funds and corporations.

When: Rule and plan amendment adopted on October 13, 2023, and they become effective on January 2, 2024. The compliance date for Rule 13f-2 and Form SHO will be 12 months after the effective date of the adopting release – with public aggregated reporting to follow 3 months later. The compliance date for the amendment to the CAT NMS Plan will be 18 months after the effective date of the adopting release.

Why: The SEC is adopting Rule 13f-2 and Form SHO to help enhance transparency regarding short selling in equity securities—including both exchange-listed and over-the-counter securities, and ETFs. The SEC believes that, through the publication of short sale-related data to investors and other market participants, the information reported by Managers will provide important additional context to market participants regarding short sale activity in these equity securities by Managers.

How: Under Rule 13f-2, institutional investment managers that meet or exceed certain prescribed reporting thresholds will report on Form SHO certain short position and short activity data for equity securities. The SEC will thereafter aggregate and publish certain data collected from Form SHO.

Why it matters: The SEC estimates that approximately 1,000 Managers per month will trigger a reporting threshold for at least one security and therefore be required to file the new Form SHO.  The SEC concluded that it would take about 20 hours per Form SHO filing.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Adopts New Rule Enhancing Short Sale Disclosure appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
SEC Adopts Amendments to Names Rule https://compliance-risk.com/sec-adopts-amendments-to-names-rule/ Wed, 03 Jan 2024 14:31:20 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14365

On September 20, 2023, the SEC adopted amendments to the Investment Company Act “Names Rule,” […]

The post SEC Adopts Amendments to Names Rule appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

On September 20, 2023, the SEC adopted amendments to the Investment Company Act “Names Rule,” as well as related disclosure and reporting requirements.

Principal Elements

Expands Scope

  • The rule’s 80% investment policy requirement will be expanded beyond its current scope, to apply to any fund name with terms suggesting that the fund focuses on investments that have, or investments whose issuers have, particular characteristics.
  • This coverage will include, for example, fund names with terms such as “growth” or “value,” or terms indicating that the fund’s investment decisions incorporate one or more ESG factors.

Temporary Departures from the 80% Investment Requirement

  • The amendments retain the names rule’s current requirements for a fund to invest in accordance with its 80% investment policy “under normal circumstances” (the “80% investment requirement”), and for the 80% investment requirement to apply at the time a fund invests its assets.
  • The amendments add a new provision that requires a fund to review its portfolio assets’ inclusion in its “80% basket” at least quarterly.
  • The amendments include specific time frames—generally 90 days—for getting back into compliance if a fund departs from the 80% requirement as a result of drift or in other-than-normal circumstances.

Derivatives

  • The amendments generally require funds to use a derivatives instrument’s notional amount to determine the fund’s compliance with its 80% investment policy, with certain adjustments.
  • The amendments include a limited modification to this approach that would exclude certain currency hedges from the names rule compliance calculation.

Unlisted Registered Closed-End Funds and BDCs

  • The amendments generally prohibit an unlisted registered closed-end fund or BDC that is required to adopt an 80% investment policy from changing that policy without a shareholder vote.
  • The amendments permit these funds to change their 80% investment policies without such a vote if:
    • the fund conducts a tender or repurchase offer with at least 60 days’ prior notice of the policy change,
    • that offer is not oversubscribed, and
    • the fund purchases shares at their net asset value.

Enhanced Prospectus Disclosure

  • The amendments to funds’ prospectus disclosure requirements that will require a fund to define the terms used in its name, including the criteria the fund uses to select the investments that the term describes.

Plain English Requirements for Terms Used in Fund Names

  • The amendments to the names rule effectively require that any terms used in the fund’s name that suggest either an investment focus, or that the fund’s distributions are tax-exempt, must be consistent with those terms’ plain English meaning or established industry use.

Form N-PORT Reporting Requirements

  • The amendments to Form N-PORT for funds will require funds to report the value of the fund’s 80% basket, and whether an investment is included in the fund’s 80% basket.
  • The amendments also include a new reporting item to include the definition(s) of terms used in the fund’s name. Funds will have to report this information for the third month of every quarter, instead of for each month as proposed.

Recordkeeping

  • The final rules include recordkeeping provisions related to a fund’s compliance with the rule’s requirements.

Compliance Date

Tiered Compliance Period

  • The compliance date for the final amendments is December 10, 2025 for larger entities, and June 10, 2026 for smaller entities.
    • Larger entities are funds that, together with other investment companies in the same “group of related investment companies” (as such term is defined in rule 0-10 under the Investment Company Act [17 CFR 270.0-10]) have net assets of $1 billion or more as of the end of the most recent fiscal year
    • Smaller entities are funds that together with other investment companies in the same “group of related investment companies” have net assets of less than $1 billion as of the end of the most recent fiscal year

Compliance Cost Estimates

The SEC project direct compliance costs broadly attributable to the following activities:

  • reviewing the final rule’s requirements;
  • determining whether to change a fund’s name or comply with the new requirements, as applicable;
  • developing new (or modifying existing) practices, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements to align with the requirements of the final rule;
  • integrating and implementing those practices, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements to the rest of the funds’ activities; and
  • preparing new training materials and administering training sessions for staff in affected areas.

The SEC estimated that the initial costs to establish and implement practices designed to meet the requirements of the final amendments as described in the adopting release will range from $50,000 to $500,000 per fund, depending on the particular facts and circumstances of the fund. The SEC believes the costs would be closer to the lower end of the range for funds whose current practices are more similar to the requirements of the final rule and for a fund that only incurs costs associated with analyzing the requirements of the rule.

The SEC also concluded that some funds may change their name rather than comply with the amended rule, which it estimated would result in a total direct burden of $75,000 to $250,000 as a one-time cost, including analyzing the rule and deciding to change their name.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post SEC Adopts Amendments to Names Rule appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: SEC Sweep Initiative Targeting AI-Driven Investment Advisers https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sec-announces-sweep-initiative-targeting-ai-driven-investment-advisers/ Fri, 15 Dec 2023 14:19:35 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14332

December 13, 2023 What: The SEC’s Division of Examinations has initiated a sweep of investment […]

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Sweep Initiative Targeting AI-Driven Investment Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

December 13, 2023

What: The SEC’s Division of Examinations has initiated a sweep of investment advisers on how AI-based tools are being deployed by the firms across the industry.

Who: Investment advisers in receipt of examination notifications should expect requests related to AI practices, governance, and oversight.

When: Several investment advisers have reported AI-focused request lists in conjunction with recent examinations. CRC expects this trend to continue into 2024.

Why: In light of the SEC’s recent focus on AI-driven investment management services, as well as the proposed rule related to conflicts associated with such activity, a sweep initiative is a commonly-practiced next step for the regulator, and serves primarily as a data collection exercise. In light of findings, advisers should expect modifications to proposed rulemaking, risk alerts, and guidance in this area.

How: Advisers can prepare for AI-focused examinations and request list items by conducting a brief mock-audit of its AI-related policies, procedures, and practices. Firms should be prepared to produce the documents relating to AI use in the event of an SEC request, including (but not limited to):

  • Itemization of areas and instances where AI-based tools are deployed across the firm, particularly with respect to investment recommendations;
  • Data security measures relative to AI use;
  • Policies and procedures related to the use of AI within the firm, particularly with respect to investment recommendations;
  • An itemization of inputs that drive AI-based recommendations and other activity, including how such information is collected and updated;
  • Advertising materials and disclosures, including Form ADV, that reference the use of AI, particularly with respect to investment recommendations;
  • Information related to the development, testing, and ongoing management and oversight of AI tools; and
  • Plans in place to identify, resolve, and disclose AI system failures, AI-driven errors, and other issues related to AI use.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information about the SEC’s AI-driven conflicts proposed rule and new sweep exam initiative, including updated proposals, rule finalization details, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful integration of new or updated rules within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Sweep Initiative Targeting AI-Driven Investment Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-november-2023/ Fri, 08 Dec 2023 01:03:38 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14294

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 23-19, FINRA has adopted a short-form membership application process for certain firms that must become FINRA members due to the recent amendments to Rule 15b9-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Firms that are eligible for the short-form membership application process also must have been a member of a national securities exchange with which FINRA has had a regulatory services agreement for the 12-month period prior to August 23, 2023. FINRA has further adopted a partial waiver of the new membership application fee for those firms that apply for FINRA membership through the short-form membership application process. These rule changes became effective on October 30, 2023.

The text of the rule changes is set forth in Attachment A. The short-form application is set forth in Attachment B.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-98845, the SEC is adopting a set of rules and forms under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“SEA”) that would create a regime for the registration and regulation of security-based swap execution facilities (“SBSEFs”) and address other issues relating to security-based swap (“SBS”) execution generally. One of the rules being adopted implements an element of the Dodd-Frank Act that is intended to mitigate conflicts of interest at SBSEFs and national securities exchanges that trade SBS (“SBS exchanges”). Other rules being adopted address the cross-border application of the SEA’s trading venue registration requirements and the trade execution requirement for SBS. In addition, the SEC is amending an existing rule to exempt, from the SEA definition of “exchange,” certain registered clearing agencies, as well as registered SBSEFs that provide a market place only for SBS. The SEC is also adopting a new rule that, while affirming that an SBSEF would be a broker under the SEA, exempts a registered SBSEF from certain broker requirements. Further, the SEC is adopting certain new rules and amendments to its Rules of Practice to allow persons who are aggrieved by certain actions by an SBSEF to apply for review by the SEC. Finally, the SEC is delegating new authority to the Director of the Division of Trading and Markets and to the General Counsel to take actions necessary to carry out the rules being adopted.

The SEC is adopting the following compliance schedule for Regulation SE. The SBSEF rules shall become effective 60 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register (“Effective Date”). Once Regulation SE has become effective, any entity that meets the definition of SBSEF may file an application to register with the SEC on Form SBSEF at any time after the Effective Date. As discussed above, the Temporary SBSEF Exemptions will expire 180 days after the Effective Date for any entity that has not filed an application to register with the SEC on Form SBSEF.

For an entity that has submitted an application on Form SBSEF by 180 days after the Effective Date, the exemptive relief relating to SBSEF registration would expire 240 days after the Effective Date, except with respect to an entity whose application on Form SBSEF is complete (having responded to requests by the SEC’s staff for revisions or amendments) within 240 days of the Effective Date. An entity that has submitted an application within 180 days of the Effective Date and whose application is complete within 240 days of the Effective Date will continue to benefit from the exemption from registration until 30 days after the SEC acts to approve or disapprove the application on Form SBSEF.

Per Release No. 34-98959, the SEC is adopting rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to improve the governance of clearing agencies registered with the SEC (“registered clearing agencies”) by reducing the likelihood that conflicts of interest may influence the board of directors or equivalent governing body (“board”) of a registered clearing agency. The rules identify certain responsibilities of the board, increase transparency into board governance, and, more generally, improve the alignment of incentives among owners and participants of a registered clearing agency. In support of these objectives, the rules establish new requirements for board and committee composition, independent directors, management of conflicts of interest, and board oversight.

The SEC is adopting a compliance date of 12 months after publication in the Federal Register for Rule 17Ad-25, except that the compliance date for Rules 17Ad-25(b)(1), (c)(2), and (e) is 24 months after publication in the Federal Register.

Per Release No. 33-11254, the SEC is adopting a rule to implement Section 621 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”) prohibiting an underwriter, placement agent, initial purchaser, or sponsor of an asset-backed security (including a synthetic asset-backed security), or certain affiliates or subsidiaries of any such entity, from engaging in any transaction that would involve or result in certain material conflicts of interest.

The final rule is effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. Under the compliance date that the SEC is adopting in this release, any securitization participant must comply with the prohibition and the requirements of the exceptions to the final rule, as applicable, with respect to any ABS the first closing of the sale of which occurs 18 months after publication in the Federal Register.

Proposed Rules

There were no proposed rules in November.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in November.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in November.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in November.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-23-20

November 20, 2023

Request for Public Representative Nominations for NFA's Board of Directors

Please Route To:
Compliance/Legal/Membership
Sr. Management

NFA's Board of Directors (Board) amended NFA's Articles of Incorporation (Articles) to reduce the size of NFA's Board from 29 to 21 Directors. The Board's new composition becomes effective at the Board's Annual Meeting on February 15, 2024, at which time the terms of all current Public Representatives - Ana Beskin, Michael C. Dawley, Ronald H. Filler, Arthur W. Hahn, Douglas E. Harris, Mary M. McDonnell, Michael H. Moskow, Ronald S. Oppenheimer, Todd E. Petzel, and Michael R. Schaefer - will expire. NFA is seeking nominations to fill seven Public Representative vacancies. The incumbent Public Representatives are eligible for nomination.*

NFA's Articles permit NFA Members and non-Members to nominate Public Representatives. At its February 15, 2024 Annual Meeting, the Board will elect, by majority vote, from among the nominees seven Public Representatives to serve on the Board.

Over the years, NFA's Board has consistently included Public Representatives with outstanding credentials, and their contributions to NFA have been enormous. Public Representatives bring the perspective of non-Members to the Board. Public Representative candidates must be knowledgeable of the markets and the Members regulated by NFA and have no material relationship with NFA that would impact their ability to provide an impartial, objective analysis of the issues that come before the Board. NFA Bylaw 517 sets forth the qualifications for Public Representatives as follows:

To qualify as a Public Representative of NFA, an individual must first be found by the Board, on the record, to have no material relationship with NFA that might reasonably affect the independent judgment of the public representative. Any of the following relationships during the previous three years shall be considered a material relationship with NFA:

(a) The Director or Member of the Director's immediate family (i.e., spouse, parents, children and siblings) is an NFA Officer or employee;

(b) The Director is an NFA Member, Associate Member or a principal of an NFA Member or has an immediate family Member (i.e., spouse, parents, children and siblings) who is an NFA Member, Associate Member or principal of an NFA Member;

(c) The Director, or a firm with which the Director is an officer, director or partner receives more than $100,000 in combined annual payments from NFA, or the Director, or a firm with which the Director is an officer, director or partner receives more than $100,000 annually from an NFA Member or Associate Member for legal, accounting or consulting services related to the NFA Member's or Associate Member's CFTC-registered activities. Compensation for services as a Director of NFA does not count towards the annual $100,000 payment limit, nor does deferred compensation for services prior to becoming a Director so long as compensation is in no way contingent, conditioned or revocable.

Public representation on NFA's Board of Directors is an important matter. We ask that you give serious consideration to submitting a nomination to fill these vacancies. The deadline for submitting Public Representative nominations is Tuesday, January 9, 2024.

Nominations may be submitted by mail or email by January 9, 2024 to:

By Mail:
Carol A. Wooding
General Counsel and Secretary
NFA
320 South Canal, Suite 2400
Chicago, Illinois 60606

By Email:
election2024@nfa.futures.org

Notice I-23-21

November 21, 2023

FCM and IB Members—FinCEN adopts terrorism crowdfunding report and updates its list of FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies

On November 3, 2023, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a news release informing U.S. financial institutions of the Financial Action Task Force's (FATF) recent public statement. The statement announces the FATF's adoption of a report regarding terrorist groups' use of crowdfunding techniques to raise money for attacks. Additionally, the FATF reiterates that all jurisdictions should be vigilant of current and emerging risks from the circumvention of measures taken against the Russian Federation to protect the international financial system.

The release also announced that the FATF reissued its list of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. NFA Member futures commission merchants (FCM) and introducing brokers (IB) should review this release to ensure that their AML programs have the most current information on FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies and revise their AML programs accordingly. A copy of the news release is available on FinCEN's website.

News Releases

November 15, 2023

NFA orders London, United Kingdom introducing broker Braemar Securities LTD to pay a $140,000 fine

November 15, Chicago—NFA has ordered Braemar Securities LTD (Braemar Securities) to pay a $140,000 fine. Braemar Securities is an introducing broker (IB) Member of NFA located in London, United Kingdom.

The Decision, issued by an NFA Hearing Panel (Panel), is based on a Complaint issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee and a settlement offer submitted by Braemar Securities, in which the firm neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint. The Complaint charged Braemar Securities with failing to comply with its communication recordkeeping obligations, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-10, and disclosing customers' confidential non-public information, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-26. The Complaint further charged Braemar Securities with a failure to supervise, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-9.

In its Decision, the Panel found that Braemar Securities violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-10, 2-26 and 2-9.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issue

The SEC is continuing its enforcement activity against cypto asset securities trading platforms. In its latest publicized move, the SEC charged Payward Inc. and Payward Ventures Inc., together known as Kraken, with operating Kraken’s crypto trading platform as an unregistered securities exchange, broker, dealer, and clearing agency. The SEC alleged that Kraken:

  • Provides a marketplace that brings together the orders for securities of multiple buyers and sellers using established, non-discretionary methods under which such orders interact, and thus operates as an exchange;
  • Engages in the business of effecting securities transactions for the accounts of Kraken customers, and thus operates as a broker;
  • Engages in the business of buying and selling securities for its own account without an applicable exception, and thus operates as a dealer; and
  • Serves as an intermediary in settling transactions in crypto asset securities by Kraken customers, and acts as a securities depository, and thus operates as a clearing agency.

The November action follows charges against Coinbase in June and Bittrex in April.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Releases
  • NFA Notices
  • NFA New Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: New FINRA “Residential Supervisory Location” (RSL) Approved by SEC https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-new-finra-residential-supervisory-location-rsl-approved-by-sec/ Thu, 07 Dec 2023 14:52:05 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14274

What: The SEC recently approved FINRA’s amended rule proposal (SR-FINRA-006) to adopt new Supplementary Material […]

The post Regulatory News Update: New FINRA “Residential Supervisory Location” (RSL) Approved by SEC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

What: The SEC recently approved FINRA’s amended rule proposal (SR-FINRA-006) to adopt new Supplementary Material .19 (Residential Supervisory Location) under FINRA Rule 3110, which will permit certain broker-dealers to treat an eligible private residence in which an associated person engages in specified supervisory activities as a non-branch location (subject to various conditions and limitations).

Who: FINRA member broker-dealers who allow supervisors to work from a private residence.

When: The SEC order approving the rule change was issued on November 17, 2023. FINRA will announce the effective date of the rule change in a Regulatory Notice.

Why: During the recent pandemic many FINRA member firms developed hybrid workforce models, and many of the supervisors who began working from home during the pandemic continue to do so, at least on a part-time basis. Under the pre-RSL regulatory framework, those supervisors likely conduct activities that would require the registration and designation of their private residence as supervisory branch offices or OSJ.

How: Generally, a private residence at which supervisory functions described in Rule 3110(f)(1) or (2)(B) occur must be registered and designated as a branch office or OSJ and inspected at least annually. The rule change will permit eligible FINRA members to treat such locations as non-branch locations (subject to terms and conditions under the rule), which would permit inspections to be conducted on a regular periodic schedule rather than annually.

Why it matters: Sooner or later the temporary pandemic regulatory relief related to Form BR reporting of new temporary office locations created due to Covid will end. Broker-dealers with hybrid/remote supervisory operations would be well-served to begin evaluating the eligibility criteria and associated requirements that will be necessary to utilize the RSL designation once it becomes effective. Likewise, broker-dealers who will be ineligible at the firm-level and those with one or more ineligible locations should begin evaluating what adjustments will need to be made to maintain compliance with Rule 3110 after the discontinuation of the Covid relief.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: New FINRA “Residential Supervisory Location” (RSL) Approved by SEC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: FINRA Voluntary Remote Inspection Pilot Program Approved by the SEC https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-finra-voluntary-remote-inspection-pilot-program-approved-by-the-sec/ Tue, 28 Nov 2023 13:53:32 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14191

What: The SEC approved FINRA’s amended rule proposal (SR-FINRA-2023-007) to adopt a voluntary, three-year remote […]

The post Regulatory News Update: FINRA Voluntary Remote Inspection Pilot Program Approved by the SEC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

What: The SEC approved FINRA’s amended rule proposal (SR-FINRA-2023-007) to adopt a voluntary, three-year remote inspections pilot program.

Who: Eligible FINRA member firms who opt-in to the pilot.

When: The SEC order approving the rule change was issued on November 17, 2023. FINRA will announce the effective date of the program in a Regulatory Notice.

Why: FINRA has explained that the pilot program will provide it the opportunity to gauge the effectiveness of remote inspections as part of a modernized, reasonably designed supervisory system that reflects the current work environment and availability of technologies that did not exist when the on-site inspection originally was conceived.

How: The new rule will permit participating member firms to perform required inspections of OSJs, branch offices, and non-branch locations remotely under the applicable provisions of FINRA Rule 3110(c)(1), subject to specified safeguards and limitations. The pilot program will automatically sunset on a date that is three years after its effective date.

Why it matters: The potential operational flexibility to eligible firms comes at a cost.Firms that are interested in opting into the pilot should carefully weigh the various eligibility criteria and participation conditions (e.g., quarterly data collection and reporting to FINRA) to determine if the voluntary election makes sense for the firm.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: FINRA Voluntary Remote Inspection Pilot Program Approved by the SEC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-october-2023/ Thu, 02 Nov 2023 13:23:12 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14051

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort tostrengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 23-16, FINRA has amended its By-Laws to exempt from the Trading Activity Fee (TAF) any transaction by a proprietary trading firm that occurs on an exchange of which the proprietary trading firm is a member.

The amendment to FINRA’s TAF will take effect on November 6, 2023.

The amended text of the FINRA By-Laws is set forth in Attachment A.

Per Regulatory Notice 23-17, FINRA is issuing this Notice to inform members that it is discontinuing collection of data under Rule 4540. The data collected under Rule 4540 is used in the Integrated National Surveillance and Information Technology Enhancements program (INSITE). The decision to discontinue the collection of data under Rule 4540 at this time is based on the availability of alternative sources of data that were not available when INSITE was developed and that have enhanced FINRA’s ability to assess risk.

Effective November 30, 2023, FINRA will discontinue its collection of data under Rule 4540.

Per Regulatory Notice 23-18, FINRA ’s Renewal Program supports the collection and disbursement of fees related to the renewal of broker-dealer (BD) and investment adviser (IA) registrations, exempt reporting and notice filings with participating self-regulatory organizations (SRO) and jurisdictions. FINRA communicates information about renewal fees BD and IA firms owe via a Preliminary Statement in November and publishes a Final Statement in January to confirm or reconcile the actual renewal fees BD and IA firms owe after Jan. 1, 2024. Renewal statements reflect all applicable renewal fees assessed for BD and IA firms, branches and individuals.

It is critical that firms ensure that they pay in full by the Preliminary Statement deadline. If payment is late, firms should ensure that the Preliminary Statement is paid in full before the year-end system shutdown. Payments received after the Preliminary Statement deadline for FINRA-registered firms are subject to a late fee.

In addition to this Notice, firms should review resources on the following pages:

• FINRA’s Renewal Program page (for BDs)

• IARD Renewal Program page (for IAs)

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in October.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-98704, the SEC is adopting amendments to certain rules that govern beneficial ownership reporting. The amendments generally shorten the filing deadlines for initial and amended beneficial ownership reports filed on Schedules 13D and 13G. The amendments also clarify the disclosure requirements of Schedule 13D with respect to derivative securities. The SEC also is expanding the timeframe within a given business day by which Schedules 13D and 13G must be filed, and separately requiring that Schedule 13D and 13G filings be made using a structured, machine-readable data language. Further, the SEC discusses how, under the current rules, an investor’s use of a cash-settled derivative security may result in the person being treated as a beneficial owner of the class of the reference equity security. The SEC also isproviding guidance on the application of the current legal standard found in Section 13(d)(3) and 13(g)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to certain common types of shareholder engagement activities. Finally, the SEC is making certain technical revisions.

The amendments will become effective 90 days after publication in the Federal Register. Compliance with the revised Schedule 13G filing deadlines will be required beginning on September 30, 2024. Compliance with the structured data requirement for Schedules 13D and 13G will be required on December 18, 2024

Per Release No. 34-98737, the SEC is adopting a new rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to increase the transparency and efficiency of the securities lending market by requiring certain persons to report information about securities loans to a registered national securities association (“RNSA”). The new rule also requires certain confidential information to be reported to an RNSA to enhance an RNSA’s oversight and enforcement functions. Further, the new rulerequires that an RNSA make certain information it receives, along with daily informationpertaining to the aggregate transaction activity and distribution of loan rates for each reportablesecurity, available to the public.

Rule 10c-1a will become effective 60 days following the date of publication of the adoptingrelease in the Federal Register. The compliance dates for Rule 10c-1a require that: (1) an RNSA propose rules to implement Rule 10c-1a within four months of the effective date of Rule 10c-1a and that such RNSA rules are effective no later than 12 months after the effective date of Rule 10c-1a; (2) covered persons report the information required by Rule 10c-1a to an RNSA starting on the first business day 24 months after the effective date of Rule 10c-1a (“reporting date”); and (3) an RNSA make specified information publicly available within 90 calendar days of the reporting date.

Per Release No. 34-98738, the SEC is adopting a new rule and new Form SHO pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The new rule and related form are designed to provide greater transparency through the publication of short sale-related data to investors and other market participants. Under the new rule, institutional investment managers that meet or exceed certain specified reporting thresholds are required to report, on a monthly basis using the related form, specified short position data and short activity data for equity securities. In addition, the SEC is adopting an amendment to the national market system (“NMS”) plan governing the consolidated audit trail (“CAT”) created pursuant to the Exchange Act to require the reporting of reliance on the bona fide market making exception in the SEC’s short sale rules. The SEC is publishing the text of the amendments to the NMS plan governing the CAT (“CAT NMS Plan”) in a separate notice.

Effective date: January 2, 2024.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-98766, the SEC is proposing a new rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to prohibit national securities exchanges from offering volume-based transaction pricing in connection with the execution of agency-related orders in certain stocks. If exchanges offer such pricing for their members’ proprietary orders, the proposal would require the exchanges to adopt rules and written policies and procedures related to compliance with the prohibition, as well as disclose, on a monthly basis, certain information including the total number of members that qualified for each volume tier during the month.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in October.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in October.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in October.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-23-18

October 2, 2023

CPOs and IBs—NFA enhances notice filing user experience

On Tuesday, October 3, NFA will add fillable forms to the following commodity pool operator (CPO) and introducing broker (IB) notices and requests to improve the filing process efficiency. The type and amount of required information Members must provide remains the same.

Registration CategoryCFTC RegulationDescriptionSystem
CPO4.22(f)(1)Annual Report Extension Request - Undue HardshipEasy File
CPO4.22(f)(2)Annual Report Extension Request - Fund of FundsEasy File
CPO4.22(d)(1)Replacement of Pool's CPAEasy File
CPO4.22(g)Change in Pool's FYEEasy File
IB1.16(g)Replacement of IB's CPAEasy File and WinJammer
IB1.12(a)Firm is Under-CapitalizedEasy File and WinJammer
IB1.10(f)(1)(i)Extension to File Uncertified StatementEasy File
IB1.16(f)(1)Extension to File Certified StatementEasy File

Following the update, IBs that are SEC registered broker dealers will now select "Regulation Notices - IBs" to file all notices and requests in WinJammer.

Notice I-23-19

October 23, 2023

NFA Announces 2023 Nominating Committee Nominations

NFA's Board of Directors amended NFA's Articles of Incorporation to reduce the size of NFA's Board of Directors from 29 to 21 Directors. The new Board composition becomes effective at the Board's Annual Meeting on February 15, 2024, and all current Directors' terms expire on that date. Pursuant to NFA's Articles of Incorporation (NFA's Articles), NFA's 2023 Nominating Committee has provided NFA's Secretary with a list of its nominees for the open positions on NFA's Board of Directors and 2024 Member Category Nominating Committee. The list of nominees included with this Notice shall serve as notification to NFA Members of the candidates nominated by the 2023 Nominating Committee.

Article VII, Section 3(b) of NFA's Articles provides that other nominations may be made for elected FCM and LTM, IB; CPO and CTA; and SD, MSP and RFED Director positions as follows:

(i) Petition signed by 50 or more NFA Members* in the category for which the nomination is made (i.e., FCM and LTM; SD, MSP and RFED; IB; and CPO and CTA);or

(ii) Petition submitted by any organization or association recognized by NFA as fairly representing the category (See)(i) above) for which the nomination is made.

No petition may nominate more than one candidate for the same position.

Article X, Section 3 of NFA's Articles similarly permits nominations for the Nominating Committee by petition.

NFA Bylaw 406 requires that each petition identify the position to which the nomination pertains, and that petitions must be received by the Secretary within 21 days of the date of this Notice. Any petition received after November 13, 2023 will not be considered.

News Releases

October 30, 2023

NFA orders New York, N.Y. introducing broker Oscar Gruss & Son Inc. to pay a $140,000 fine

October 30, Chicago—NFA has ordered Oscar Gruss & Son Inc. (Oscar Gruss & Son) to pay a $140,000 fine. Oscar Gruss & Son is an introducing broker (IB) Member of NFA located in New York, N.Y.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaintissued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Oscar Gruss & Son, in which the firm neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint. The Complaint charged Oscar Gruss & Son with failing to comply with its communication recordkeeping obligations, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-10(a), and allowing unregistered individuals to act as associated persons (AP) without being registered as APs and NFA Associates, in violation of NFA Bylaw 301(b). The Complaint further charged Oscar Gruss & Son with a failure to supervise, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(a).

In its Decision, the BCC found that Oscar Gruss & Son violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-9(a) and 2-10(a), and NFA Bylaw 301(b).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issue

The SEC released its 2024 examination priorities in October to inform investors and registrants of the key risks, examination topics, and priorities that the Division plans to focus on in the upcoming year. As further detailed in the priorities statement, the SEC is priorities include but are not limited to:

For broker-dealers – Regulation Best Interest (notably dual-registrants, conflicts of interest, account allocation practices, account selection practices and branch office supervision), Form CRS, financial responsibility rules (e.g., accounting for reward programs, point programs, gift cards, and non-brokerage services), and trading practices (particularly Regulations SHO and ATS and Exchange Act Rule 15c2-11).

For investment advisers – advice regarding complex, high cost, and/or illiquid products, and unconventional strategies, processes to determine if advice is in the client’s best interest, how advisers address conflicts of interest and sufficiency of disclosures relating to those conflicts (of note are dual-registrants, those who use affiliated firms for clients services, and have FPs that service brokerage and advisory clients).

For private fund advisers – portfolio management risks when there is exposure to market volatility and higher interest rates, adherence to contractual requirements regarding LP advisory committees or similar structures (e.g., notification and consent processes), accurate calculation and allocation of private fund fees and expenses, due diligence practice consistency (with policies and procedures and disclosures), Advisers Act compliance (e.g., custody, Form ADV, timely audits, and distribution of audited financial statements), and policies and procedures for reporting on Form PF.

For multiple market participants – information security and operational resiliency, crypto assets and emerging financial technology, Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity, and anti-money laundering.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

• FINRA Notices

• SEC Regulatory Actions

• SEC 2024 Examination Priorities

• NFA Notices

• NFA New Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: SIPC Nearing Launch of Broker-Dealer Portal https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sipc-nearing-launch-of-broker-dealer-portal/ Wed, 25 Oct 2023 13:44:15 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14042 sipc

October 20, 2023 What: The Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) is nearing the launch of […]

The post Regulatory News Update: SIPC Nearing Launch of Broker-Dealer Portal appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
sipc

October 20, 2023

What: The Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) is nearing the launch of an online portal for Broker-Dealers.

Who: Broker-Dealers (including Broker-Dealers claiming exclusion from SIPC membership)

When: Portal launches on November 1, 2023.

Why: The new portal will allow Broker-Dealers to file forms, pay assessments, and communicate with SIPC.

How: Initial access to the SIPC Portal will be on a staggered basis, based on the broker-dealer’s fiscal year. Each Broker-Dealer’s Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) must either act as the Broker-Dealer’s Portal Administrator or delegate this responsibility to another individual. Check out SIPC’s Portal Administrator Delegation webpage for more details.

Why it matters: Once the SIPC Portal is operational, SIPC will no longer accept filings by mail, email, or fax. Broker-dealers that fail to use the SIPC Portal will not be able to submit required filings with SIPC.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: SIPC Nearing Launch of Broker-Dealer Portal appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: SEC Publishes 2024 Exam Priorities https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sec-publishes-2024-exam-priorities/ Thu, 19 Oct 2023 13:34:29 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14003 Sec Publishes 2024 Exam Priorities

October 19, 2023 What: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced its examination priorities for […]

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Publishes 2024 Exam Priorities appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Sec Publishes 2024 Exam Priorities

October 19, 2023

What: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced its examination priorities for fiscal year 2024.

Who: Priorities for Broker-Dealers, Investment Advisers, Investment Companies, SROs, Clearing Agencies, and Other Market Participants (Municipal Advisors, Security-Based Swap Dealers, and Transfer Agents)

When: October 16, 2023. Although typically provided in Q1 of the same calendar year, the SEC is re-aligning its publication of examination priorities with the beginning of its fiscal year.

Why: The SEC prioritizes examination of certain practices, products, and services that it believes present potentially heightened risks to investors or the integrity of the U.S. capital markets.

How: In addition to focus areas for specific market participants, the SEC highlighted four areas applicable across the multiple participants: 1) Information Security and Operational Resiliency, 2) Crypto Assets and Emerging Financial Technology, 3) Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity, and 4) Anti-Money Laundering and OFAC Sanctions.

Why it matters: The SEC has explained that it will allocate significant resources to the 2024 examination priorities. It is worth noting that the multiple participant topics noted above were similarly identified in the prior year’s priorities, which means that participants have now had two publication cycles of notice from the SEC regarding the importance of addressing these matters. As we close out 2023, firms should thoughtfully evaluate their compliance programs in light of the recent priorities to ensure they are particularly responsive to the SEC’s focus areas.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Publishes 2024 Exam Priorities appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Celebrating a Decade of Success and Growth: Compliance Risk Concepts Turns 10 https://compliance-risk.com/celebrating-a-decade-of-success-and-growth-compliance-risk-concepts-turns-10/ Thu, 05 Oct 2023 15:27:32 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13988

Celebrating our 10th anniversary this year, Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) remains committed to helping businesses […]

The post Celebrating a Decade of Success and Growth: Compliance Risk Concepts Turns 10 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Celebrating our 10th anniversary this year, Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) remains committed to helping businesses succeed while maintaining regulatory compliance. As we reflect on the past decade, we are proud to have assisted numerous clients in reaching their financial, operational, and strategic goals.

"Celebrating CRC's 10-year anniversary is an amazing milestone for the company and for me, personally," said Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Partner. Avnet leveraged his 20+ years of in-house expertise and practical experience in professional services by identifying a gap in the industry: organizations needing comprehensive compliance support.

"We are businesspeople who know compliance," continued Avnet. "This unique commercial approach to solving compliance issues, combined with our proactive focus on our clients' future needs, separates us from the 'check-the-box' providers. Our practical, in-depth risk assessments focus on our clients' risk postures and have been our driving force since day one."

The CRC Advantage

What sets CRC apart is our team—business professionals armed with extensive compliance knowledge ready to help our clients navigate increasingly complex laws and regulations. Unlike conventional "check- the-box" providers, CRC thrives on critical thinking and risk assessment, tailoring solutions based on each client's risk appetite.

From thoroughly understanding each client's unique business model to assessing potential risks and creating comprehensive plans to mitigate exposure, CRC has successfully enabled its clients to achieve long-term, strategic, and scalable success.

Service That's Not "One-Size-Fits-All"

With the intensity of regulatory scrutiny at an all-time high, financial institutions must re-examine their compliance approach. For small businesses challenged with handling compliance matters without a dedicated in-house team, we offer ongoing, routine compliance services at a fraction of the cost of traditional resources. Larger organizations with an established in-house team can leverage our services to help manage workload surges and ensure all aspects of business compliance are adequately addressed.

Reflecting on a Decade of Growth

Principal Roland Reyes shared his excitement about the milestone: "The growth of our company is a testament to our team's professionalism, hard work and dedication. It is a pleasure every day to work alongside the best and brightest. It has been an incredible ten years. I am excited to see what the next will bring."

Culture of Collaboration

Our COO, Jaclyn Bowdren, believes this anniversary validates CRC's core values. "CRC's team is what sets us apart," said Bowdren. "CRC fosters a collaborative environment, where our team members work together to provide the best advice and guidance for our clients. We understand our clients and provide solutions that balance their risk with their commercial interests. We always strive to be valued partners to our clients; this has been pivotal to our success."

"I plan to continue work to build upon the success of CRC by listening to our team and clients to find additional opportunities for improvement and growth. I could not imagine working with a better group of people, and I look forward to seeing how we can work together to further build this incredible company."

Building a Future of Trust and Growth

Adding another perspective, Debbie Nathanson, our Senior HR Advisor, identifies industry expertise, client trust, and supportive team culture as the drivers of our success. She joined CRC about 2.5 years ago, and the team has since doubled in size. "Ten years is a milestone that announces staying power in the industry," said Nathanson. "It tells current and future staff that exciting times are still to come, and CRC will only become an even better place to work."

"CRCs success is a direct result of industry expertise, amazing client relationships and a truly unique and supportive employee culture. We know what we are doing. Our clients like and trust us. Our team likes and trusts each other. The future of CRC is supported by our past. We will continue to hire experienced professionals, provide expert advice and service, and respect each other."

Delivering on Our Promises

David Amster, Principal, aligned with the team's sentiments, commenting, "CRC's tenth anniversary validates the value proposition on which the firm has focused since day one; we expertly balance compliance solutions that keep our clients out of the regulatory crosshairs without hampering their business interests. CRC has thrived for a decade because that is what we've consistently delivered."

"CRC's success is firmly rooted in our culture," Amster continued. "We're professionals who deeply believe that our company's success is driven by helping our clients succeed. But while we're acutely serious about the quality of our work product, we love to laugh and don't take ourselves all too seriously."

Looking to the Future

As we celebrate this milestone, we look forward to the coming years with enthusiasm, fully committed to continuing to deliver exceptional compliance support services. With a team of senior compliance professionals and executives, CRC helps clients establish, maintain, and enhance their compliance programs.

Thanks to our incredible team, valued clients, and all those who have supported and helped shape CRC over the years, we're proud to celebrate this 10-year milestone in our journey. Contact us to learn more about partnering with CRC.

The post Celebrating a Decade of Success and Growth: Compliance Risk Concepts Turns 10 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-september-2023/ Sun, 01 Oct 2023 03:56:25 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14066

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 23-15, the SEC has amended Rule 15c6-1(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to shorten the standard settlement cycle for most broker-dealer transactions from two business days after the trade date (T+2) to one business day after the trade date (T+1). To aid firms in preparing for this transition, FINRA is updating the Regulatory Extension (REX) system to enable firms to file extension of time requests under the shortened settlement cycle. Firms may file such requests beginning May 31, 2024, via the batch file process and by completing the online request form by logging into the REX system via FINRA Gateway. Further, FINRA is updating the REX Customer Test Environment to allow testing under various scenarios for both batch and online request form filings.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in September.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11235, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system Filer Manual (“EDGAR Filer Manual” or “Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. EDGAR Release 23.3 will be deployed in the EDGAR system on September 18, 2023.

Per Release No. 33-11238, the SEC is amending the rule under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act” or “Act”) that addresses certain broad categories of investment company names that are likely to mislead investors about an investment company’s investments and risks. The amendments to this rule are designed to increase investor protection by improving, and broadening the scope of, the requirement for certain funds to adopt a policy to invest at least 80 percent of the value of their assets in accordance with the investment focus that the fund’s name suggests, updating the rule’s notice requirements, and establishing recordkeeping requirements. The SEC is also adopting enhanced prospectus disclosure requirements for terminology used in fund names, and additional requirements for funds to report information on Form N-PORT regarding compliance with the names-related regulatory requirements.

Per Release No. 34-98437, the SEC is adopting amendments to the SEC’s regulations under the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (“Privacy Act”). The amendments revise the SEC’s regulations under the Privacy Act to clarify, update, and streamline the language of several procedural provisions.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-11232, the SEC is proposing rule and form amendments concerning access to and management of accounts on the Commission’s Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) that are related to potential technical changes to EDGAR (collectively referred to as “EDGAR Next”). The SEC is proposing to require that electronic filers (“filers”) authorize and maintain designated individuals as account administrators and that filers, through their account administrators, take certain actions to manage their accounts on a dashboard on EDGAR. Further, we propose that filers may only authorize individuals as account administrators or in the other roles described herein if those individuals first obtain individual account credentials in the manner to be specified in the EDGAR Filer Manual. As part of the EDGAR Next changes, the SEC would offer filers optional Application Programming Interfaces (“APIs”) for machine-to-machine communication with EDGAR, including submission of filings and retrieval of related information. If the proposed rule and form amendments are adopted, the SEC would make corresponding changes to the EDGAR Filer Manual and implement the potential technical changes.

Per Release No. 33-11250, the SEC is proposing rule and form amendments to provide a tailored form to register the offerings of registered index-linked annuities (“RILAs”). Specifically, the SEC is proposing to amend the form currently used by most variable annuity separate accounts, Form N-4, to require issuers of RILAs to register offerings on that form as well. To facilitate this amendment, the SEC is also proposing to amend certain filing rules and make other related amendments. These changes would, if adopted, implement the requirements relating to RILAs contained in Division AA, Title I of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023. Further, the SEC is proposing other amendments to Form N-4 that would apply to all issuers that would use that form under the proposal. The SEC is also proposing to apply to RILA advertisements and sales literature a current SEC rule that provides guidance as to when sales literature is materially misleading under the Federal securities laws. The SEC is proposing a technical amendment to Form N-6 to correct an error from a prior SEC rulemaking. Finally, the SEC requests comment as to whether to require the registration of market-value adjustments associated with certain annuities on Form N-4 as well.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in September.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in September.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in September.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-23-16

September 8, 2023

Board and Nominating Committee Members Whose Terms Will Expire at the Board's 2024 Regular Annual Meeting and Executive Representative Reminder

On November 17, 2022, NFA's Board of Directors unanimously approved amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation (Articles)1. As a result, effective February 2024, NFA's Board will be reduced from 29 to 21 Directors, and the terms of all current Directors will expire at the Board's regular Annual Meeting on February 15, 2024.

Each year, prior to October 15th, NFA's Secretary notifies all Members of the elected Board Directors and Nominating Committee members whose terms will expire at the Board of Directors' regular annual meeting in the following categories: FCM and LTM; IB; CPO and CTA; and SD, MSP and RFED. Given NFA's Board's reduction, the attached list of Board members whose terms expire in February 2024 contains the names of all current Directors in the Member categories. Also attached is a list of Nominating Committee members in each of the Member categories whose terms expire in February 2024.

NFA's Secretary requests Members to recommend eligible persons to the Nominating Committee for consideration to fill each open Board position and the open Nominating Committee position for each Board category. Incumbent Directors, if otherwise eligible, may be recommended to the Nominating Committee. The specific criteria regarding the composition of the representatives in each Member category on the Board of Directors and the Nominating Committee is provided below. Please use the attached form to submit names of persons eligible to fill the vacancies on the Board of Directors and the Nominating Committee.

The Nominating Committee will consider the names that are submitted and nominate at least one person for each open Board position and one person for each open Nominating Committee position. Thereafter, additional nominations may be made by petition pursuant to NFA's Articles. Upon completion of its work, NFA will issue a Notice to Members announcing the Nominating Committee's nominations to fill the Board and Nominating Committee vacancies, which will also provide the procedures for filing a nomination by petition.

NFA's Board of Directors and Open Positions as of the February 15, 2024 Board of Directors' Regular Annual Meeting

Since all Directors' terms will expire at the February 2024 Board meeting, the following vacancies must be filled:

Four (4) FCM representatives of which two (2) must be FCMs ranked as a top-ten FCM and (2) must be FCMs not ranked as a top-ten FCM based on the total of futures customer segregated funds, cleared swaps customer collateral and foreign futures or foreign options secured amounts (customer segregated funds), as those terms are defined in the applicable Commission regulations, held as of June 30 preceding the election;

One (1) IB representative;

Three (3) representatives of CPOs or CTAs that are NFA Members reporting funds under management allocated to futures and swaps (as defined in Article XVIII) on NFA Form PQR or NFA Form PR as of June 30 preceding the election (Funds Under Management) of which one (1) representative must be a CPO or CTA ranked within the top 10 percent based on Funds Under Management; one (1) representative must be a CPO or CTA ranked within the top 20 percent based on Funds Under Management; and one (1) is an at-large representative from CPOs or CTAs with no restriction on its rank among CPOs and CTAs reporting Funds Under Management; and

Four (4) SD/MSP/RFED representatives of which two (2) must be representatives of SDs that are Large Financial Institutions as of June 30 preceding the election and two (2) representatives of SDs, MSPs or RFEDs that are not Large Financial Institutions as of June 30 preceding the election. NFA's Board of Directors has resolved to use the list of Participating Dealers on the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's website on a designated webpage "OTC Derivatives Supervisors Group" to define Large Financial Institutions.

Nominating Committee Open Positions

Nominating Committee open positions for the 2024 Member election:

  • One (1) open position for an FCM Representative who may be affiliated with either a top-ten FCM or a non-top ten FCM based on customer segregated funds as of June 30 preceding the election;
  • One (1) open position for an IB Representative who may be affiliated with either a Guaranteed IB or an Independent IB;
  • One (1) open position for a CPO/CTA Representative who must be affiliated with a CPO or CTA ranked within the top ten percent based on Funds Under Management; and
  • One (1) open position for an SD/MSP/RFED Representative who is affiliated with an SD/MSP/RFED of a Non-Large Financial Institution as of June 30 preceding the election.

NFA is a membership organization. NFA Members have a voice in NFA's governance through the exercise of the right to recommend candidates and to nominate and elect individuals to serve on NFA's Nominating Committee and Board of Directors. The Nominating Committee relies heavily on the recommendations of the membership in making its nominating decisions. Please give this matter serious consideration and return your submission(s) to NFA for receipt no later than September 29, 2023.

Notice I-23-17

September 20, 2023

FCM and IB Members—FinCEN issues alert on virtual currency investment scam known as "Pig Butchering"

On September 8, 2023, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a news release alerting U.S. financial institutions of a prominent virtual currency investment scam known as “pig butchering.” The alert explains the scam’s methodology; provides behavioral, financial, and technical red flags to help financial institutions identify and report related suspicious activity; and reminds financial institutions of their reporting requirements under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). As U.S. financial institutions under the BSA, NFA Member futures commission merchants and introducing brokers should review the alert and comply with the suspicious activity report (SAR) requirements if applicable.

News Releases

September 12, 2023

NFA orders Denver-based firm Transamerica Asset Management Inc. to pay a $140,000 fine and sanctions a former Transamerica employee

September 12, Chicago—NFA issued Decisions against Transamerica Asset Management Inc. (Transamerica), an NFA Member commodity pool operator located in Denver, Colorado, and its former employee, Quynh Pham Keiser, resolving charges brought against them by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (Committee or BCC).

The BCC Decisions are based on a Complaint issued by the Committee and separate settlement offers submitted by Transamerica and Keiser, in which they neither admitted nor denied the Complaint's allegations. In the Transamerica Decision, the BCC found Transamerica failed to diligently supervise the firm's operations, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(a), and ordered Transamerica to pay a $140,000 fine to NFA. In the Keiser Decision, the BCC found Keiser willfully submitted materially false or misleading information to NFA, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-2(f), and ordered Keiser not to reapply for NFA associate membership, apply for NFA membership or principal status with a Member, or act as a principal of a Member at any time in the future.

The complete text of the Complaint, the Transamerica Decision, and the Keiser Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

September 18, 2023

NFA takes emergency enforcement action against Doral, Fla. commodity pool operator Bit5ive Mining Fund Advisor, LLC and its principal Richard Alexander Acosta

September 18, Chicago—NFA has taken an emergency enforcement action against Bit5ive Mining Fund Advisor, LLC, (Bit5ive Advisor), an NFA Member commodity pool operator located in Doral, Florida, and Richard Alexander Acosta, a listed principal and the sole associated person of Bit5ive Advisor.

NFA took this action to protect participants in Bit5ive Mining Fund LP, a commodity pool operated by Bit5ive Advisor, as well as the investing public, the derivatives markets, and other NFA Members because of Bit5ive Advisor and Acosta's failure to cooperate with NFA. Due to their failure to produce requested documents and information, NFA is unable to determine, among other things, who invested in the Fund, as well as when and how much; whether there are additional investors in the Fund other than those disclosed to NFA; what Bit5ive Advisor and Acosta did with the funds received for investment in the Fund; and the source of funds used to repay one investor.

Effective immediately, Bit5ive Advisor and Acosta are suspended from NFA membership and prohibited from soliciting or accepting any funds for investment in the Fund or in any other pools or other investment vehicles over which Bit5ive Advisor or Acosta exercise control. Bit5ive Advisor and Acosta are further prohibited from disbursing or transferring any funds from any accounts in the name of Bit5ive Advisor, Bit5ive Fund, or from the account of any other commodity pool or other investment vehicle operated by Bit5ive Advisor or Acosta, without NFA's prior approval. This action will remain in effect until Bit5ive Advisor and Acosta demonstrate to NFA's satisfaction that they are in complete compliance with all NFA requirements.

Bit5ive Advisor or Acosta may request a hearing before NFA's Hearing Committee.

The complete text of the emergency action is available on NFA's website.

September 18, 2023

NFA orders Houston-based introducing broker Bosworth Brokers LLC and one of its principals to each pay a $100,000 fine

September 18, Chicago—NFA has ordered Bosworth Brokers LLC, an NFA Member introducing broker located in Houston, Texas, and Andrew Michael Gizienski, a principal and associated person of Bosworth Brokers LLC, to each pay a $100,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by an NFA Hearing Panel, is based on a Complaint authorized by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC) and a settlement offer submitted by Bosworth Brokers LLC, Gizienski and Dennis Michael Bosworth, another principal and AP of Bosworth Brokers LLC, in which they neither admitted nor denied the Complaint's allegations. The BCC Complaint alleged that Bosworth Brokers LLC failed to comply with its recordkeeping obligations under NFA Compliance Rule 2-10 and that Gizienski failed to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade under NFA Compliance Rule 2-4, due to Gizienski's use of an unapproved, unmonitored platform to communicate with a Bosworth Brokers LLC customer, which deleted communications after seven days. The Complaint also alleged that Bosworth Brokers LLC failed to promptly list Gizienski as a principal, in violation of NFA Registration Rule 208. Finally, the Complaint alleged that Bosworth Brokers LLC and Bosworth failed to supervise, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-9.

In its Decision, the Panel found that Bosworth Brokers LLC and Bosworth violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-9; that Bosworth Brokers LLC violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-10 and NFA Registration Rule 208; and that Gizienski violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-4.

The complete text of the Complaint and the Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

September 25, 2023

NFA permanently bars Chicago-based commodity pool operator Tyche Asset Management LLC and its principal Phillip Moncel Galles from membership

September 25, Chicago—NFA has permanently barred Tyche Asset Management LLC, a former NFA Member commodity pool operator (CPO) located in Chicago, Illinois, and Phillip Moncel Galles, a former NFA Associate and principal of Tyche Asset Management LLC, from NFA membership status and from acting or being listed as a principal of an NFA Member.

The default Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and Tyche Asset Management LLC and Galles' failure to file an Answer. The BCC found that Tyche Asset Management LLC and Galles engaged in a deceitful course of conduct to defraud customers and failed to uphold high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade in connection with a commodity pool or other investment vehicle that Tyche Asset Management LLC and/or Galles operated. The BCC also found that Tyche Asset Management LLC and Galles provided misleading information to NFA about the firm's activities as a CPO and failed to cooperate promptly with NFA during an examination.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issue

At the end of September, the SEC continued with its enforcement actions for failing to preserve electronic communications. The SEC’s investigations uncovered pervasive and longstanding off-channel communications at 10 more firms. The firms agreed to pay combined penalties of $79 million. These actions follow on the heels of similar charges against 11 other firms only the previous month that resulted in $289 million in combined penalties.

With the sustained SEC enforcement concerning communications recordkeeping, firms should ensure that they have recently reviewed their communications surveillance policies and procedures, particularly those involving personal mobile devices and messaging applications. In this context, CRC believes that it is more of a question of when – not if – firms will face questions about off-channel communications as part of an examination or other focused requests from the SEC and/or FINRA.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices
  • NFA New Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: Citadel Prepared to Take Legal Action Against SEC Amid WhatsApp Probe https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-citadel-prepared-to-take-legal-action-against-sec-amid-whatsapp-probe/ Fri, 29 Sep 2023 17:16:46 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13982

September 29, 2023 Bloomberg reported that Citadel has indicated it is planning to push back against the […]

The post Regulatory News Update: Citadel Prepared to Take Legal Action Against SEC Amid WhatsApp Probe appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

September 29, 2023

Bloomberg reported that Citadel has indicated it is planning to push back against the SEC if it moves against the firm, going so far as to take the SEC to court. Such a court case would be a first among firms against whom the SEC has made allegations of untracked communications.

This update follows a Reuters article earlier in the week that identified Citadel among a group of more than two dozen investment advisers from whom the SEC has reportedly requested messages on personal devices or applications of a selection of employees, including senior management.

The SEC’s approach appears to put senior executives at risk as a matter of course in these investigations. As noted in the reporting, the general review of business communications on personal devices opens the door to a range of inquiry. This transforms what may have been seen as a books and record issue into an entry point for the SEC to take an interest in the underlying substantive communications, which could relate to any aspect of the business, transactions, dealings with customers, etc.

Additionally, executives who are found to have violated their employer’s compliance policies regarding off-channel communications may face employment consequences.

CRC will continue to monitor developments in what could result in the first legal challenge to the SEC’s recent off-channel communications approach to investment advisers, however, despite the potential for a legal challenge from the industry, any resolution is speculative and does not change the reality for firms at the present. Our view is that firms should be very focused on taking steps now to understand and mitigate their risks related to electronic communications to better position themselves ahead of a regulator request or examination.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information about this developing situation, as well as the SEC’s continued focus on electronic communications, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: Citadel Prepared to Take Legal Action Against SEC Amid WhatsApp Probe appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
News Update: SEC Provides Road Map for Investment Advisory Firm Examinations https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-provides-road-map-for-investment-advisory-firm-examinations/ Thu, 28 Sep 2023 15:25:02 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13976

September 2023 Overview & Summary On Sept. 6, 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division […]

The post News Update: SEC Provides Road Map for Investment Advisory Firm Examinations appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

September 2023

Overview & Summary

On Sept. 6, 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Examinations issued a Risk Alert detailing the Division’s examination selection process for SEC-registered investment advisers. 

Given the size and variety of the adviser population, the Division utilizes a risk-based approach for both selecting advisers to examine and in determining the scope of risk areas to examine. The Risk Alert highlights the Division’s risk-based approach for both (A) selecting Advisers to examine and (B) determining examination focus areas and documents. The Division leverages technology to collect and analyze large sets of industry- and firm-level data to help identify risks and better understand the firm’s business during examinations. The Division also reviews disclosure documents and various filings with regulators (e.g., Form ADV) and other regulatory filings.

A. Selecting Firms to Examine

Some of the reasons the Division may select an adviser to examine include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following: the firm’s risk characteristics; a tip, complaint, or referral; or the staff’s interest in a particular compliance risk area.

There are also firm-specific risk factors that the staff considers when selecting advisers for examination, such as those related to a particular adviser’s business activities, conflicts of interest, and regulatory history. In the Risk Alert, the Division lists 11 firm-specific factors it may consider: (1) prior examination observations and conduct, such as when the staff has observed what it believes to be repetitive deficient practices during more than one review of a firm, significant fee- and expense-related issues, and significant compliance program concerns; (2) supervisory concerns, such as disciplinary history of associated individuals or affiliates; (3) tips, complaints, or referrals involving the firm; (4) business activities of the firm or its personnel that may create conflicts of interest, such as outside business activities and the conflicts associated with advisers dually registered as, or affiliated with, brokers; (5) the length of time since the firm’s registration or last examination, such as advisers newly registered with the SEC; (6) material changes in a firm’s leadership or other personnel; (7) indications that the adviser might be vulnerable to financial or market stresses; (8) reporting by news and media that may involve or impact the firm; (9) data provided by certain third-party data services; (10) the disclosure history of the firm; and (11) whether the firm has access to client and investor assets and/or presents certain gatekeeper or service provider compliance risks.

B. Selecting Examination Focus Areas

Once an adviser is selected for examination, additional risk assessment occurs to determine the scope of the examination, such as selecting areas of the business that examiners will review. This involves requesting documents with respect to the firm’s operations, disclosures, conflicts of interest, and compliance practices related to core areas, including custody and safekeeping of client assets, valuation, portfolio management, fees, expenses, brokerage, and best execution.

The Risk Alert includes an attachment that outlines the types of information and documents the staff requests during a typical exam. The list includes (1) general information about the Adviser’s business and investment activities, (2) information about the assessment of risks and the implementation of a written compliance program and internal controls, (3) information with respect to advisory trading activities, and (4) information for compliance testing in particular areas.

The Division is providing this information so that advisers may prepare themselves for an examination. Although the Division continuously refines and enhances its risk assessment process, the information shared herein also may assist firms in their compliance efforts.

Our Take

This SEC Risk Alert lays out how the SEC approaches the selection of firms for examination, as well as their selection examination focus areas. In doing so, the SEC has essentially established a  step-by-step guide for Advisers to follow relative to examination preparedness.CRC recommends that firms consider partnering with an established compliance team who can help you navigate and prepare for future examinations. A mock examination utilizing the document request areas outlined within the Risk Alert should serve as an accurate predictor of overall examination preparedness.

Opportunities for CRC to Assist Your Firm

  • CRC will conduct a mock examination to identify any gaps or weaknesses relative to your firm’s examination preparedness.
  • CRC is available for general and ongoing outsourced support with respect to SEC-registered investment advisers.
  • CRC can proactively conduct a review of your existing compliance program to identify opportunities to potentially implement enhancements in preparation for regulatory examinations.
  • CRC is available to assist with examination responses.

Please contact Mitch Avnet for more information.

Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com or (646) 346.2468

The post News Update: SEC Provides Road Map for Investment Advisory Firm Examinations appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: SEC Probes Investment Adviser Electronic Communications https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sec-probes-investment-adviser-electronic-communications/ Tue, 26 Sep 2023 12:58:44 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13972

September 25, 2023 What: Sources close to relevant investigations indicate that at least a dozen […]

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Probes Investment Adviser Electronic Communications appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

September 25, 2023

What: Sources close to relevant investigations indicate that at least a dozen advisory firms and hedge funds have been subject to deep-dive probes of employee electronic communications.  

Who: While relevant fines and enforcement actions to date have typically centered around broker-dealers, this move signals a shift in focus to the electronic communication practices of investment advisers.

When: CRC anticipates that this area of focus will be the star of the SEC’s examination priorities list once it is released in early 2024.

Why: Chairman Gensler has defended his standing position that diving into advisers’ communications at recordkeeping practices is a crucial component of investor protection, despite industry backlash and an open letter from SIFMA stating the overreach of the SEC’s regulatory scope.

How: While during previous sweep efforts, the SEC has previously required firms under examination to sample employee electronic communications and report back, their new approach is much more invasive and ups the ante considerably. Exam staff is requesting the phones of specific employees, including executives, and reviewing all communications themselves.

Why it matters: Firms using a certification only or “wait and see” approach are operating at a disadvantage and need to evaluate their existing policies and procedures relative to electronic communications to ensure they are clear and reasonably designed for the size and scope of their operations. The question is not if, but when the SEC review adviser communications, and it seems the scope and methodology of their investigation are escalating.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information about the SEC’s continued focus on electronic communications, including updated guidance, risk alerts, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful compliance with evolving regulatory expectations within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Probes Investment Adviser Electronic Communications appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-august-2023/ Fri, 01 Sep 2023 03:48:26 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14062

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 23-12, FINRA has adopted amendments to its Codes of Arbitration Procedure (Codes) to modify the process relating to requests to expunge customer dispute information in the FINRA Dispute Resolution Services (DRS) arbitration forum. The amendments impose requirements on expungement requests (a) filed by an associated person during an investment-related, customer-initiated arbitration (customer arbitration), or filed by a party to the customer arbitration on behalf of an associated person (on-behalf-of request), or (b) filed by an associated person separate from a customer arbitration (straight-in request). The amendments become effective on October 16, 2023. The rule text is available in Attachment A. The Guidance is available in Attachment B. The Form Requesting Expungement on Behalf of an Unnamed Person is available in Attachment C.

Per Regulatory Notice 23-13, FINRA has adopted changes to its rules to allow for video conference hearings before the Office of Hearing Officers and the National Adjudicatory Council under specified conditions. These amendments became effective August 23, 2023.

Per Regulatory Notice 23-14, FINRA has amended the requirements relating to Covered Agency Transactions that FINRA originally adopted in 2016. Covered Agency Transactions include (1) To Be Announced transactions, inclusive of adjustable rate mortgage transactions, (2) Specified Pool Transactions and (3) transactions in Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, issued in conformity with a program of an agency or Government-Sponsored Enterprise, with forward settlement dates, as recapped more fully in this Notice.

This Notice provides an overview of the amendments. The SEC approved the amendments on July 27, 2023. FINRA stated in its rule filing, and the SEC noted in approving the rule change, that the amendments would become effective between nine and ten months following the SEC’s approval. Consistent with this timeframe, the amendments become effective on May 22, 2024. FINRA will monitor the implementation of the amendments and their impact. Prior to the May 22, 2024, effective date, FINRA will engage with market participants to make available updated guidance as appropriate.

The text of the amendments to the Covered Agency Transaction requirements is included as Attachment A. In this Notice, all references to provisions of the amended requirements are to the rule text as shown in Attachment A.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in August.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-98202, the SEC is adopting amendments to a rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act” or “Exchange Act”) that exempts certain SEC-registered brokers or dealers from membership in a registered national securities association (“Association”).  The amendments replace rule provisions that provide an exemption for proprietary trading with narrower exemptions from Association membership for any registered broker or dealer that is a member of a national securities exchange, carries no customer accounts, and effects transactions in securities otherwise than on a national securities exchange of which it is a member.  The amendments create exemptions for such a registered broker or dealer that effects securities transactions otherwise than on an exchange of which it is a member that result solely from orders that are routed by a national securities exchange of which it is a member to comply with order protection regulatory requirements, or are solely for the purpose of executing the stock leg of a stock-option order.

Per Release No. IA-6383, the SEC is adopting new rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act” or “Act”). The rules are designed to protect investors who directly or indirectly invest in private funds by increasing visibility into certain practices involving compensation schemes, sales practices, and conflicts of interest through disclosure; establishing requirements to address such practices that have the potential to lead to investor harm; and restricting practices that are contrary to the public interest and the protection of investors. These rules are likewise designed to prevent fraud, deception, or manipulation by the investment advisers to those funds. Specifically, the new rules require registered investment advisers to private funds to provide transparency to their investors regarding the fees and expenses and other terms of their relationship with private fund advisers and the performance of such private funds. The new rules also require a registered private fund adviser to obtain an annual financial statement audit of each private fund it advises and, in connection with an adviser-led secondary transaction, a fairness opinion or valuation opinion from an independent opinion provider. In addition, the new rules restrict all private fund advisers, including those that are not registered with the SEC, from engaging in certain activities unless they provide specified disclosure to and, for certain restricted activities, obtain consent from investors. All private fund advisers are also prohibited from providing certain types of preferential treatment that would have a material, negative effect on other investors, subject to certain exceptions; and other types of preferential treatment to any investor in a private fund, unless the adviser satisfies certain disclosure obligations. The SEC is adopting corresponding amendments to the Advisers Act books and records rule to facilitate compliance with these new rules and assist our examination staff. Finally, the SEC is adopting amendments to the Advisers Act compliance rule, which affect all registered investment advisers, to better enable SEC staff to conduct examinations.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. IA-6384, the SEC is reopening the comment period for its proposal, Safeguarding Advisory Client Assets, Release No. IA-6240 (Feb. 15, 2023) (“Proposal”), which proposed a new rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act” or “Act”) that would redesignate and amend the current custody rule. In light of the adoption of the private fund adviser audit rule, which generally requires a registered investment adviser to obtain an annual financial statement audit of each private fund it advises in accordance with the audit provision of the current custody rule, reopening the comment period will allow interested persons additional time to assess the proposed amendments to the current custody rule’s audit provision in light of the private fund adviser audit rule.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in August.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in August.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in August.

NFA

Notices to Members

There were no NFA Notices to Members in August.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in August.

Hot Issue

In August, the SEC continued with its enforcement actions against broker-dealers for failing to preserve electronic communications. According to the SEC, this brings the total to 30 enforcement actions and $1.5 billion in penalties. In what is becoming a familiar script, the firms admitted that their employees (including supervisors and executives) often communicated through various messaging platforms on personal devices about the business of their employers, which were often not preserved in violation of federal securities laws. The SEC’s sustained enforcement activity in this area strongly suggests that firms should not delay taking the initiative to conduct meaningful reviews of their communication practices, policies and procedures.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Release 2023-149

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory News Update: SEC Announces Rule Proposal Targeting AI-Driven Conflicts of Interest https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sec-announces-rule-proposal-targeting-ai-driven-conflicts-of-interest/ https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sec-announces-rule-proposal-targeting-ai-driven-conflicts-of-interest/#respond Fri, 04 Aug 2023 14:55:32 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13864

What: SEC voted in a split 3-2 decision on July 26th to release a proposal […]

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Announces Rule Proposal Targeting AI-Driven Conflicts of Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

What: SEC voted in a split 3-2 decision on July 26th to release a proposal requiring the elimination or neutralization of conflicts related to conducting investor relations via artificial intelligence, predictive data analytics, etc.

Who: Proposed rules would apply to both Investment Advisers and Broker-Dealers

When: The proposal is currently open for comment. Initial comment period will close 60 following publication to the Federal Register (September 26th)

Why: Per the release, the proposal is designed to address situations where AI-driven technology places a firm’s interests ahead of the interests of customers, clients, and/or investors by optimizing, predicting, guiding, or directing their behavior to purchase certain investments, deploy strategies, or otherwise make investment-related decisions.

How: If adopted as written, the proposed rules will have implications for firms deploying AI solutions, and may impact or potentially come into conflict with existing suitability and Reg BI policies, procedures, and practices. Advisers and Broker-Dealers will need to examine relevant policies related to the identification, resolution, and disclosure of conflicts of interest, as well as all AI-driven investment practices and existing Reg BI and suitability practices.

CRC keeps its thumb on the pulse of the evolving regulatory landscape. Keep an eye out for additional information about the SEC’s AI-driven conflicts proposed rule, including updated proposals, rule finalization details, and CRC’s thoughts on how to ensure successful integration of new or updated rules within your firm’s existing regulatory compliance program.

Contact Mitch Avnet for further details: (646)346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

The post Regulatory News Update: SEC Announces Rule Proposal Targeting AI-Driven Conflicts of Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-news-update-sec-announces-rule-proposal-targeting-ai-driven-conflicts-of-interest/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-july-2023/ Tue, 01 Aug 2023 03:33:07 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=14058

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

There were no Regulatory Notices in July.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in July.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11211, the SEC is adopting amendments to certain rules that govern money market funds under the Investment Company Act of 1940. These amendments are designed to improve the resilience and transparency of money market funds. The amendments will revise the primary rule that governs money market funds to remove the ability for a fund board to temporarily suspend redemptions if the fund’s liquidity falls below a threshold. In addition, the amendments will remove the tie between liquidity thresholds and the potential imposition of liquidity fees. The amendments will also require certain money market funds to implement a liquidity fee framework that will better allocate the costs of providing liquidity to redeeming investors. In addition, the SEC is increasing the daily liquid asset and weekly liquid asset minimum requirements to 25% and 50%, respectively. The SEC also is amending certain reporting requirements on Form N-MFP and Form N-CR and making certain conforming changes to Form N-1A to reflect amendments to the regulatory framework for money market funds. In addition, the SEC is addressing how money market funds with stable net asset values may handle a negative interest rate environment, including by adopting amendments that will permit these funds to use share cancellation, subject to certain conditions. Further, the SEC is adopting rule amendments to specify how funds must calculate weighted average maturity and weighted average life. In addition, the SEC is adopting amendments to Form PF concerning the information large liquidity fund advisers must report for the liquidity funds they advise. Finally, the SEC is adopting two technical amendments to Form N-CSR and Form N-1A to correct errors from recent Commission rulemakings.

Per Release No. 33-11216, the SEC is adopting new rules to enhance and standardize disclosures regarding cybersecurity risk management, strategy, governance, and incidents by public companies that are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the SEC is adopting amendments to require current disclosure about material cybersecurity incidents. The SEC is also adopting rules requiring periodic disclosures about a registrant’s processes to assess, identify, and manage material cybersecurity risks, management’s role in assessing and managing material cybersecurity risks, and the board of directors’ oversight of cybersecurity risks. Lastly, the final rules require the cybersecurity disclosures to be presented in Inline eXtensible Business Reporting Language (“Inline XBRL”).

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-97877, the SEC proposes to amend the broker-dealer customer protection rule to require certain broker-dealers to perform their customer and broker-dealer reserve computations and make any required deposits into their reserve bank accounts daily rather than weekly. The SEC also is seeking comment on whether similar daily reserve computation requirements should apply to broker-dealers and security-based swap dealers with respect to their security-based swap customers.

Comments should be received on or before September 11, 2023.

Per Release No. 34-97990, the SEC is proposing new rules (“proposed conflicts rules”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) to eliminate, or neutralize the effect of, certain conflicts of interest associated with broker-dealers’ or investment advisers’ interactions with investors through these firms’ use of technologies that optimize for, predict, guide, forecast, or direct investment-related behaviors or outcomes. The SEC is also proposing amendments to rules under the Exchange Act and Advisers Act that would require firms to make and maintain certain records in accordance with the proposed conflicts rules.

The public comment period will remain open until 60 days after the date of publication of the proposing release in the Federal Register.

Per Release No. IA-6354, the SEC is proposing amendments to the rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 that exempts certain investment advisers that provide advisory services through the internet (“internet investment advisers”) from the prohibition on Commission registration, as well as related amendments to Form ADV. The proposed amendments are designed to modernize the rule’s conditions to account for the evolution in technology and the investment advisory industry since the adoption of the rule.

The public comment period will remain open until 60 days after the date of publication of the proposing release in the Federal Register.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in July.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in July.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in July.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-23-14

July 10, 2023

FCM and IB Members—FinCEN updates its list of FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies

On June 29, 2023, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a news release informing U.S. financial institutions of the Financial Action Task Force's (FATF) recent public statement. The statement reiterates that all jurisdictions should be vigilant of current and emerging risks from the circumvention of measures taken against the Russian Federation in order to protect the international financial system. The release also announced that the FATF reissued its list of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. NFA Member futures commission merchants (FCM) and introducing brokers (IB) should review this release to ensure that their AML programs have the most current information on FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies and revise their AML programs accordingly. A copy of the news release is available on FinCEN's website.

Notice I-23-15

July 25, 2023

Effective date for repeal of NFA Interpretive Notice regarding reduced NFA assessment fee for diminutive notional value-designated contracts

NFA recently repealed its Interpretive Notice entitled NFA Bylaw 1301(b): NFA's Assessment Fee-Diminutive Notional Value Contracts and Security Futures Products, to eliminate the reduced assessment fee for security futures products (SFP) and diminutive notional value (DNV)-designated contracts. This action becomes effective on January 1, 2024, at which time DNV-designated contracts1 will be subject to the assessment fee under NFA Bylaw 1301. The fee is currently $.04 per round turn. NFA's Board of Directors unanimously approved this repeal after concluding that NFA's regulatory oversight costs are the same for DNV-designated contracts as they are for other exchange traded futures products, and therefore the assessment fee should be the same.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in July.

Hot Issue

Broker-dealers and Investment Advisers, particularly FinTech firms, should monitor the SEC’s recent proposed rulemaking around conflicts of interest and predictive data analytics. Although any final rule would likely incorporate some changes resulting from public comments, the rule proposal demonstrates the SEC’s intent to build upon existing regulatory protections to address conflicts of interest from the use of artificial intelligence, predictive data analytics, or similar technologies in investor interactions. Firms that use or plan to use such technologies may want to begin planning for review of its processes for the purposes of identifying and evaluating potential conflicts of interest between the firm and its customers resulting from its use of predictive technologies. Such proactive steps will position firms to better gauge any potential impact to its business operations as the rulemaking proceeds.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notice to Members

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
SEC Recordkeeping Enforcement Continues to Result in Large Penalties for Off-Channel Communications https://compliance-risk.com/sec-recordkeeping-enforcement-continues-to-result-in-large-penalties-for-off-channel-communications/ https://compliance-risk.com/sec-recordkeeping-enforcement-continues-to-result-in-large-penalties-for-off-channel-communications/#respond Fri, 14 Jul 2023 14:18:02 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13847

The list of firms that have been charged in less than 12 months with recordkeeping […]

The post SEC Recordkeeping Enforcement Continues to Result in Large Penalties for Off-Channel Communications appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

The list of firms that have been charged in less than 12 months with recordkeeping failures for off-channel electronic communications continues to grow. Last month, the SEC charged HSBC Securities (USA) Inc. and Scotia Capital (USA) Inc. for widespread and longstanding failures by both firms and their employees to maintain and preserve electronic communications, which resulted in multimillion dollar SEC enforcement penalties for both broker-dealers. Their employees often communicated about securities business matters on their personal devices, using messaging platforms, such as Whatsapp. Most of these messages were not preserved and involved employees at multiple levels of authority, including supervisors and executives.

The SEC’s investigation of HSBC Securities (USA) Inc. and Scotia Capital (USA) Inc., both registered broker dealers, uncovered pervasive and longstanding use of off-channel communications at both firms. Messages sent through unapproved communications methods, such as WhatsApp and those sent from unapproved applications on personal devices, were not monitored, subject to review, or archived. According to the resulting SEC orders, the firms failed to implement a system of follow-up and review to determine that supervisors were reasonably following the firms’ policies and also failed to implement sufficient monitoring to assure that its recordkeeping and communications policies were being followed.

The recent actions follow enforcement activity against several other firms for recordkeeping failures in September 2022, in which those charged firms agreed to pay combined penalties of more than one billion dollars. However, it appears that one meaningful contrast between those earlier cases and the recent actions are that the published orders in 2022 reported that it was the SEC that discovered the misconduct through its investigations, but, in the recent actions both firms self-reported after having already initiated a review of their recordkeeping failures and begun a program of remediation prior to contacting the Division of Enforcement. One may draw the conclusion that the repeated references to proactive steps by HSBC and Scotia in identifying and addressing the recordkeeping issues were a relevant consideration that may help to explain the difference in the scale of the monetary penalties when comparing the two clusters of cases. In 2022, all but one of the charged firms had penalties of at least $50 million (most were $125 million), and while still significant, HSBC and Scotia were penalized $15 million and $7.5 million respectively.

Likewise, CRC believes that the best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. The SEC’s 2023 Examination Priorities report identified electronic communications as an examination focus area for both broker-dealers and registered investment advisers. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines after an examination has begun, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

What can firms do?

In one of the recent orders, the SEC highlighted several remedial steps taken by the firm, which included:

  • Clarifying the application of relevant policies;
  • Enhancing training to reinforce the requirement to use authorized communications channels; and
  • Providing clear messaging to employees from senior management regarding the use of unauthorized communication channels.

In addition to these shorter-term steps, the recent firms were also required to conduct reviews or assessments of:

  • Supervisory, compliance, and other policies and procedures;
  • Training and employee certifications;
  • Surveillance program measures;
  • Technological solutions to meet record retention requirements;
  • Measures used to prevent the use of unauthorized communications methods for business communications by employees;
  • Electronic communications surveillance routines to ensure that electronic communications through approved communications methods found on personal devices are incorporated into the overall surveillance program; and
  • The framework to address instances of non-compliance by employees with the firm’s policies and procedures concerning the use of personal devices for business communications in the past.

For more information about how CRC can help your firm, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

CRC is a business-focused team of senior compliance consultants and executives who furnish top-tier compliance advisory services to clients on an as-needed, project or part-time basis. We provide our clients with the critical skills and expertise required to establish, maintain and enhance a balanced and effective compliance operational risk management program. We help organizations demonstrate a commitment to a strong risk management culture. We bring a unique tailored approach to help our clients succeed in today’s challenging regulatory and economic environment, enabling and empowering our clients to manage the “cost of compliance” without sacrificing the necessary infrastructure and control environment.

The post SEC Recordkeeping Enforcement Continues to Result in Large Penalties for Off-Channel Communications appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/sec-recordkeeping-enforcement-continues-to-result-in-large-penalties-for-off-channel-communications/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-june-2023/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-june-2023/#respond Fri, 30 Jun 2023 13:38:48 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13837

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 23-11, FINRA is soliciting comment on a concept proposal to establish liquidity risk management requirements. The concept proposal describes a potential rule, labeled Rule 4610, that is intended to ensure that members have sufficient liquid assets to meet their funding needs in both normal and stressed conditions. Broadly, the proposal outlines three areas where a potential rule might address liquidity risk, including liquidity stress testing, contingent funding plans and a requirement to maintain sufficient liquidity on a current basis at all times. FINRA is issuing this concept proposal so that any feedback received can be taken into account as FINRA considers a proposed rule; any proposed rule would need to be reviewed and approved by the FINRA Board of Governors, and then filed with and approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission. FINRA welcomes comment on all aspects of the concept proposal, including comment on alternatives to the proposed approach.

The draft text of potential Rule 4610 is included as Attachment A.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in June.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-97656, the SEC is adopting a final rule, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), that is designed to prevent fraud, manipulation, and deception in connection with effecting any transaction in, or attempting to effect any transaction in, or purchasing or selling, or inducing or attempting to induce the purchase or sale of, any security-based swap. The rule takes into account the features fundamental to a security-based swap and the broad definitions of purchase and sale under the Exchange Act as they relate to security-based swaps. In addition, the Commission is adopting a final rule, under the Exchange Act, that makes it unlawful for any officer, director, supervised person, or employee of a security-based swap dealer (“SBSD”) or major security-based swap participant (“MSBSP”) (each SBSD and each MSBSP also referred to as an “SBS Entity” and together referred to as “SBS Entities”), or any person acting under such person’s direction, to directly or indirectly take any action to coerce, manipulate, mislead, or fraudulently influence the SBS Entity’s chief compliance officer (“CCO”) in the performance of their duties under the Federal securities laws or the rules and regulations thereunder.

Per Release No. 34-97657, the SEC is adopting rule amendments to implement section 939A(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”), which requires, among other things, that the SEC remove from its regulations any references to credit ratings and substitute in their place alternative standards of creditworthiness. The amendments remove certain existing rule exceptions that reference credit ratings for nonconvertible debt securities, nonconvertible preferred securities, and asset-backed securities and substitute in their place new exceptions that are based on alternative standards of creditworthiness. These substitutes include exceptions for nonconvertible debt securities and nonconvertible preferred securities (together, “Nonconvertible Securities”) of issuers who meet a specified probability of default threshold, as well as exceptions for asset-backed securities that are offered pursuant to an effective shelf registration statement filed on a certain form that is tailored to asset-backed securities offerings. The SEC is also adopting an amendment to a recordkeeping rule applicable to broker-dealers in connection with their reliance on an exception involving probability of default determinations.

Per Release No. 33-11205, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. EDGAR Release 23.2 will be deployed in the EDGAR system on June 20, 2023.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-97762, the SEC is reopening the comment period for its proposal, Position Reporting of Large Security-Based Swap Positions, Release No. 34-93784, (Dec. 15, 2021) (“Proposing Release”). In the Proposing Release, the SEC proposed for comment a new rule, which would require any person with a security-based swap position that exceeds a certain threshold to promptly file with the SEC a schedule disclosing certain information related to its security-based swap position (“Proposed Rule”). The SEC is reopening the comment period to allow interested persons an opportunity to comment on the additional analysis and data contained in a staff memorandum that was added to the public comment file on June 20, 2023, including providing comment on questions identified below.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in June.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in June.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in June.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-23-12

June 5, 2023

Information regarding NFA's upcoming move to new Chicago office space

NFA's Chicago headquarters will move to a new location next week. Effective Monday, June 12th, NFA will be located at 320 South Canal, Suite 2400, Chicago, IL 60606. All mail sent to NFA after June 12th should be sent to the new address.

Notice I-23-13

June 29, 2023

Effective date of amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws to implement changes to NFA's governance structure

The CFTC recently approved amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws to implement the recommendations of an NFA Board of Directors-appointed Special Committee on NFA Governance. The amendments, which are effective February 15, 2024, will:

  • Reduce the size of the Board and modify its composition;
  • Adopt Director and Board Chair term limits;
  • Require that a Director complete one full two-year term before being eligible to serve as Board Chair;
  • Eliminate the position of Board Vice Chair;
  • Reduce the size of the Executive Committee and modify its composition and the process for electing Directors to the Executive Committee;
  • Create a Nominating and Governance Committee to advise the Board on corporate governance matters, nominate Public Representative candidates and make recommendations to the Board regarding Directors to serve on various Board Committees;
  • Amend the Public Representative definition;
  • Modify the composition of the CPO/CTA Nominating Committee to mirror the composition of the CPO/CTA Board category's seats; and
  • Make other technical amendments.

NFA's Board unanimously approved these amendments at its November 17, 2022, meeting. In accordance with Article XVII, the proposed amendments to NFA's Articles were submitted to a ballot vote of NFA Members, and on February 14, 2023, Corporate Election Services, an external tabulation service overseeing the ballot process, certified that Members voted in favor of the amendments.

NFA's March 13, 2023, submission letter to the CFTC contains more detailed information regarding these amendments.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in June.

Hot Issue

Off-channel communications continue to be a hot issue with the SEC with the potential for significant enforcement consequences.

In May, the SEC charged HSBC Securities (USA) Inc. and Scotia Capital (USA) Inc. for widespread and longstanding failures by both firms and their employees to maintain and preserve electronic communications. To settle the charges, HSBC and Scotia agreed to pay penalties of $15 million and $7.5 million, respectively. As described in the SEC’s orders, the firms admitted that their employees often communicated “off-channel” about securities business matters on their personal devices, using messaging platforms, such as WhatsApp. Neither firm maintained or preserved the substantial majority of these communications, in violation of the federal securities laws. The failings involved employees at multiple levels of authority, including supervisors and senior executives.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA June 2023 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Release 2023-91

NFA Notice to Members

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-june-2023/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (May 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-may-2023/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-may-2023/#respond Fri, 09 Jun 2023 15:15:06 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13825

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (May 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Regulatory Notice 23-07, FINRA has adopted amendments to Rule 8312 (FINRA BrokerCheck Disclosure) to release information on BrokerCheck as to whether a particular current or former member firm is currently designated as a Restricted Firm pursuant to FINRA Rules 4111 (Restricted Firm Obligations) and 9561 (Procedures for Regulating Activities Under Rule 4111).

The new rule amendments become effective on June 1, 2023.

The amended rule text is available in Attachment A.

Per Regulatory Notice 23-08, FINRA reminds members of their obligations when selling private placements (i.e., unregistered offerings sold pursuant to the Regulation D safe harbors under Sections 3 and 4 of the Securities Act of 1933 (Securities Act)). In Regulatory Notice 10-22 (Obligation of Broker-Dealers to Conduct Reasonable Investigations in Regulation D Offerings), FINRA reminded members of their obligations to conduct reasonable investigations of the issuers and the securities they recommend in private offerings made under Regulation D. In the years since FINRA published Regulatory Notice 10-22, the unregistered offering market and the related regulatory landscape have evolved, and FINRA has observed both areas of concern and effective practices in the sales of private placements by members. This Notice updates and supplements the prior guidance in light of those developments and observations. It is not intended to alter the principles or the guidance FINRA provided in prior Regulatory Notices

This Notice highlights a member’s obligation, when recommending a security, to conduct a reasonable investigation of the security. This duty has long been rooted in the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws and is a core component of a broker-dealer’s obligations under Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) and FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability), the fundamental standards that members must meet when recommending securities. This Notice also addresses certain additional obligations for members when selling private placements, including FINRA’s filing requirements and its communications with the public and supervision rules.

This Notice does not create new legal or regulatory requirements or new interpretations of existing requirements, nor does it relieve firms of any existing obligations under federal securities laws and regulations. Members may consider the information in this Notice in developing new, or modifying existing, practices that are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with relevant regulatory obligations based on the member’s size and business model. 

FINRA notes that it is issuing a companion notice, Regulatory Notice 23-09, requesting comment on whether changes to FINRA rules, operations or administrative processes would enhance the capital-raising process without compromising protections for investors and issuers. FINRA encourages members to provide feedback pursuant to that Notice.

Per Regulatory Notice 23-09, FINRA promotes the capital raising process through appropriately tailored rules for its members that are designed to promote transparency and to establish important standards of conduct for the benefit of all market participants, including investors and issuers.

In 2017, in Regulatory Notice 17-14, FINRA requested comment on ways to increase efficiency and reduce unnecessary burdens on the capital raising process. Since that time, FINRA has completed certain actions (including rule changes) and is undertaking additional actions, that promote capital formation. While these actions increase efficiency and reduce unnecessary burdens on the capital-raising process, FINRA is requesting comment on whether additional changes to these or other FINRA rules, operations or administrative processes would further enhance the capital-raising process without compromising protections for investors and issuers.

Comment Period Expires: August 7, 2023

Per Regulatory Notice 23-10, FINRA requests comment on a proposal to facilitate centralized access to members’ order execution quality reports for NMS stocks that are required to be published by market centers under Rule 605 of Regulation NMS. Under the proposal, FINRA members would be required to provide their Rule 605 reports to FINRA, which FINRA would publish in a centralized location on the FINRA website.

Comment Period Expires: July 31, 2023

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in May.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-97424, the SEC is adopting amendments to modernize and improve disclosure about repurchases of an issuer’s equity securities that are registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The amendments require additional detail regarding the structure of an issuer’s repurchase program and its share repurchases, require the filing of daily quantitative repurchase data either quarterly or semi-annually, and eliminate the requirement to file monthly repurchase data in an issuer’s periodic reports. The amendments also revise and expand the existing periodic disclosure requirements about these repurchases. Finally, the amendments add new quarterly disclosure in certain periodic reports related to an issuer’s adoption and termination of certain trading arrangements. This final rule is effective on July 31, 2023.

Per Release No. IA-6297, the SEC is adopting amendments to Form PF, the confidential reporting form for certain SEC-registered investment advisers to private funds to require event reporting upon the occurrence of key events. The amendments also require large private equity fund advisers to provide additional information to the SEC about the private equity funds they advise. The reporting requirements are designed to
enhance the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s (“FSOC”) ability to monitor systemic risk as well as bolster the SEC’s regulatory oversight of private fund advisers and investor protection efforts.

Per Release No. 34-97478, the SEC is making technical amendments to Form BD and Form BDW, the uniform broker-dealer registration form and the uniform request for withdrawal from broker-dealer registration, respectively. The technical amendments will update the current list of self-regulatory organizations (“SROs”) and government jurisdictions listed on Form BD and Form BDW, and make conforming changes to the definition of “jurisdiction” in the forms.

Per Release No. 33-11197, the SEC is adopting technical amendments to various rules and forms under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”), as well as to the rule setting forth undertakings that certain registrants must include in their registration statements, and to the general authority provision corresponding to SEC rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Investment Advisers Act”). These revisions make changes to correct errors that are technical in nature, including typographical errors and erroneous cross-references in various SEC rules and
forms.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-97516, the SEC is proposing to amend certain portions of the Covered Clearing Agency Standards under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to strengthen the existing rules regarding margin with respect to intraday margin and the use of substantive inputs to a covered clearing agency’s risk-based margin system. The SEC is also proposing a new rule to establish requirements for the contents of a covered clearing agency’s recovery and wind-down plan.

Comments should be received on or before July 17, 2023.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in May.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in May.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in May.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-23-11

May 24, 2023

FINRA adjusts online testing requirements for candidates seeking to take futures industry proficiency exams

FINRA administers the futures industry proficiency exams on behalf of NFA, including the Series 3, Series 30, Series 31, Series 32 and Series 34. Beginning Friday, June 9, 2023, FINRA will end its interim accommodation process, and only certain individuals will be able to request online administration of these exams. These individuals include:

  • Those experiencing underlying health conditions or are immunocompromised and at an increased risk for severe illness; or
  • Those who live more than 150 miles from a test center.

Candidates can visit FINRA's website for more information about proficiency exam administration and how to request available accommodations.

Note that NFA's Swaps Proficiency Requirements are not impacted by this change.

News Releases

May 10, 2023

FINRA and NFA Discuss Crypto Assets at Special Summit

FINRA, NFA Expand MOU to Include Information Sharing, Collaboration

May 10, Washington—FINRA and NFA recently held a special summit focused on crypto assets and agreed to expand their Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to address crypto activities that fall within their respective regulatory mandates.

During the day-long summit held at FINRA's San Francisco office, crypto and blockchain experts from both organizations met to share regulatory intelligence and ways to leverage new technology. FINRA and NFA also discussed the importance of investor protection, as well as potential risks, reporting and supervisory obligations associated with crypto-related activities.

The meeting culminated in an agreement to expand the existing MOU to address information sharing and collaboration regarding crypto assets, blockchain technology developments and crypto asset regulatory risks.

"We are excited to build on our strong relationship with our colleagues at NFA in finding new ways to benefit from one another's deep expertise," said Greg Ruppert, Executive Vice President, Member Supervision at FINRA. "Maintaining effective regulatory partnership and information sharing across various products and asset classes helps each of our organizations better serve the investing public."

"NFA looks forward to collaborating with FINRA as the crypto market continues to evolve," said Regina Thoele, Senior Vice President, Compliance at NFA. "By leveraging our shared expertise, we can continue enhancing our investor protection efforts in light of market developments."

Hot Issue

Off-channel communications continue to be a hot issue with the SEC with the potential for significant enforcement consequences.

In May, the SEC charged HSBC Securities (USA) Inc. and Scotia Capital (USA) Inc. for widespread and longstanding failures by both firms and their employees to maintain and preserve electronic communications. To settle the charges, HSBC and Scotia agreed to pay penalties of $15 million and $7.5 million, respectively. As described in the SEC’s orders, the firms admitted that their employees often communicated “off-channel” about securities business matters on their personal devices, using messaging platforms, such as WhatsApp. Neither firm maintained or preserved the substantial majority of these communications, in violation of the federal securities laws. The failings involved employees at multiple levels of authority, including supervisors and senior executives.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA May 2023 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Release
  • NFA Notice to Members
  • NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (May 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-may-2023/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (April 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-april-2023/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-april-2023/#respond Thu, 11 May 2023 13:16:12 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13815

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (April 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

There were no Regulatory Notices in April.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in April.

SEC

Final Rules

There were no final rules in April.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-97309, the SEC is reopening the comment period for its proposal (“Proposed Rules”) to amend the rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that defines certain terms used in the statutory definition of “exchange.” The reopening provides supplemental information and economic analysis regarding trading systems that trade crypto asset securities that would be newly included in the definition of “exchange” under the Proposed Rules. The SEC is requesting further information and public comment on certain aspects of the Proposed Rules as applicable to all securities and the compliance dates and other alternatives for the Proposed Rules. The Proposed Rules were set forth in Release No. 34-94062 (“Proposing Release”), and the related comment period, which was reopened in Release No. 34-94868 on May 9, 2022, ended on June 13, 2022. The reopening of this comment period is intended to allow interested persons further opportunity to analyze and comment on the Proposed Rules in light of the supplemental information provided herein (“Reopening Release”).

Per Release No. 33-11180, the SEC is reopening the comment period for its proposal, Modernization of Beneficial Ownership Reporting, Release No. 33-11030, (Feb. 10, 2022) (“Proposing Release”). In the Proposing Release, the SEC proposed to amend certain rules that govern beneficial ownership reporting (“Proposed Amendments”). The Proposed Amendments would modernize the filing deadlines for initial and amended beneficial ownership reports filed on Schedules 13D and 13G. The Proposed Amendments also would deem holders of certain cash-settled derivative securities as beneficial owners of the reference equity securities and clarify the disclosure requirements of Schedule 13D with respect to derivative securities. In addition, the Proposed Amendments would clarify and affirm the operation of the beneficial ownership reporting rules as applied to two or more persons that form a group under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and provide new exemptions to permit such persons to communicate and consult with each other, jointly engage issuers, and execute certain transactions without being subject to regulation as a group. Finally, the Proposed Amendments would require that Schedules 13D and 13G be filed using a structured, machine-readable data language. The SEC is reopening the comment period to allow interested persons an opportunity to comment on the additional analysis and data contained in a staff memorandum that was added to the public comment file on April 28, 2023.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in April.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in April.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in April.

NFA

There were no Notices to Members in April.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in April.

Hot Issue

Although the initial compliance date for the amended Rule 17a-4 (broker-dealer records rule) came and went on May 3, 2023, the new requirements and options with respect to books and records maintained on electronic recordkeeping systems should be an ongoing consideration for broker-dealers. If you need help evaluating your systems and program for compliance with the new requirements, please contact CRC.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • SEC Regulatory Actions

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (April 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-april-2023/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-february-2023/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-february-2023/#respond Wed, 08 Mar 2023 14:35:04 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13785

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 23-03, FINRA established an accounting support fee (GASB Accounting Support Fee) in February 2012 pursuant to an SEC order to adequately fund the annual budget of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The GASB Accounting Support Fee is collected on a quarterly basis from member firms that report trades to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB). Each member firm’s assessment is based on its portion of the total par value of municipal securities transactions reported by all FINRA member firms to the MSRB during the previous quarter. FINRA will assess and collect a total of $14,403,500 to adequately fund GASB’s annual budget by collecting $3,600,875 from its member firms each calendar quarter beginning in April 2023.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in February.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-96930, the SEC is adopting rule amendments to shorten the standard settlement cycle for most broker-dealer transactions from two business days after the trade date (“T+2”) to one business day after the trade date (“T+1”). In addition, the SEC is adopting new rules related to the processing of institutional trades by broker-dealers and certain clearing agencies. The SEC is also amending certain recordkeeping requirements applicable to registered investment advisers.

Per Release No. 33-11159, the SEC is adopting an amendment to Regulation S-T to extend the filing deadline for Form 144 from 5:30 p.m. to 10 p.m., Eastern Standard Time or Eastern Daylight Saving Time, whichever is currently in effect, on SEC business days. The SEC is also adopting technical amendments to enhance the consistency of recently revised provisions related to the filing format of Form 144.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-96906, the SEC is proposing amendments to the SEC’s regulations under the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (“Privacy Act”). The proposed amendments would revise the SEC’s regulations under the Privacy Act to clarify, update, and streamline the language of several procedural provisions.

Per Release No. IA-6240, the SEC is proposing a new rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act” or “Act”) to address how investment advisers safeguard client assets. To effect the redesignation of the current custody rule for the proposed new safeguarding rule, the SEC is proposing to renumber the current rule. In addition the SEC is proposing to amend certain provisions of the current custody rule for enhanced investor protections. The SEC is proposing corresponding amendments to the recordkeeping rule under the Advisers Act and to Form ADV for investment adviser registration under the Advisers Act.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in February.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in February.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in February.

NFA

Notice I-23-04

February 6, 2023

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for SD Members

NFA is committed to providing its Members with the resources they need to meet their regulatory obligations as efficiently as possible. This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, swap dealer (SD) Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes several regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations.

Daily Trading Records: SD Members are required to make and keep daily trading records of all swaps executed, including all documents on which transaction information is originally recorded, pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.202. SD Members should consider taking preventative measures against the use of unauthorized or unrecorded channels for pre-execution trade communications.

Supervision: SD Members are required to have a supervisory program and must diligently supervise all activities relating to their business pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.602.

Business Conduct Standards: SD Members are required to obtain and retain a record of essential facts to accurately categorize their counterparties to facilitate compliance with various regulatory requirements pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.402. The failure to properly identify and classify counterparties may result in non-compliance with other transaction-specific requirements. Additionally, SD Members are required to make several disclosures to non-SD counterparties pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.431. A common deficiency in this area is a failure to disclose material information and pre-trade mid-market marks to counterparties prior to entering into uncleared swap transactions.

Market Practice: SD Members are required to implement policies and procedures designed to prevent fraud, manipulation and other abusive practices prohibited by CFTC Regulation 23.410. Additionally, SD Members are required to communicate with counterparties in a fair and balanced manner as detailed in CFTC Regulation 23.433. Common deficiencies in this area include:

  • Failure to implement adequate trade surveillance to detect fraud, manipulation and abusive practices; and
  • Failure to conduct communication surveillance reasonably designed to ensure fair and balanced communications and the prohibition of fraud, manipulation and other abusive practices.

Portfolio Reconciliation: SD Members must engage in portfolio reconciliation pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.502. Firms are required to establish, maintain and follow written procedures to resolve discrepancies identified by portfolio reconciliation.

Swap Valuation Disputes: SD Members, including non-U.S. SDs relying on substituted compliance with respect to CFTC Regulation 23.502, must submit valuation disputes to NFA as set forth in Interpretive Notice 9072.

Swap Data Reporting: SD Members must report swap transaction data to swap data repositories pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.204 and CFTC Regulation 23.205. Additionally, they must report corrections of identified errors or omissions as soon as technologically practicable (ASATP) after discovery. Common deficiencies in this area include:

  • Failure to report required regulatory messages, either at all or within the regulatory timeframes;
  • Failure to report accurately required data fields to the SDR; and
  • Failure to remediate errors and omissions ASATP after discovery.

Ongoing Updates

On an ongoing basis, each NFA Member must update its Annual Questionnaire in the event of a material change to its operations. For example, if a Member begins to hold or transact in digital assets, the Member must immediately update its Annual Questionnaire. Doing so ensures that NFA has correct information about the firm's business activities and that the firm receives all applicable notices relating to its reporting requirements in a timely manner.

Recent Amendments and Reminders

Capital Requirements: The compliance date for CFTC minimum capital requirements was October 6, 2021. SD Members subject to CFTC minimum capital requirements must maintain regulatory capital as defined under the bank holding company regulations in 12 CFR Part 217 as if the SD itself were a bank holding company or as defined in SEC Regulation 240.18a-1 as if the SD were a security-based SD registered with the SEC. Certain SDs that are predominately engaged in non-financial activities may instead choose to maintain tangible net worth in an amount equal to or in excess of minimum capital requirements. Regulatory capital, tangible net worth and minimum capital requirements are determined at the legal entity level. Additionally, when internal models are used to determine regulatory capital or minimum capital requirements, the SD must demonstrate independent model validation and ongoing performance monitoring of the SD's own use of the internal models at the legal entity level.

Phase VI Margin Requirements: The compliance date for entities in scope for Phase VI of the CFTC's final margin rules was September 1, 2022. SD Members without a prudential regulator must exchange initial margin with all covered counterparties exceeding initial margin threshold amounts.

Reporting Requirements: The compliance date for the CFTC's amendments to its final rules for SD reporting was December 5, 2022. The final rules revise the current CFTC reporting requirements to improve the quality, accuracy and completeness of the reporting data. Included in the amended rules are requirements for each reporting counterparty to compare swap data maintained by the relevant SDR to swap data in the firm's own internal records to verify accuracy and completeness of reported swap data.

Position Limits: The compliance date for CFTC's position limits regulations was January 1, 2023. SD Members must establish and enforce written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to monitor for, and prevent violations of, applicable position limits.

Recent Notices to Members

I-21-30: Effective date for amendment imposing a late fee for certain SD filings and new Interpretive Notice clarifying existing SD filing requirements

I-22-27: SD holiday filing requirements

I-22-20: Reminder: NFA Member cybersecurity responsibilities

I-22-18: SD notice filing requirements under CFTC Regulation 23.154

I-22-15: Proxies and Approximations Related to Alternative Reference Rates and Other Indices for Initial Margin Model Purposes

I-22-08: NFA encourages Members to monitor U.S. sanctions on Russia and be vigilant of cybersecurity threats

Notice I-23-05

February 6, 2023

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for CPO and CTA Members

NFA is committed to providing its Members with the resources they need to meet their regulatory obligations as efficiently as possible. This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Commodity Pool Operators (CPO)

Commodity Trading Advisors (CTA)

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes a number of regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations of CPO and CTA Members.

Self-Examination Questionnaire

NFA Members must annually review their operations using NFA's Self-Examination Questionnaire. This questionnaire is designed to aid Members in recognizing potential problem areas and to alert them to procedures that need to be revised or strengthened. A common deficiency in this area includes failing to review the questionnaire on an annual basis. NFA encounters firms with deficient policies and procedures, indicating an inadequate review of the self-examination questionnaire. Thorough questionnaire completion and review ensures firms are alerted to deficient policies and procedures that should be updated to comply with NFA rules.

Digital Assets

Members engaging in activities related to digital assets or digital asset derivatives must comply with the customer disclosure requirements established in NFA's Interpretive Notice 9073.

Third Party Service Providers

Members that outsource regulatory functions must adopt and implement a written supervisory framework over outsourced functions to mitigate outsourcing-related risks pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9079. The supervisory framework must address activities the firm will undertake with respect to initial risk assessment, onboarding due diligence, ongoing monitoring, termination and recordkeeping. Appendix E of the Self-Examination Questionnaire includes several questions intended to help Members understand these requirements. Firms must also maintain records demonstrating that they have addressed the items outlined in the Interpretive Notice and are following their procedures.

Cybersecurity

CPO and CTA Members must adopt a written information systems security program (ISSP) pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9070 to address the risk of unauthorized access to or attack of their information technology systems and to respond appropriately should unauthorized attacks occur. Members are also required to notify NFA of certain cybersecurity incidents related to their commodity interest activities via NFA's Cyber Notice Filing System. One common deficiency in this area is failure to provide cybersecurity training to employees upon hiring and annually thereafter.

Members that fail to establish and implement an ISSP may be subject to disciplinary action.

Pool Financial Reporting—Notification Requirements

Notice Filing Requirements: CPOs are required to file notice with NFA when a market or other event affects a commodity pool's ability to fulfill its participant obligations. Notice must be filed by 5:00 p.m. CT the next business day following one of the events outlined in Compliance Rule 2-50 and Interpretive Notice 9080.

Changes in Fiscal Year End: If a CPO elects a fiscal year end other than the calendar year end for a pool, it must give written notice of the election to all participants and file notice with NFA via EasyFile pursuant to CFTC Regulation 4.22(g) within 90 calendar days after the pool's formation. If this notice is not given, the CPO will be deemed to have elected the calendar year end as the pool's fiscal year end. The CPO must continue to use the elected fiscal year end for the pool unless it provides written notice of any proposed change to all participants and files such notice with NFA via EasyFile at least 90 days before the change.

Changes in Certified Public Accountant (CPA): In the event that a CPO changes the independent CPA engaged to audit a pool's financial statements, the CPO must file notice with NFA via EasyFile pursuant to CFTC Regulation 1.16(g) no more than 15 days after the CPA's resignation or dismissal by the CPO.

Extension Requests: If a CPO requests an extension to file an annual pool financial statement, the extension must be filed with NFA via EasyFile prior to the due date of the filing.

Cessation of Trading: When a pool ceases trading, the CPO must promptly update the Annual Questionnaire. With few exceptions, a CPO must also distribute to participants a final Annual Report and file the Annual Report with NFA. This Annual Report is due within 90 days after the pool ceases trading, absent an extension.

Calculation of Financial Ratios

CPO and CTA Members must compute financial ratios using the accrual method of accounting and in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles or another internationally recognized accounting standard as outlined in Interpretive Notice 9071. Members should consult Notice I-18-20 for additional guidance on calculating these ratios.

Financial Reporting: With few exceptions, each CPO Members must distribute an Annual Report, certified by an independent public accountant, to pool participants within 90 days of the pool's fiscal year-end or the permanent cessation of trading, whichever is earlier. Each CPO must also report to NFA on a quarterly basis specific information about the firm and the pools it operates. These pool quarterly reports (PQRs) are due within 60 days of each calendar quarter end. Each PQR filed after its due date will be subject to a late filing fee of $200 for each business day it is late.

CTA Members that direct trading of commodity interests are required to file a quarterly CTA Form PR report within 45 days of the quarter end. Each Form PR report filed after its due date will be subject to a late filing fee of $200 for each business day it is late. CTAs that commence trading client accounts during a quarter must update the Annual Questionnaire immediately to receive timely reporting notifications.

As a reminder, NFA views late filings as a serious rule violation, and we have taken disciplinary action against Member firms in the past for filing reports after the due date.

Ongoing Updates

On an ongoing basis, each NFA Member must update its Annual Questionnaire in the event of a material change to its operations. For example, if a Member begins doing business or begins soliciting for digital asset or micro contract products, the Member must immediately update its Annual Questionnaire. Doing so ensures that NFA's BASIC system displays correct information about the firm's business activities and ensures the firm receives all applicable notices relating to its reporting requirements in a timely manner.

A CPO Member who operates an umbrella-series structure (i.e., a single legal entity that has several distinct sub-funds which, in effect, are traded as individual funds) needs to list the umbrella entity with NFA through the Annual Questionnaire and mark it as such. CPOs may also identify the series funds that are tied to that umbrella through the questionnaire. Exemptions must be claimed at the umbrella level and must apply to the structure as a whole.

Recent Amendments and Reminders

The following links contain Notices to Members regarding reminders and recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

I-22-25: Guidance on the annual affirmation requirement for entities currently operating under an exemption from CPO or CTA registration

I-22-20: Reminder: NFA Member cybersecurity responsibilities

I-22-10: Reminder: CPO notice filing requirements under Compliance Rule 2-50

I-22-08: NFA encourages Members to monitor U.S. sanctions on Russia and be vigilant of cybersecurity threats

I-22-05: Extension of relief from the on-site annual inspection of branch offices and guaranteed IBs

I-22-01: Member obligations under NFA Bylaw 1101 and Compliance Rule 2-36(d) with respect to CPOs/CTAs exempt from registration

Notice I-23-06

February 6, 2023

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for FCM, FDM and IB Members

NFA is committed to providing its Members with the resources they need to meet their regulatory obligations as efficiently as possible. This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Futures Commission Merchants (FCM)

Forex Dealer Members (FDM)

Introducing Brokers (IB)

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes several regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations of Member FCMs for which NFA is the DSRO, FDMs and IBs.

Self-Examination Questionnaire: NFA Members must annually review their operations using NFA's Self-Examination Questionnaire. This questionnaire is designed to aid Members in recognizing potential problem areas and to alert them to procedures that need to be revised or strengthened. A common deficiency in this area includes failing to review the questionnaire on an annual basis. NFA encounters firms with deficient policies and procedures, indicating an inadequate review of the self-examination questionnaire. Thorough questionnaire completion and review ensures firms are alerted to deficient policies and procedures that should be updated to comply with NFA rules.

Supervision: FCM, FDMs and IBs Members must have written supervisory policies and procedures to address the manner, frequency and results of monitoring written and oral communications. Such supervision includes, when required1, maintaining a record of all oral and written communications provided or received concerning quotes, solicitations, bids, offers, instructions, trading and prices that lead to the execution of a transaction in a commodity interest and related cash or forward transaction, whether communicated by telephone, voicemail, facsimile, instant messaging, chat rooms, electronic mail, mobile device or other digital or electronic media. Common deficiencies in this area include firms not maintaining all required communications, failing to identify brokers using unapproved and unrecorded communication methods and permitting unregistered individuals to act as associated persons.

Digital Assets: Members engaging in activities related to digital assets or digital asset derivatives must comply with the customer disclosure requirements established in NFA's Interpretive Notice 9073.

Third Party Service Providers: Members that outsource regulatory functions must adopt and implement a written supervisory framework over outsourced functions to mitigate outsourcing-related risks pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9079. The supervisory framework must address activities the firm will undertake with respect to initial risk assessment, onboarding due diligence, ongoing monitoring, termination and recordkeeping. Appendix E of the Self-Examination Questionnaire includes several questions to help Members understand these requirements. Firms must also maintain records demonstrating that they have addressed the items outlined in the Interpretive Notice and are following their procedures.

Cybersecurity: FCM, FDM and IB Members must adopt a written information systems security program (ISSP) pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9070 to address the risk of unauthorized access to or attack of their information technology systems and to respond appropriately should unauthorized attacks occur. Members are also required to notify NFA of certain cybersecurity incidents related to their commodity interest activities via NFA's Cyber Notice Filing System. One common deficiency in this area is failure to provide cybersecurity training to employees upon hiring and annually thereafter.

Members that fail to establish and implement an ISSP may be subject to disciplinary action.

Financial Reporting: FCM, FDM and IB Members must periodically file financial reports. Each financial report filed late will be subject to a fee of $1,000 for each business day it is late. Firms that fail to file financial reports in a timely manner may be subject to disciplinary action.

Ongoing Updates

On an ongoing basis, each NFA Member must update its Annual Questionnaire in the event of a material change to its operations. For example, if a Member begins doing business or begins soliciting for digital asset or micro contract products, the Member must immediately update its Annual Questionnaire. Doing so ensures that NFA's BASIC system displays correct information about the firm's business activities and ensures the firm receives all applicable notices relating to its reporting requirements in a timely manner.

Recent Amendments and Reminders

The following links contain Notices to Members regarding reminders and recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

I-22-20: Reminder: NFA Member cybersecurity responsibilities

I-22-17: Forex Dealer Members: Effective date for amendment to NFA Compliance Rule 2-43

I-22-09: FinCEN issues alert on potential Russian sanctions evasion efforts and reminds financial institutions of SAR and other reporting obligations

I-22-08: NFA encourages Members to monitor U.S. sanctions on Russia and be vigilant of cybersecurity threats

I-22-05: Extension of relief from the on-site annual inspection of branch offices and guaranteed IBs

I-22-01: Member obligations under NFA Bylaw 1101 and Compliance Rule 2-36(d) with respect to CPOs/CTAs exempt from registration

Notice I-23-07

February 23, 2023

NFA's Board of Directors re-elects Maureen C. Downs to serve as Chair

At its February meeting, NFA's Board of Directors re-elected Maureen C. Downs, Phillip Capital, Inc., to serve a one-year term as Chair. The Board also re-elected Don Thompson, JPMorgan Chase & Co., to serve as Vice-Chair.

Public Directors

Additionally at its February meeting, the Board elected the following individuals to serve as public directors:

  • Michael C. Dawley, BlueFin Partners LLC;
  • Douglas E. Harris;
  • Ronald S. Oppenheimer;
  • Todd E. Petzel, Offit Capital Advisors LLC; and
  • Michael R. Schaefer.

Executive Committee

The Board also elected the following individuals to serve one-year terms on NFA's Executive Committee:

  • Mark G. Bagan, Minneapolis Grain Exchange;
  • Douglas L. Bry, Augur Trading Company;
  • Gerald F. Corcoran, R.J. O'Brien & Associates LLC;
  • Michael C. Dawley, Bluefin Partners LLC;
  • Arthur W. Hahn;
  • Julie Holzrichter, CME Group;
  • Ernest L. Jaffarian, Efficient Capital Management LLC;
  • William F. McCoy, Morgan Stanley;
  • Mary M. McDonnell, McDonnell & Associates;
  • Michael H. Moskow, The Chicago Council on Global Affairs;
  • Ronald S. Oppenheimer;
  • Scott W. Stewart, Stewart-Peterson Group, Inc.; and
  • Don Thompson, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Ms. Downs, NFA Permanent Special Advisor Leo Melamed, and NFA's President also serve on the Executive Committee.

During its meeting on January 19, 2023, NFA's Executive Committee, pursuant to Article VII, Section (3)(c) and Article X, Section 3 of NFA's Articles of Incorporation, elected the following nominees to the Board and Nominating Committee:

Board of Directors

FCM Category:

  • Thomas R. Kadlec, ADM Investor Services, Inc.

IB Category:

  • Michael T. Burke, HighGround Trading LLC

CPO/CTA Category:

  • Ernest L. Jaffarian, Efficient Capital Management LLC
  • Martin Lueck, Aspect Capital Limited

SD/MSP/RFED Category:

  • Seth P. Bender, HSBC Bank USA, NA
  • Charlotte B. McLaughlin, PNC Capital Markets LLC

2023 NFA Nominating Committee

FCM Category:

  • Melissa B. Zierk, R.J. O'Brien & Associates LLC

IB Category:

  • Ilan Levy-Mayer, Cannon Trading Company

CPO/CTA Category:

  • Tobias B. Hekster, True Partner Advisor Limited

SD/MSP/RFED Category:

  • Thomas Salatte, Nomura Holding America Inc.

The terms of NFA's Board of Directors and Nominating Committee began on February 16, 2023.

A complete list of NFA's Board of Directors, Executive Committee, and Nominating Committee can be found on NFA's website.

News Releases

For Immediate Release
February 16, 2023

NFA orders Sioux Falls, S.D. introducing broker VBI Company to pay a $135,000 fine

February 16, Chicago—NFA has ordered Sioux Falls, S.D. introducing broker Member VBI Company (VBI) to pay a $135,000 fine. Peter Mark Vanden Berge, an associated person and principal of VBI, shares liability with the firm jointly and severally for the fine.

The Decision, issued by an NFA Hearing Panel, is based on a Complaint issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC) and a settlement offer submitted by VBI and Vanden Berge. In the settlement offer, the firm and Vanden Berge neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint.

The BCC's Complaint alleged that VBI violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-10 by failing to maintain required oral and written pre-trade communications. The Complaint also alleged that VBI and Vanden Berge violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-2(f) by providing NFA with a number of excuses for the firm's communication recordkeeping deficiencies and, in doing so, provided NFA with materially false or misleading information regarding whether VBI ever complied with its recordkeeping obligations. The Complaint also alleged that VBI and Vanden Berge violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(a) by failing to supervise the firm's operations.

In its Decision, the Panel found that VBI violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-10, and that VBI and Vanden Berge violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-2(f) and 2-9(a).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issues

On February 7, the SEC announced its 2023 examination priorities. The following are a selection of the Division’s 2023 priorities: New Rules – including the new Marketing Rule, RIAs to Private Funds – including Reg BI and management of conflicts of interest, ESG-related advisory services and fund offerings – including whether ESG products are appropriately labeled, Information Security and Operational Resiliency – including BDs/RIAs practices to prevent interruptions to mission-critical services and to protect investor information, records, and assets, and Emerging Technologies and Crypto-Assets – including a focus on registrants’ offer, sale, recommendation of, or advice regarding trading in crypto or crypto-related assets.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA February 2023 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Release
  • NFA Notice to Members
  • NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-february-2023/feed/ 0
The Message from the SEC’s Reg BI Risk Alert: “Come on, be reasonable." https://compliance-risk.com/the-message-from-the-secs-reg-bi-risk-alert-come-on-be-reasonable/ https://compliance-risk.com/the-message-from-the-secs-reg-bi-risk-alert-come-on-be-reasonable/#respond Thu, 09 Feb 2023 14:20:44 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13646

Overview At the end of January, the SEC’s Division of Examinations published a Risk Alert […]

The post The Message from the SEC’s Reg BI Risk Alert: “Come on, be reasonable." appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Overview

At the end of January, the SEC’s Division of Examinations published a Risk Alert to highlight observations from examinations related to Regulation Best Interest. The primary takeaway: generic policies and procedures or those that merely regurgitate the rule do not meet the “reasonably designed” standard under the Compliance Obligation of Reg BI. A firm’s policies should be highly specific to the firm itself, its products, its clients, Further, firms should be taking the next step with their policies and procedures to ensure that policies, procedures, and training materials are providing sufficient guidance to Financial Professionals (FPs) and other staff about how to meet their obligations.

Deficiencies and Weaknesses Highlighted in the Risk Alert

Specific areas which were highlighted as wide-spread weaknesses and deficiencies across policies and procedures:

  • Disclosure Obligation
    • Not identifying when disclosures should be created or updated and who is responsible for doing so.
    • Failing to have a process to demonstrate that disclosure had been provided to retail customers.
    • Only posting Regulation Best Interest disclosures on their website or referencing in disclosures in other documents delivered to customers.
    • Not having policies and procedures to ensure that FPs with multiple licenses were disclosing their capacity to retail customers prior to or at the time of the recommendation.
    • Lacking guidance to FPs about oral disclosures when there were differences between specific FP conflicts and a firm’s standard disclosures – e.g., circumstances requiring additional disclosures and how to maintain a record of making oral disclosures.
  • Care Obligation
    • Directing FPs to consider reasonably available alternatives and/or costs without providing any guidance how to do so.
      • If systems were put in place to allow FPs to evaluate costs or alternatives, firms failed to mandate their use or could not determine if the systems were used.
    • Directing FPs to document the basis for their recommendation but without providing instructions as to when it is necessary and what information is appropriate to include.
  • Conflict of Interest Obligation
    • Policies and procedures did not specify how conflicts of interest are to be identified or addressed. Firms failed to provide a structure to identify and address conflicts (e.g., a conflicts officer or committee or a particular unit within Compliance).
    • Generic conflict language (e.g., we have conflicts related to compensation differences) without reflecting all conflicts of interest associated with the recommendations made by a firm or its FPs.
    • Inappropriately relying on disclosure to “mitigate” conflicts that appeared to create an incentive for FPs to place their interest ahead of the retail customer without establishing any mitigation measures (i.e., modifying practices to reasonably reduce conflicts of interest) at the FP level.
  • Training and Testing
    • Relying heavily on surveillance systems that existed before the effective date of Regulation Best Interest without considering whether those systems needed modification in order to effective monitor Reg BI compliance – e.g., failing to consider new obligations regarding rollovers, account recommendations, implicit hold recommendations, and account monitoring (if agreed to).
      • Relying on surveillance systems that did not capture hold recommendations or recommendations that are not accepted by the retail customer, which resulted in those recommendations going unreviewed.
    • Relying on locally stored documents that limited surveillance regarding Care Obligation to branch examinations.
    • Relying on Reg BI training that did not provide employees with the specific tools, methods, or policies and procedures that they could use to comply with Reg BI.

Our Take

CRC believes that the best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

In light of the recent Risk Alert related to Reg BI, as well as the ongoing trend of increased findings and enforcements in this area since its implementation, firms should take this opportunity to assess their existing Reg BI compliance procedures, training materials, and operational processes to ensure that no gaps exist. Firms should pay careful attention to technological solutions deployed to meet the obligations of Reg BI and confirm that such solutions do not implicate the regulatory pitfalls outlined in this most recent Risk Alert.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468 

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

The post The Message from the SEC’s Reg BI Risk Alert: “Come on, be reasonable." appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/the-message-from-the-secs-reg-bi-risk-alert-come-on-be-reasonable/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2023) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-january-2023/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-january-2023/#respond Tue, 07 Feb 2023 17:10:47 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13642

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 23-01, FINRA’s Renewal Program supports the collection and disbursement of fees related to the renewal of broker-dealer (BD) and investment adviser (IA) registrations, exempt reporting and notice filings with participating self-regulatory organizations (SRO) and jurisdictions. During this program, FINRA announces renewal fees BD and IA firms owe via Preliminary Statements issued in November. FINRA publishes Final Statements in January to confirm or reconcile the actual renewal fees BD and IA firms owe after Jan. 1, 2023.

FINRA is issuing this Notice to help firms review, reconcile and respond to their Final Statements in E-Bill as well as view the reports that are currently available in the Central Registration Depository (CRD) and Investment Adviser Registration Depository (IARD) systems for the annual registration renewal process.

The deadline to remit payment for any additional amounts owed and to report any discrepancies to FINRA is Jan. 27, 2023. It is critical that firms ensure they pay in full or report discrepancies by this deadline. More information about reporting discrepancies, as well as key dates, is in the Notice.

Per Notice 23-02, FINRA has adopted amendments to Rule 2231 (Customer Account Statements) to add eight new supplementary materials pertaining to:

  • compliance with Rule 4311 (Carrying Agreements);
  • the transmission of customer account statements to other persons or entities;
  • the use of electronic media to satisfy delivery obligations;
  • compliance with Rule 3150 (Holding of Customer Mail);
  • the information disclosed on customer account statements;
  • assets externally held;
  • the use of logos and trademarks, etc.; and
  • the use of summary statements.

Several of these new supplementary materials are derived largely from Temporary Dual FINRA-NYSE Rule 409T (Statements of Accounts to Customers) and Temporary Dual FINRA-NYSE Rule Interpretation 409T (together, the NYSE provisions).

These changes become effective on January 1, 2024.

The amended rule text is available in Attachment A.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in January.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11143, the SEC is publishing this notice (the “Notice”) pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (the “2015 Act”). This Act requires all agencies to adjust annually for inflation the civil monetary penalties that can be imposed under the statutes administered by the agency and publish the adjusted amounts in the Federal Register. This Notice sets forth the annual inflation adjustment of the maximum amount of civil monetary penalties (“CMPs”) administered by the Commission under the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, and certain penalties under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. These amounts are effective beginning on January 15, 2023, and will apply to all penalties imposed after that date for violations of the aforementioned statutes that occurred after November 2, 2015.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-11151, the SEC is revising and re-proposing a rule that was initially proposed in September 2011 that would implement a provision under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”) prohibiting an underwriter, placement agent, initial purchaser, or sponsor of an asset-backed security (including a synthetic asset-backed security), or any affiliate or subsidiary of any such entity, from engaging in any transaction that would involve or result in certain material conflicts of interest.

Per Release No. 34-96768, the SEC, with the concurrence of the Office of Government Ethics (“OGE”), is jointly issuing with OGE this proposed rule for Commission members and employees. This proposed rule would amend the existing Supplemental Standards of Ethical Conduct for Members and Employees of the SEC (“Supplemental Standards”) jointly issued by SEC and OGE, would supplement the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch (OGE Standards) issued by OGE, and is necessary and appropriate to address ethical issues unique to the SEC. The SEC is proposing to revise transaction and reporting requirements for certain assets that pose a low risk of conflicts of interest or appearance concerns, and to prohibit employee ownership of sector funds that have a stated policy of concentrating their investments in entities directly regulated by the SEC. Further, the SEC proposes to authorize collection of covered securities transactions and holdings data from financial institutions through a third-party automated compliance system. The SEC also proposes to correct certain technical matters and adjust its transaction and reporting requirements to provide the flexibility necessary to implement a third-party automated compliance system.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in January.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in January.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in January.

NFA

Notice I-23-01

January 4, 2023

Notice of Annual Meeting of NFA Members and Board and Nominating Committee Selection

Notice of Annual Meeting

NFA will hold its Annual Meeting of Members on Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 12:00 p.m. (CST), via video conferencing. The agenda of the meeting is:

  1. Opening remarks.
  2. Members' questions regarding NFA-related topics.
  3. Any other business that may properly come before the Annual Meeting (or any adjournment or postponement thereof).

To register for the Annual Meeting of Members, please email your name, NFA ID and contact email to MemberMeeting2023@nfa.futures.org. Registration is due by Tuesday, January 31, 2023. NFA will then provide you with information on accessing the Annual Meeting.

Board and Nominating Committee Election

On November 10, 2022, NFA notified all Members of the candidates that the 2022 Nominating Committee nominated for election to NFA's Board of Directors and 2023 Nominating Committee and advised Members of the procedures by which additional candidates could petition to be nominated for election (NTM I-22-22). No Members have petitioned for nomination of a candidate for election to the Board or Nominating Committee. Accordingly, NFA's Executive Committee, pursuant to Article VII, Section (3)(c) and Article X, Section 3 of NFA's Certificate of Incorporation, will elect the nominees to the Board and Nominating Committee in January 2023.

Notice I-23-02

January 10, 2023

Executive Representative Reminder and Proposed Amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation Relating to NFA's Governance

Executive Representative Reminder

As discussed more fully below, NFA's Board of Directors (Board) recently approved unanimously amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation (Articles). NFA's Articles require that these amendments be submitted to a vote of the Members and adopted upon the affirmative vote of the majority of those Members that cast a vote in each Member Category—FCM/IB, CPO/CTA, SD/MSP/RFED and Contract Market. NFA utilizes an electronic voting process for Member approval of amendments to NFA's Articles. NFA has engaged Corporate Election Services (CES) to administer the electronic voting process. To facilitate the electronic voting process, CES will send the voting materials to each Member's designated Executive Representative who has the Member's sole authority to sign and complete proxy cards and provide voting instructions and cast votes on behalf of the Member.

If a Member has already designated an Executive Representative, it is not necessary to do so again unless the person designated as the Executive Representative has changed. Any Member that needs to designate or change its Executive Representative should do so through NFA's website by accessing NFA's Executive Representative Contact form found on NFA's Electronic Filing Systems page. Only firm employees who are Security Manager(s) or are authorized to "View, Update, and File" information in ORS may complete this form. Any addition or change must be made by January 16, 2023.

If a Member does not have a designated Executive Representative by January 16, 2023, NFA will deem the Membership Contact listed on the Member's Form 7-R as the Member's Executive Representative, and that person will have the sole authority to cast votes on the Member's behalf. Votes submitted by any person other than the Executive Representative (or the Membership Contact if no Executive Representative is designated) will not be counted.

Notice I-23-03

January 23, 2023

Member obligations under NFA Bylaw 1101 and Compliance Rule 2-36(d) with respect to CPOs/CTAs exempt from registration

The CFTC requires any person that claims an exemption from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3), 4.13(a)(5), an exclusion from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.5 or an exemption from CTA registration under 4.14(a)(8) (collectively, exemption) to annually affirm the applicable notice of exemption within 60 days of the calendar year end. Persons that fail to file the affirmation notice by March 1, 2023, will be deemed to have requested a withdrawal of the exemption and, therefore, may be required to be registered and NFA Members.

Since exempt CPOs/CTAs have until March 1, 2023, to complete the affirmation process, NFA recognizes that it may be difficult for a Member to conclusively determine prior to that date whether a previously exempt CPO/CTA continues to be eligible for a current exemption.

Therefore, Members that take reasonable steps to determine the registration and membership status of these previously exempt persons will not be in violation of NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d) if, between January 1 and March 31, 2023, they transact customer business with a previously exempt person that fails to become registered and an NFA Member, file a notice affirming its exemption from CPO/CTA registration, or provide a written representation as to why the person is not required to register or file the notice affirming the exemption.

How to identify whether an exempt CPO/CTA has affirmed its exemption

Members should compare their list of exempt CPO/CTAs with which the Member transacts customer business to the information NFA makes available to assist Members in determining whether an exempt CPO/CTA has affirmed its exemption(s).

Members can review exemption information in two ways. Members can view individual persons or entities by navigating to NFA's BASIC System, opening the person or entity's record, and, if applicable, clicking 'View All' in the Firm Exemptions box and/or the Pools & Pool Exemptions box. The Firm Exemptions page and/or the Pools & Pool Exemptions page will reflect an affirmation date if an exempt person or entity has properly filed a notice affirming an exemption, if applicable. Any exemption that was not affirmed in the previous year will no longer appear in BASIC as of March 2, 2023.

Alternatively, Members can access a spreadsheet that includes a list of all persons or entities that have exemptions on file with NFA that must be affirmed on an annual basis. This spreadsheet, which is updated nightly, can be found in the Member's Annual Questionnaire which can be accessed by logging into the system. The spreadsheet includes all persons or entities with an exemption(s) that requires an annual affirmation, as well as the most recent affirmation date, if applicable, and the affirmation due date. If the affirmation due date is March 1, 2023 the exemption has not yet been affirmed. Once the exemption has been affirmed, the affirmation due date will change to February 29, 2024. Any exemptions not affirmed after March 1, 2023, will be withdrawn.

Expectations for Members transacting customer business with an exempt CPO/CTA that has not affirmed its exemption

NFA expects any Member transacting customer business with a person that previously claimed an exemption from CPO/CTA registration under the regulations listed above, and that has not filed a notice in NFA's Exemption System affirming the exemption, not filed a notice of exemption for another available exemption, or not properly registered and become an NFA Member by December 31, 2022, to promptly contact the person to determine whether the person intends to file a notice affirming the exemption.

If the Member learns that the person does not intend to file a notice affirming the exemption, or the person does not file a notice affirming the exemption by March 1, 2023, then the Member must promptly obtain a written representation as to why the person is not required to register or file a notice of exemption and evaluate whether the representation appears adequate. If the Member determines that this written representation is inadequate and the person is required to be registered, then the Member must put a plan in place (e.g., liquidation-only trades) to cease transacting customer business with the person or risk violating NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d).

Any Member that acts in accordance with the information provided in this Notice will not be charged with violating NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d). Members should be aware, however, that this Notice does not relieve their regulatory obligations pursuant to the Commodity Exchange Act and the CFTC's Regulations.

News Releases

January 12, 2023

NFA orders Chicago, IL swap dealer StoneX Markets LLC to pay a $1,000,000 fine

NFA has ordered Chicago, Illinois swap dealer Member StoneX Markets LLC (Stone) to pay a $1,000,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Stone. In the settlement offer, the firm neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint.

In its Decision, the BCC found that Stone violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-4 by failing to provide timely and complete disclosure to its counterparties that the firm was not calculating initial margin (IM) according to its customary procedures; violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-49(a) by failing to maintain and enforce an adequate risk management program with respect to the firm's value-at-risk calculation and daily IM determination, and by failing to retain required records and provide pre-trade mid-market marks to counterparties; and violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-9(d) and 2-49(a) by failing to supervise the firm's operations.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issues

In January, the 2023 Report on FINRA’s Examination and Risk Monitoring Program was published. This year’s report addresses a materially broader range of topics than in prior years particularly in the Market Integrity section). Additionally, the report introduces a new Financial Crimes section, consisting of three topics—Anti-Money Laundering (AML), Fraud and Sanctions; Cybersecurity and Technological Governance; and Manipulative Trading. The report also identifies several emerging risks:  Manipulative Trading in Small Cap IPOs, Sanctions Evasion, ACATS Fraud, and Senior Investors and Financial Crime.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA January 2023 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notice to Members
  • NFA Press Releases
  • 2023 Report on FINRA’s Examination and Risk Monitoring Program

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2023) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-january-2023/feed/ 0
Considerations for FINRA Membership involving Digital Asset Securities https://compliance-risk.com/considerations-for-finra-membership-involving-digital-asset-securities/ https://compliance-risk.com/considerations-for-finra-membership-involving-digital-asset-securities/#respond Fri, 27 Jan 2023 15:01:42 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13633

In November 2022, FINRA published a podcast that discussed available guidance concerning several paths through […]

The post <strong>Considerations for FINRA Membership involving Digital Asset Securities</strong> appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

In November 2022, FINRA published a podcast that discussed available guidance concerning several paths through which broker-dealers can be approved by FINRA for digital asset securities activity: 1) as a placement agent in private placement digital asset securities offerings, 2) as an ATS facilitating secondary transaction of digital asset securities, and 3) as a special purpose broker-dealer (SPBD) with custody of digital asset securities.

1) Placement agent in private placement digital asset securities offerings

Overview

The broker-dealer sends the trade-matching details (e.g., identity of the parties, price, and quantity) to the buyer and issuer of a digital asset security—like a traditional private placement—and the issuer settles the transaction bilaterally between the buyer and issuer, away from the broker-dealer. In this case, the broker-dealer instructs the customer to pay the issuer directly and instructs the issuer to issue the digital asset security to the customer directly (e.g., the customer’s “digital wallet”).

Everything happens away from the broker-dealer so it does not custody the digital asset. The broker-dealer does not handle, control, or receive customer funds or securities. Issuers and investors directly transact with each other through an escrow account established by issuer.

Key Considerations in a Placement Agent Application

  1. Demonstrate an understanding of the risks of the digital asset security.
  2. Communicate how the risks will be disclosed and how the offering documents will be reviewed.
  3. Evidence an understanding of the obligations under FINRA’s advertising rules (including if first-year firm conditions apply).
  4. Detail the role and function of the broker-dealer with specificity.
  5. Be able to show that that there are procedures that are specific to digital asset securities and the distributed ledger.

2) ATS facilitating secondary transaction of digital asset securities (two types)

ATS #1: Bilateral settlement without ATS involvement

Overview

The ATS matches the orders of buyers and sellers of digital asset securities, and the trades are either settled directly between the buyer and seller or the buyer and seller give instructions to their respective custodians to settle the transactions. In either case, a broker-dealer operator does not guarantee or otherwise have responsibility for settling the trades and does not at any time exercise any level of control over the digital asset securities being sold or the cash being used to make the purchase (e.g., the ATS does not place a temporary hold on the seller’s wallet or on the buyer’s cash to ensure the transaction is completed).

  • Step 1 - the buyer and seller send their respective orders to the ATS;
  • Step 2 - the ATS matches the orders;
  • Step 3 - the ATS notifies the buyer and seller of the matched trade; and
  • Step 4 - the buyer and seller settle the transaction bilaterally, either directly with each other or by instructing their respective custodians to settle the transaction on their behalf.

ATS #2: Custodians carry out conditional instructions using information from ATS

Overview

In this case, there is a higher degree of control exercised by the broker-dealer operator because it tells the buyer’s custodian where to send the funds and the seller’s custodian where to deliver the securities. As with the four-step process, the broker-dealer operator does not guarantee or otherwise have responsibility for settling the trades and does not at any time exercise any level of control over the digital asset securities being sold or the cash being used to make the purchase (e.g., the ATS does not place a temporary hold on the seller’s wallet or on the buyer’s cash to ensure the transaction is completed) but it notifies the custodians for the buyer and seller, and the buyer and seller, of the match.

  • Step 1 - the buyer and seller send their respective orders to the ATS, notify their respective custodians of their respective orders submitted to the ATS, and instruct their respective custodians to settle transactions in accordance with the terms of their orders when the ATS notifies the custodians of a match on the ATS;
    • Step 2 - the ATS matches the orders; and
    • Step 3 - the ATS notifies the buyer and seller and their respective custodians of the matched trade and the custodians carry out the conditional instructions.

Key Considerations in ATS Applications

  1. Explain in detail how the transaction flows and business model involving digital asset securities and the ATS comply with either the three-step or the four-step process.
  2. Ensure other documents are consistent with that process, such as:
    1. User disclosure
    1. Draft Form ATS
    1. Contracts
    1. Custodian disclosure
    1. Disclosures with other third-parties

3) Special Purpose Broker-Dealer (SPBD) with Custody of Digital Asset Securities

Overview

The business activities of a special purpose broker-dealer are limited to digital assets that are also securities (this can include operation of an ATS that trades only in digital assets securities or otherwise engages in other business involving digital assets securities). It cannot engage in business activities involving non-security digital assets or securities that are not digital assets (e.g., traditional securities).

Key Considerations in SPBD Applications

  1. Demonstrate an understanding how the business model is impacted by the nine conditions detailed in the SEC Statement (dated April 27, 2021).
  2. Explain how each of the nine conditions are met.
  3. Make it clear where staff can find information responsive to each of the nine conditions.

Lastly, the FINRA podcast also identified several common issues with membership applications involving digital asset securities.

  • Show that the applicant is capable of complying with FINRA rules and the U.S. federal securities laws and regulations.
  • Missing details. For example:
    • What is the business plan?
    • What is the relationship between different parts of the broker-dealer’s business?
    • How does the transaction flow and business model involving digital asset securities fit with the available guidance?
    • How will the broker-dealer ensure that it functions in a way comporting with the applicable guidance?
    • How do the transaction flows address compliance and legal requirements?
    • Is there documentation to support that each step in the transaction flow meets those requirements?
  • Being inconsistent in describing the proposed business activities involving digital assets, cryptocurrencies, distributed ledger or related products.

CRC has extensive experience with helping firms successfully navigate the New Member and Continuing Member Application process with FINRA. We are specifically familiar with the fintech space and offer clients the ability to quickly scale and support their application with experienced C-Suite level personnel. Contact us today to discuss how we can provide right-sized support as you consider forming a broker-dealer.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

The post <strong>Considerations for FINRA Membership involving Digital Asset Securities</strong> appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/considerations-for-finra-membership-involving-digital-asset-securities/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-december-2022/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-december-2022/#respond Thu, 19 Jan 2023 15:36:42 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13627

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-27, FINRA has adopted amendments to Rule 6730 (Transaction Reporting) to (i) require members to report transactions in U.S. Treasury securities to FINRA’s Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (TRACE) as soon as practicable but no later than 60 minutes from the time of execution; and (ii) require members to report electronically executed transactions in U.S. Treasury securities to TRACE in the finest increment captured by the system used to execute the transaction, subject to an exception for members with limited trading volume in U.S. Treasury securities. FINRA is also revising its TRACE Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) to standardize price reporting for Treasury bills and Floating Rate Notes (FRNs) by requiring all transactions to be reported using the dollar price.

The amendments to reduce the trade reporting timeframe for transactions in U.S. Treasury securities will take effect on May 15, 2023. The amendments related to the granularity of execution timestamps, as well as the revisions to the TRACE FAQs to standardize price reporting, will take effect on November 6, 2023.

The amended text of Rule 6730 is set forth in Attachment A.

Per Notice 22-28, FINRA has adopted amendments to the Rule 6700 series (Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (TRACE)) to require members to report to TRACE transactions in U.S. dollar-denominated foreign sovereign debt securities. The amendments will take effect on November 6, 2023.

The amended rule text is available in the online FINRA Manual.

Per Notice 22-29, FINRA has received reports about increasing numbers and sophistication of ransomware incidents. Ransomware typically involves bad actors gaining unauthorized access to firm systems and encrypting or otherwise accessing sensitive firm data or customer information, then holding that hijacked data for ransom. Some ransomware attacks have become significant threats that include theft of data and bad actors’ ongoing network access.

Ransomware attacks have proliferated due to, in part, increased use of technology and continued adoption of cryptocurrencies, which bad actors use to hide their identities when collecting ransom payments. Further, Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) models, where bad actors purchase attack services on the dark web, have helped execute attacks on a much larger scale and make attacks available to less technologically savvy bad actors.

Rule 30 of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Regulation S-P requires firms to have written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to safeguard customer records and information. FINRA Rule 4370 (Business Continuity Plans and Emergency Contact Information) also applies to ransomware attacks that include denials of service and other interruptions to members’ operations.

This Notice provides questions firms can use to evaluate their cybersecurity programs in light ofthe increased ransomware threat, lists possible additional firm controls and provides relevant resources.

This Notice, including the questions for consideration, does not create new legal or regulatory requirements or new interpretations of existing requirements, nor does it relieve firms of any existing obligations under federal securities laws and regulations. Member firms may consider the information in this Notice in developing new, or modifying existing, practices that are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with relevant regulatory obligations based on the member firm’s size and business model. Moreover, some questions may not be relevant due to certain firms’ business models, size or practices.

Per Notice 22-30, FINRA is issuing this Notice to re-open the comment period for Regulatory Notice 15-13. Rule 15b9-1 currently provides proprietary trading firms with an exemption from membership in a national securities association. If the SEC re-proposal is adopted, the amendments generally would require a proprietary trading firm relying on the current exemption to register with FINRA if the firm continues to effect transactions other than on an exchange of which it is a member, with limited exceptions. FINRA membership would, among other things, apply FINRA’s existing fee structure to these firms, including FINRA’s Trading Activity Fee. FINRA is re-opening the comment period for Regulatory Notice 15-13, which had previously proposed an exemption to exclude from FINRA’s Trading Activity Fee transactions by a proprietary trading firm on exchanges of which the firm is a member.

Per Notice 22-31, member firms are required to make reasonable efforts to obtain the name of and contact information for a trusted contact for a non-institutional customer’s account. This Notice summarizes member firms’ regulatory obligations, discusses the benefits of trusted contacts in administering customers’ accounts, highlights customer education resources and shares effective practices member firms use.

This Notice does not create new legal or regulatory requirements or new interpretations of existing requirements, nor does it relieve firms of any existing obligations under federal securities laws and regulations. Member firms may consider the information in this Notice in developing new, or modifying existing, practices that are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with relevant regulatory obligations based on the member firm’s size and business model.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in November.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11138, the SEC is adopting amendments to the rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that provides affirmative defenses to trading on the basis of material nonpublic information in insider trading cases. The amendments add new conditions to this rule that are designed to address concerns about abuse of the rule to trade securities opportunistically on the basis of material nonpublic information in ways that harm investors and undermine the integrity of the securities markets. The SEC is also adopting new disclosure requirements regarding the insider trading policies and procedures of issuers, the adoption and termination (including modification) of plans that are intended to meet the rule’s conditions for establishing an affirmative defense, and certain other similar trading arrangements by directors and officers. In addition, the SEC is adopting amendments to the disclosure requirements for director and executive compensation regarding equity compensation awards made close in time to the issuer’s disclosure of material nonpublic information. Finally, the SEC is adopting amendments to Forms 4 and 5 to require filers to identify transactions made pursuant to a plan intended to meet the rule’s conditions for establishing an affirmative defense and to require disclosure of bona fide gifts of securities on Form 4.

Per Release No. 33-11139, the SEC is adopting technical amendments to its regulations regarding organization, conduct and ethics; and information requests. The technical amendments move the citations of statutory authority for the regulations from the subpart level to the part level and amend related citations to remove duplicative statutory citations at the subpart level.

Per Release No. 33-11140, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volumes I and II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. EDGAR Releases 22.4 and 22.4.1 will be deployed in the EDGAR system on or about December 19, 2022, and January 3, 2023, respectively.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-96458, the SEC is reopening the comment period for its proposal, Share Repurchase Disclosure Modernization, Exchange Act Release No. 34-93783 (Dec. 15, 2021) (“Proposing Release”). The SEC proposed amendments to modernize and improve disclosure about repurchases of an issuer’s equity securities that are registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the proposed amendments would require an issuer to provide more timely disclosure on a new Form SR regarding purchases of its equity securities for each day that it, or an affiliated purchaser, makes a share repurchase. The proposed amendments would also enhance the existing periodic disclosure requirements about these purchases. The SEC subsequently reopened the comment period for the Proposing Release in Resubmission of Comments and Reopening of Comment Periods for Several Rulemaking Releases Due to a Technological Error in Receiving Certain Comments, Exchange Act Release No. 34-96005 (Oct. 7, 2022). In addition, after the proposed amendments were published for public comment, an excise tax on share repurchases was signed into law. A staff memorandum was added to the public comment file on December 7, 2022 to analyze the impact of the new excise tax on the potential economic effects of the proposed amendments. The SEC is reopening the comment period to allow interested persons the opportunity to analyze and comment on the additional analysis.

Per Release No. 34-96493, the SEC is proposing to amend existing requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to update the disclosure required for order executions in national market system (“NMS”) stocks. First, the SEC is proposing to expand the scope of reporting entities subject to the rule that requires market centers to make available to the public monthly execution quality reports to encompass broker-dealers with a larger number of customers. Next, the SEC is proposing to modify the definition of “covered order” to include certain orders submitted outside of regular trading hours and certain orders submitted with stop prices. In addition, the SEC is proposing modifications to the information required to be reported under the rule, including changing how orders are categorized by order size as well as how they are categorized by order type. As part of the changes to these categories, the SEC is proposing to capture execution quality information for fractional share orders, odd-lot orders, and larger-sized orders. Additionally, the SEC is proposing to modify reporting requirements for non-marketable limit orders (“NMLOs”) in order to capture more relevant execution quality information for these orders by requiring statistics to be reported from the time such orders become executable. The SEC is also proposing to eliminate time-to-execution categories in favor of average time-to-execution, the median time-to-execution, and 99th percentile time-to-execution, each as measured in increments of a millisecond or finer and calculated on a share-weighted basis. In order to better reflect the speed of the marketplace, the SEC is proposing that the time of order receipt and time of order execution be measured in increments of a millisecond or finer and that realized spread be calculated at both 15 seconds and one minute. Finally, the SEC is proposing to enhance the accessibility of the required reports by requiring all reporting entities to make a summary report available.

Per Release No. 34-96494, the SEC is proposing to amend certain rules of Regulation National Market System (“Regulation NMS”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) to adopt variable minimum pricing increments for the quoting and trading of NMS stocks, reduce the access fee caps, and enhance the transparency of better-priced orders.

Per Release No. 34-96495, the SEC is proposing to amend the regulation governing the national market system (“NMS”) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to add a new rule designed to promote competition as a means to protect the interests of individual investors and to further the objectives of an NMS. The proposed rule would prohibit a restricted competition trading center from internally executing certain orders of individual investors at a price unless the orders are first exposed to competition at that price in a qualified auction operated by an open competition trading center. The proposed rule would also include limited exceptions to this general prohibition. In addition, the SEC is proposing to amend the regulation governing the NMS to add new defined terms included in the proposed rule.

Per Release No. 34-96496, the SEC is proposing new rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) relating to a broker-dealer’s duty of best execution. Proposed Regulation Best Execution would enhance the existing regulatory framework concerning the duty of best execution by requiring detailed policies and procedures for all broker-dealers and more robust policies and procedures for broker-dealers engaging in certain conflicted transactions with retail customers, as well as related review and documentation requirements.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in December.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in December.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in December.

NFA

Notice I-22-24

December 1, 2022

FINRA announces increase in proficiency examination fees for 2023

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) notified NFA that it will increase its fees for the administration and delivery of NFA's qualifications examinations on January 1, 2023.

On this date, the fee for an individual to take the Series 3: National Commodity Futures Examination will be $140, an increase of $10. The fee for the Series 30: NFA Branch Manager Examination; Series 31: Futures Managed Funds Examination; Series 32: Limited Futures Examination–Regulations; and Series 34: Retail Off-Exchange Forex Examination will be $90, a $5 increase.

To sign up for any of these examinations, an applicant must apply online by visiting FINRA's website.

For information on proficiency requirements, including study outlines, visit NFA's proficiency requirements webpage.

Notice I-22-25

December 5, 2022

Guidance on the annual affirmation requirement for entities currently operating under an exemption from CPO or CTA registration

The CFTC requires any person that claims an exemption from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3), 4.13(a)(5), an exclusion from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.5 or an exemption from CTA registration under 4.14(a)(8) (collectively, exemption) to annually affirm the applicable notice of exemption within 60 days of the calendar year-end, which is March 1, 2023, for this affirmation cycle.

Persons re-affirming an exemption under 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3) and 4.13(a)(5) will be required to attest that neither the person nor its principals has in its background any statutory disqualifications listed under Section 8a(2) of the Commodity Exchange Act. 

Failure to affirm an active exemption from CPO or CTA registration will result in the exemption being withdrawn on March 2, 2023. For registered CPOs or CTAs, withdrawal of the exemption will result in the entity being subject to Part 4 Requirements regardless of whether the entity otherwise remains eligible for the exemption. For non-registrants, the withdrawal of the exemption may subject the person or entity to enforcement action by the CFTC, if either continues to operate without registration or exemption.

How to complete the affirmation process

To complete the affirmation process, access the Exemptions System from the Electronic Filing Systems page on NFA's website.

The Notice also includes frequently asked questions about exemptions.

Notice I-22-26

December 12, 2022

FCM and RFED filing requirements for Christmas and New Year's Day—Reminder for upcoming holidays 

This is a reminder that the following futures commission merchant (FCM) and retail foreign exchange dealer (RFED) regulatory filings will be impacted as follows by the Christmas and New Year's Day holidays:

Christmas Day (Observed)—Monday, December 26, 2022

• Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Friday, December 23, 2022, are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, December 27, 2022; and

• Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements are required to be prepared as of Monday, December 26, 2022, and are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, December 27, 2022.

New Year's Day (Observed)—Monday, January 2, 2023

• Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Friday, December 30, 2022, are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, January 3, 2023;

• Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, and cleared swaps customer collateral statements are not required to be prepared as of Monday, January 2, 2023; and

• Daily forex statements are required to be prepared as of Monday, January 2, 2023, and are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, January 3, 2023.

Any information filed by FCMs or RFEDs after its due date must be accompanied by a fee for each business day that it is late.

Holiday Filing Schedule

Visit NFA's website to view a complete schedule of daily filing requirements for upcoming holidays and an updated calendar of Segregated Investment Detail Report (SIDR) due dates. NFA recommends viewing the calendars and keeping this Notice as a reference for the upcoming 2023 holiday filing requirements.

For more information about filing financial reports, visit NFA's website.

Notice I-22-27

December 12, 2022

SD holiday filing requirements

Visit NFA's website to view schedules of 2023 swap dealer (SD) holiday filingsrisk data and margin monitoring filings and financial reporting due dates. We recommend viewing the schedules and keeping this Notice as a reference for the upcoming 2023 holiday filing requirements.

For more information about SD filing requirements visit NFA's website.

News Releases

December 8, 2022

NFA orders Warren, NJ retail forex dealer and futures commission merchant Gain Capital Group LLC to pay a $700,000 fine

December 8, Chicago—NFA has ordered Gain Capital Group LLC (Gain) to pay a $700,000 fine. Gain, which does business as FOREX.com, is a registered retail forex dealer and futures commission merchant Member of NFA headquartered in Warren, New Jersey.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Gain and Alexander Robert Bobinski, Jr. (Bobinski), an associated person and principal of the firm and Associate Member of NFA. In the settlement offer, the firm and Bobinski neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint.

In its Decision, the BCC found that Gain violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-43(a)(1) by improperly adjusting customer accounts following a system malfunction; violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-36(c) by its treatment of customers affected by the system malfunction and Gain's account adjustments; violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-5 and 2-36(c) by submitting inaccurate and incomplete information to NFA; and violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-36(e) and 2-9(a) by failing to supervise. The BCC also found that Bobinski violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-36(e) by failing to supervise.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issues

Advertising & Solicitation

The SEC’s new marketing rule went into full compliance effect in November. The single rule draws from and replaces the previous advertising and cash solicitation rules, Rule 206(4)-1 and Rule 206(4)-3, respectively. The new rule is designed to comprehensively and efficiently regulate advisers’ marketing communications. The new rule also made related amendments to Form ADV, the investment adviser registration form, and Rule 204-2, the books and records rule.

Please reach out today to find out how CRC resources and expertise can be leveraged to support a comprehensive review your compliance programs related to marketing as well as assess existing communications.

Archiving Electronic Communications

In September, the SEC fined 16 firms with penalties totaling over $1.1B due to archiving failures related to electronic communications. Under specific scrutiny is personnel use of texting on personal devices for business-related communications and the use of messaging applications, such as WhatsApp. CRC advises that firms review and address policies and procedures related to the use of personal mobile devices, texting, and other electronic channels to communicate for business purposes. Firms should carefully consider what is permitted under its policies, how such policies are enforced and confirmed, and whether additional solutions need to be built out to ensure appropriate archiving and oversight of such communications. 

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

• FINRA December 2022 Industry Notices

• SEC Regulatory Actions

• NFA Notice to Members

• NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-december-2022/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-november-2022/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-november-2022/#respond Wed, 07 Dec 2022 15:11:15 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13600

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-23, member firms often encourage registered representatives to have succession plans in place to plan for expected or unexpected life events. Succession planning can benefit customers, member firms and registered representatives. This Notice discusses these benefits, as well as common types of succession plans. This Notice also provides an overview of related FINRA rules and administrative processes and includes questions to consider when developing and implementing succession plans.

Per Notice 22-24, FINRA has amended Rule 11880 (Settlement of Syndicate Accounts) to revise the syndicate account settlement timeframe for offerings of corporate debt securities. The amendments to Rule 11880 establish a two-stage syndicate account settlement process whereby the syndicate manager is required to remit to each syndicate member at least 70 percent of the gross amount due to such syndicate member within 30 days following the syndicate settlement date, with any final balance due remitted within 90 days following the syndicate settlement date.

The amendments are effective for public offerings of corporate debt securities that commence on or after January 1, 2023.

The amended rule text is available in the online FINRA Manual.

Per Notice 22-25, FINRA alerts members to an emerging threat to customers and members, where FINRA, NASDAQ and NYSE have observed initial public offerings (IPOs) for certain small capitalization (small-cap) issuers listed on U.S. stock exchanges that may be the subject of pump-and-dump-like schemes (sometimes referred to as "ramp-and-dump" schemes in other jurisdictions). FINRA has observed significant unusual price increases on the day of or shortly after the IPOs of certain small-cap issuers, most of which involve issuers with operations in other countries. FINRA has concerns regarding potential nominee accounts that invest in the small-cap IPOs and subsequently engage in apparent manipulative limit order and trading activity. Some of the investors harmed by ramp-and-dump schemes appear to be victims of social media scams. This Notice addresses concerns similar to those previously raised in the Anti-Money Laundering sections of the 2022 and 2021 Reports on FINRA’s Examination and Risk Monitoring Program.

This Notice does not create new legal or regulatory requirements or new interpretations of existing requirements, nor does it relieve firms of any existing obligations under federal securities laws and regulations and under FINRA rules. Members may consider the information in this Notice in developing new, or modifying existing, practices that are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable regulatory obligations based on the member’s size and business model.

Per Notice 22-26, FINRA requests comment on a proposal to provide additional transparency into delayed Treasury spot trades in corporate debt securities—i.e., corporate bond trades where the dollar price of the trade is based on a spread to a benchmark U.S. Treasury security that was agreed upon at an earlier time on the same day. The proposed changes would provide for immediate transparency into the size and spread-based economics of delayed Treasury spot trades by requiring members to report the spread and identify the associated benchmark Treasury security (i.e., the CUSIP or other appropriate identifier) at the time at which the spread is agreed, and then subsequently report the dollar price of the transaction once the trade is spotted.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in November.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11131, the SEC is adopting amendments to Form N-PX under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) to enhance the information mutual funds, exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), and certain other funds currently report about their proxy votes and to make that information easier to analyze. The SEC also is adopting rule and form amendments under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that would require an institutional investment manager subject to the Exchange Act to report on Form N-PX how it voted proxies relating to executive compensation matters, as required by the Exchange Act. The reporting requirements for institutional investment managers complete implementation of those requirements added by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”). This rule is effective July 1, 2024.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-11130, the SEC is proposing amendments to its current rules for open-end management investment companies (“open-end funds”) regarding liquidity risk management programs and swing pricing. The proposed amendments are designed to improve liquidity risk management programs to better prepare funds for stressed conditions and improve transparency in liquidity classifications. The amendments are also designed to mitigate dilution of shareholders’ interests in a fund by requiring any open-end fund, other than a money market fund or exchange-traded fund, to use swing pricing to adjust a fund’s net asset value (“NAV”) per share to pass on costs stemming from shareholder purchase or redemption activity to the shareholders engaged in that activity. In addition, to help operationalize the proposed swing pricing requirement, and to improve order processing more generally, the SEC is proposing a “hard close” requirement for these funds. Under this requirement, an order to purchase or redeem a fund’s shares would be executed at the current day’s price only if the fund, its designated transfer agent, or a registered securities clearing agency receives the order before the pricing time as of which the fund calculates its NAV. The SEC also is proposing amendments to reporting and disclosure requirements on Forms N-PORT, N-1A, and N-CEN that apply to certain registered investment companies, including registered open-end funds (other than money market funds), registered closed-end funds, and unit investment trusts. The proposed amendments would require more frequent reporting of monthly portfolio holdings and related information to the SEC and the public, amend certain reported identifiers, and make other amendments to require additional information about funds’ liquidity risk management and use of swing pricing.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in November.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in November.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in November.

NFA

Notice I-22-21

November 03, 2022

FCM and IB Members—FinCEN updates its list of FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT/CPF deficiencies

On November 3, 2022, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a news release announcing that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) updated its list of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT/CPF deficiencies. NFA Member futures commission merchants (FCM) and introducing brokers (IB) should review this release to ensure that their AML programs have the most current information on FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT/CPF deficiencies and revise their AML programs accordingly. A copy of the news release is available on FinCEN's website.

Notice I-22-22

November 10, 2022

NFA Announces Nominations Made by the 2022 Nominating Committee

In accordance with NFA Bylaw 406, the Office of the Secretary has received from the 2022 Nominating Committee a list of its nominees for positions on NFA's Board of Directors and 2023 Nominating Committee. The list of nominees included with this Notice shall serve as notification to NFA Members of the candidates proposed by the 2022 Nominating Committee.

Other nominations may be made by petition. Article VII, Section 3(b) of NFA's Articles of Incorporation provides that:

"Nominations may be made for elected FCM and LTM; IB; CPO and CTA; and SD, MSP and RFED Director positions by:

(i) Petition signed by 50 or more NFA Members* in the category for which the nomination is made (i.e., FCM and LTM; SD, MSP and RFED; IB; and CPO and CTA); or

(ii) Petition submitted by any organization or association recognized by NFA as fairly representing the category...or which the nomination is made.

Petitions shall be submitted in the manner specified in the Bylaws. No petition may nominate more than one candidate for the same position."

Article X, Section 3 of NFA's Articles of Incorporation similarly permits nominations for the Nominating Committee by petition.

NFA Bylaw 406 requires that each petition identify the position to which the nomination pertains, and that all petitions must be received by the Secretary within 21 days of the date of this Notice. Therefore, if you wish to submit nominations by petition, please make sure that such petitions are received by the Secretary of NFA on or before December 1, 2022. Petitions received after that date will not be considered.

NFA Bylaw 409 provides that each Member shall designate an Executive Representative, who among other things, has the sole authority to sign nomination petitions on behalf of the Member. Members may designate an Executive Representative through NFA's website by completing an electronic Executive Representative contact form. Only firm personnel who are Security Managers or are authorized to view, update and file information in NFA's Online Registration System (ORS) may complete the Executive Representative Contact form. If a Member does not complete this form and designate an Executive Representative, the Member's membership contact listed in ORS will be deemed to be the Executive Representative. If a Member designated an Executive Representative last year, it is not necessary to do so again unless the person designated as the Executive Representative has changed.

Notice I-22-23

November 21, 2022

Request for Public Representative Nominations for NFA's Board of Directors

The terms of five of NFA's current Public Representatives—Michael C. Dawley, Douglas E. Harris, Ronald S. Oppenheimer, Todd E. Petzel, and Michael R. Schaefer—will expire at the Board of Directors' (Board) regular Annual Meeting on February 16, 2023. NFA is seeking nominations to fill the five Public Representative vacancies. NFA's Articles of Incorporation (Articles) permit Public Representatives to be nominated by either NFA Members or non-Members.

Over the years, NFA has consistently had Public Representatives with outstanding credentials and their contributions to NFA have been enormous. Public Representatives bring the perspective of non-Members to the Board. Public Representative candidates must be knowledgeable of the markets and the Members regulated by NFA and have no material relationship with NFA that would impact their ability to provide an impartial, objective analysis of the issues that come before the Board.

At its regular Annual Meeting, on February 16, 2023, the Board will elect, by majority vote, from among the nominees five Public Representatives to serve on the Board for two-year terms.

Under Article XVIII, a "Public Representative" on NFA's Board is a public director as that term is defined in Section (b)(2) of Core Principle 16 in Appendix B to Part 38 of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's Rules, read in the context as applied to NFA. Therefore, although Core Principle 16 specifically applies to contract markets, the same disqualifying circumstances regarding "material relationships" set forth therein apply to NFA’s Public Representatives and their relationship with NFA. The applicable text of Section (b)(2) of Core Principle 16 in Appendix B to Part 38—Guidance on, and Acceptable Practices in, Compliance With Core Principles is included in this Notice for your information. In the applicable text, please substitute "NFA" for "Contract Market."

Public representation on NFA's Board of Directors is an important matter, and we ask that you give serious consideration to submitting a nomination to fill these vacancies. NFA requests that Public Representative nominations be submitted by January 10, 2023 so that NFA's Executive Committee can review the potential nominees at its meeting on January 19, 2023.

News Releases

November 01, 2022

NFA orders Houston, Texas introducing broker Empire Energy Group LLC never to reapply for NFA membership

November 1, Chicago—NFA has ordered Empire Energy Group LLC (Empire Energy), a CFTC-registered introducing broker and former NFA Member located in Houston, Texas, not to reapply for membership or act as a principal of an NFA Member at any time in the future. NFA also ordered Mark Fairchild, a principal and associated person of Empire Energy and former NFA Associate, not to reapply for NFA membership or act as a principal of an NFA Member for five years and to comply with other requirements if he seeks NFA membership or principal status following the five-year period.

The default Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and Empire Energy's and Fairchild's failure to file an Answer. The BCC found that Empire Energy failed to file its 2021 audited financial statement and that Empire Energy and Fairchild failed to cooperate fully and promptly with NFA.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

November 09, 2022

NFA orders Chicago, Ill. introducing broker Stage 5 Trading Corp. to pay a $75,000 fine

November 9, Chicago—NFA has ordered Stage 5 Trading Corp. (Stage 5) to pay a $75,000 fine. Stage 5 is an introducing broker (IB) Member of NFA located in Chicago, Illinois.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Stage 5, in which the firm neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint. The BCC's Complaint charged Stage 5 with doing business with an unregistered forex IB and using a website that did not distinguish clearly between Stage 5 and the unregistered forex IB. The Complaint also charged Stage 5 with failing to diligently supervise the firm's forex operations.

In its Decision, the BCC found that Stage 5 violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-36(d), 2-36(e) and 2-36(g), as incorporated through NFA Compliance Rule 2-39(a).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

Advertising & Solicitation

The SEC’s new marketing rule went into full compliance effect last month. The single rule draws from and replaces the previous advertising and cash solicitation rules, Rule 206(4)-1 and Rule 206(4)-3, respectively. The new rule is designed to comprehensively and efficiently regulate advisers’ marketing communications. The new rule also made related amendments to Form ADV, the investment adviser registration form, and Rule 204-2, the books and records rule.

Please reach out today to find out how CRC resources and expertise can be leveraged to support a comprehensive review your compliance programs related to marketing as well as assess existing communications.

Archiving Electronic Communications

The SEC recently fined 16 firms, with penalties totaling over $1.1B due to archiving failures related to electronic communications. Under specific scrutiny is personnel use of texting on personal devices for business related communications and the use of messaging applications, such as WhatsApp. CRC advises that firms review and address policies and procedures related to the use of personal mobile devices, texting, and other electronic channels to communicate for business purposes. Firms should carefully consider what is permitted under its policies, how such policies are enforced and confirmed, and whether additional solutions need to be built out to ensure appropriate archiving and oversight of such communications.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA November 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notice to Members
  • NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-november-2022/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-october-2022/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-october-2022/#respond Tue, 15 Nov 2022 15:59:35 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13589

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-21, FINRA alerts member firms to a rising trend in the fraudulent transfer of customer accounts through the Automated Customer Account Transfer Service (ACATS), an automated system administered by the National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC), that facilitates the transfer of customer account assets from one firm to another.

This Notice provides an overview of how bad actors effect fraudulent transfers of customer accounts using ACATS (referred to as ACATS fraud), lists several existing regulatory obligations that may apply in connection with ACATS fraud, and provides contact information for reporting the fraud. As FINRA continues to gather additional information related to ACATS fraud, FINRA is committed to providing guidance, updates and other information to help member firms stay informed about the latest developments, and will supplement this Notice, as appropriate.

Per Notice 22-22, FINRA’s Renewal Program supports the collection and disbursement of fees related to the renewal of broker-dealer (BD) and investment adviser (IA) registrations, exempt reporting and notice filings with participating self-regulatory organizations (SRO) and jurisdictions. FINRA communicates information about renewal fees BD and IA firms owe via a Preliminary Statement in November and publishes a Final Statement in January to confirm or reconcile the actual renewal fees BD and IA firms owe after Jan. 1, 2023. Renewal statements reflect all applicable renewal fees assessed for BD and IA firms, branches and individuals.

It is critical that firms ensure that they pay in full by the Preliminary Statement deadline. If payment is late, firms should ensure that the Preliminary Statement is paid in full before the year-end system shutdown. Payments received after the Preliminary Statement deadline for FINRA-registered firms are subject to a late fee.

Important 2023 Renewal Program dates are provided on the Annual Renewal Program and Compliance Calendar pages, including payment and system shutdown deadlines. See the CRD Availability Schedule page for exceptions to regular operating hours for CRD/IARD.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in October.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-96034, the SEC is adopting amendments to the recordkeeping rules applicable to broker-dealers, security-based swap dealers, and major security-based swap participants. The amendments modify requirements regarding the maintenance and preservation of electronic records, the use of third-party recordkeeping services to hold records, and the prompt production of records. The SEC also is designating broker-dealer examining authorities as SEC designees for purposes of certain provisions of the broker-dealer record maintenance and preservation rule.

The compliance date for the amendments to 17 CFR 240.17a-4 is six months after publication in the Federal Register. The compliance date for the amendments to 17 CFR 240.18a-6 is twelve months after publication in the Federal Register.

Per Release No. 33-11126, the SEC is adopting a new rule and rule amendments to implement Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”), which added Section 10D to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). In accordance with Section 10D of the Exchange Act, the final rules direct the national securities exchanges and associations that list securities to establish listing standards that require each issuer to develop and implement a policy providing for the recovery, in the event of a required accounting restatement, of incentive-based compensation received by current or former executive officers where that compensation is based on the erroneously reported financial information. The listing standards must also require the disclosure of the policy. Additionally, the final rules require a listed issuer to file the policy as an exhibit to its annual report and to include other disclosures in the event a recovery analysis is triggered under the policy.

The amendments are effective 60 days after date of publication in the Federal Register.

Per Release No. 33-11125, the SEC is adopting rule and form amendments that require open-end management investment companies to transmit concise and visually engaging annual and semi-annual reports to shareholders that highlight key information that is particularly important for retail investors to assess and monitor their fund investments. Certain information that may be more relevant to financial professionals and investors who desire more in-depth information will no longer appear in funds’ shareholder reports but will be available online, delivered free of charge upon request, and filed on a semi-annual basis on Form N-CSR. The amendments exclude open-end management investment companies from the scope of the current rule that generally permits registered investment companies to satisfy shareholder report transmission requirements by making these reports and other materials available online and providing a notice of that availability. The amendments also require that funds tag their reports to shareholders using the Inline eXtensible Business Reporting Language (“Inline XBRL”) structured data language to provide machine-readable data that retail investors and other market participants may use to more efficiently access and evaluate investments. Finally, the SEC is adopting amendments to the advertising rules for registered investment companies and business development companies to promote more transparent and balanced statements about investment costs.

This rule is effective 60 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-11117, due to a technological error, a number of public comments submitted through the SEC internet comment form were not received by the SEC. The majority of the affected comments were submitted in August 2022; however, the technological error is known to have occurred as early as June 2021. All commenters who submitted a public comment to one of the affected comment files through the internet comment form between June 2021 and August 2022 are advised to check the relevant comment file posted on SEC.gov to determine whether their comment was received and posted. If a comment has not been posted, commenters should resubmit that comment by following the instructions provided below. To further ensure that interested persons, including any affected commenters, have the opportunity to comment on the affected releases or to resubmit comments, the SEC is reopening the comment periods for certain SEC rulemaking releases listed in this release.

Per Release No. IA-6176, the SEC is proposing a new rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) to prohibit registered investment advisers (“advisers”) from outsourcing certain services or functions without first meeting minimum requirements. The proposed rule would require advisers to conduct due diligence prior to engaging a service provider to perform certain services or functions. It would further require advisers to periodically monitor the performance and reassess the retention of the service provider in accordance with due diligence requirements to reasonably determine that it is appropriate to continue to outsource those services or functions to that service provider. The SEC is also proposing corresponding amendments to the investment adviser registration form to collect census-type information about the service providers defined in the proposed rule. In addition, the SEC is proposing related amendments to the Advisers Act books and records rule, including a new provision requiring advisers that rely on a third party to make and/or keep books and records to conduct due diligence and monitoring of that third party and obtain certain reasonable assurances that the third party will meet certain standards.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in October.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in October.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in October.

NFA

Notice I-22-20

October 31, 2022

Reminder: NFA Member cybersecurity responsibilities

As Cybersecurity Awareness Month comes to a close, NFA reminds Members of their cybersecurity obligations and to remain vigilant online. Given the sensitive nature of customer data that Members possess and the growing risks associated with cyber breaches, NFA continues to consider cybersecurity a top priority and expects Members to do the same.

For information on NFA's cybersecurity requirements, refer to the resources below.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in October.

Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

Advertising & Solicitation

The compliance deadline for the SEC’s new marketing rule is days away. The single rule that draws from and replaces the previous advertising and cash solicitation rules, Rule 206(4)-1 and Rule 206(4)-3, respectively. The new rule is designed to comprehensively and efficiently regulate advisers’ marketing communications. The new rule also made related amendments to Form ADV, the investment adviser registration form, and Rule 204-2, the books and records rule. The compliance date with the new rule is November 4, 2022.

Investment advisers are encouraged to conduct a comprehensive review their compliance programs related to marketing as well as assess existing communications in advance of the compliance date. Please reach out today to find out how CRC resources and expertise can be leveraged to support your reviews.

Archiving Electronic Communications

The SEC recently fined 16 firms, with penalties totaling over $1.1B due to archiving failures related to electronic communications. Under specific scrutiny is personnel use of texting on personal devices for business-related communications and the use of messaging applications, such as WhatsApp. CRC advises that firms review and address policies and procedures related to the use of personal mobile devices, texting, and other electronic channels to communicate for business purposes. Firms should carefully consider what is permitted under its policies, how such policies are enforced and confirmed, and whether additional solutions need to be built out to ensure appropriate archiving and oversight of such communications.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA October 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notice to Members

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-october-2022/feed/ 0
Broker-Dealer Regulatory Update: Amended Electronic Recordkeeping Requirements https://compliance-risk.com/broker-dealer-regulatory-update-amended-electronic-recordkeeping-requirements/ https://compliance-risk.com/broker-dealer-regulatory-update-amended-electronic-recordkeeping-requirements/#respond Tue, 25 Oct 2022 14:58:04 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13581

On October 12, 2022, the SEC adopted amendments to the electronic recordkeeping, prompt production of […]

The post Broker-Dealer Regulatory Update: Amended Electronic Recordkeeping Requirements appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

On October 12, 2022, the SEC adopted amendments to the electronic recordkeeping, prompt production of records, and third-party recordkeeping service requirements that are applicable to broker-dealers. The broker-dealer compliance date for the new requirements is six months after the date of the publication of the adopting release in the Federal Register. 

Some key highlights of the amendments to Rule 17a-4:

  • Adds an audit-trail as an alternative to the existing WORM requirement for electronic recordkeeping systems.
    • Under the audit-trail alternative, a broker-dealer will need to use an electronic recordkeeping system that maintains and preserves electronic records in a manner that permits the recreation of an original record if it is modified or deleted.
    • Electronic regulatory records may be preserved using an electronic record keeping system that meets either the audit-trail or the WORM requirement.
  • Adds an option for a designated executive officer (DEO) of the firm to make the required undertakings instead of a designated third party (D3P) when using an electronic recordkeeping system.
    • DEO must be a member of the broker-dealer’s senior management.
    • Subject to the organization’s reporting structure, DEO can designate in writing a limited number of other broker-dealer employees who have the knowledge, credentials, and information necessary to access and provide the records.
  • Adds an alternative undertaking for third parties who hold electronic regulatory records for the broker-dealer (e.g., cloud service provider) in lieu of the traditional undertaking under 17a-4(i).
    • Records must be preserved by electronic recordkeeping system as defined in Rule 17a-4(f), utilizing servers or other storage devices that are owned or operated by a third-party (including an affiliate) and the broker-dealer must have independent access to the records.
  • Adds a requirement for electronic recordkeeping systems to be able to produce copies of a record and its audit trial (if applicable) in a reasonably useable electronic format.
    • Such formats would be common and compatible with commonly used systems for accessing and reading electronic records.
  • Eliminates 90-Day DEA notice requirement before employing an electronic recordkeeping system.
  • Designates a broker-dealer’s DEA as a SEC designee for the purposes of the various provisions of the Rule that refer to “representatives and designees of the Commission.”

Important things for broker-dealers to note moving forward:

  • Existing WORM-compliant electronic recordkeeping system can continue to be used, but firms will be subject to the requirement to be able to produce a record in both a human readable format and a reasonably useable electronic format.
  • Existing designated third parties can continue to be used, however, updated undertakings will need to be filed with DEA.
  • If cloud storage providers are being used for electronic regulatory records and a traditional undertaking has not already been filed with DEA, firms must either file a traditional or alternative undertaking.

CRC believes that the best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of this rulemaking activity can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

The post Broker-Dealer Regulatory Update: Amended Electronic Recordkeeping Requirements appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/broker-dealer-regulatory-update-amended-electronic-recordkeeping-requirements/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-september-2022/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-september-2022/#respond Tue, 11 Oct 2022 16:50:42 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13566

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-20, the NAC has revised FINRA’s Sanction Guidelines, which guide FINRA adjudicators in developing remedial sanctions for violations of the securities rules. These revisions were based on a review to ensure that the guidelines accurately reflect the levels of sanctions imposed in FINRA disciplinary proceedings. The revisions tailor sanctions to differentiate between types of respondents and modify the Sanction Guidelines in the following ways:

• split each current guideline into separate guidelines for individuals and firms;

• create separate fine ranges for small and mid-size or large-size firms;

• remove the upper limit of the fine ranges for mid-size and large-size firms for select guidelines;

• create Anti-Money Laundering guidelines;

• add additional discussion of non-monetary sanctions for firms;

• introduce single fine ranges for all actions in the Quality of Markets guidelines and other select guidelines;

• establish $5,000 as the minimum low end for all firm fine ranges; and delete select guidelines.

The revised Sanction Guidelines are effective immediately and available on FINRA’s website.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in September.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11098, the SEC is adopting amendments to adjust the thresholds in the definition of “emerging growth company” as well as dollar amounts in Regulation Crowdfundingto effectuate inflation adjustments required under Title I and Title III of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (“JOBS Act”).

Per Release No. 33-11101, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual and related rules and forms. The EDGAR system was upgraded on September 19, 2022.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-95763, the SEC is proposing to amend the standards applicable to covered clearing agencies for U.S. Treasury securities to require that such covered clearing agencies have written policies and procedures reasonably designed to require that every direct participant of the covered clearing agency submit for clearance and settlement all eligible secondary market transactions in U.S. Treasury securities to which it is a counterparty. In addition, the SEC is proposing additional amendments to the Covered Clearing Agency Standards, with respect to risk management. These requirements are designed to protect investors, reduce risk, and increase operational efficiency. Finally, the SEC is proposing to amend the broker-dealer customer protection rule to permit margin required and on deposit with covered clearing agencies for U.S. Treasury securities to be included as a debit in the reserve formulas for accounts of customers and proprietary accounts of broker-dealers (“PAB”), subject to certain conditions.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in September.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in September.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in September.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-22-19

September 26, 2022

Executive Representative Reminder and Board and Nominating Committee Members Whose Terms Will Expire at the Board's 2023 Regular Annual Meeting

Executive Representative Reminder

NFA utilizes an electronic voting process, administered by a third-party service provider, for contested Board Director elections, contested Nominating Committee member elections and approval votes for amendments to NFA's Articles of Incorporation. To facilitate the voting process, NFA requires each Member to designate an individual to act as the Member's Executive Representative, who has the sole authority on behalf of the Member to sign petitions to nominate candidates for Director or Nominating Committee positions, receive notices of Member meetings and proxy materials, complete proxy cards and provide voting instructions and cast votes on behalf of the Member. Members designate an Executive Representative through NFA's website by completing the Executive Representative Contact Form. Only firm personnel who are Security Manager(s) or are authorized to "view, update and file" information in ORS may complete this form.

If a Member fails to designate an Executive Representative by completing this form, NFA will deem the Member's membership contact listed in ORS as the Member's Executive Representative. Members that have already designated an Executive Representative are not required to again complete this form unless the information on the Executive Representative has changed.

Board and Nominating Committee Members' Terms to Expire at 2023 Board of Directors' Regular Annual Meeting

Before October 15th of each year, NFA’s Secretary shall notify all Members in the Futures Commission Merchant (FCM), Introducing Broker (IB), Commodity Pool Operator and Commodity Trading Advisor (CPO/CTA) and Swap Dealer, Major Swap Participant and Retail Foreign Exchange Dealer (SD/MSP/RFED) categories of the elected Directors and the members of the Nominating Committee whose terms shall expire at the Board of Directors' regular annual meeting and shall request that the names of eligible persons to fill those positions be submitted to the Nominating Committee.

The Notice provides a list of the FCM, IB, CPO/CTA and SD/MSP/RFED Board and Nominating Committee members whose terms shall expire at the Board of Directors' regular annual meeting on February 16, 2023. Please use the form provided in the Notice to submit names of persons eligible to fill the vacancies on the Board of Directors and the Nominating Committee. For your reference, an explanation of the composition of the Board of Directors and the Nominating Committee is provided in the Notice. The Nominating Committee shall consider names that are submitted and the membership will be notified of the Committee's nominations. Thereafter, additional nominations may be made by petition pursuant to NFA's Articles. The procedure for filing a nomination by petition will be contained in a subsequent Notice to Members announcing the Nominating Committee's nominations to fill the Board and Nominating Committee vacancies.

News Releases


September 06, 2022

NFA orders Denmark firm Direct Hedge Danmark Fondsmaeglerselskab AS to pay a $70,000 fine

September 6, Chicago—NFA has ordered Direct Hedge Danmark Fondsmaeglerselskab AS(Direct Hedge) to pay a $70,000 fine. Direct Hedge is a registered introducing broker and approved swap firm Member of NFA located in Hellerup, Denmark.

The Decision, issued by an NFA Hearing Panel, is based on a Complaint issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee and a settlement offer submitted by Direct Hedge, in which the firm neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint. The Complaint alleged that Direct Hedge failed to keep required communications records, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-10(a) and failed to register an individual as an AP and NFA Associate, in violation of NFA Bylaw 301(b). The Complaint further alleged that Direct Hedge failed to diligently supervise the firm and its employees, in violation of NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(a).

In its Decision, the Hearing Panel found that Direct Hedge violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-9(a) and 2-10(a) and NFA Bylaw 301(b).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issues

Advertising & Solicitation

The compliance deadline for the SEC’s new marketing rule is approximately one month away. The single rule that draws from and replaces the previous advertising and cash solicitation rules, Rule 206(4)-1 and Rule 206(4)-3, respectively. The new rule is designed to comprehensively and efficiently regulate advisers’ marketing communications. The new rule also made related amendments to Form ADV, the investment adviser registration form, and Rule 204-2, the books and records rule. The compliance date with the new rule is November 4, 2022.

Investment advisers are encouraged to conduct a comprehensive review their compliance programs related to marketing as well as assess existing communications in advance of the compliance date. Please reach out today to find out how CRC resources and expertise can be leveraged to support your reviews.

Archiving Electronic Communications

The SEC recently fined 16 firms, with penalties totaling over $1.1B due to archiving failures related to electronic communications. Under specific scrutiny is personnel use of texting on personal devices for business related communications and the use of messaging applications, such as WhatsApp. CRC advises that firms review and address policies and procedures related to the use of personal mobile devices, texting, and other electronic channels to communicate for business purposes. Firms should carefully consider what is permitted under its policies, how such policies are enforced and confirmed, and whether additional solutions need to be built out to ensure appropriate archiving and oversight of such communications. 

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

• FINRA September 2022 Industry Notices

• SEC Regulatory Actions

• NFA Notice to Members

• NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-september-2022/feed/ 0
SEC Charges 16 Wall Street Firms with Widespread Recordkeeping Failures https://compliance-risk.com/sec-charges-16-wall-street-firms-with-widespread-recordkeeping-failures%ef%bf%bc/ https://compliance-risk.com/sec-charges-16-wall-street-firms-with-widespread-recordkeeping-failures%ef%bf%bc/#respond Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:21:59 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13560

On September 27, 2022, the SEC announced charges against 15 broker-dealers and one investment adviser […]

The post SEC Charges 16 Wall Street Firms with Widespread Recordkeeping Failures appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

On September 27, 2022, the SEC announced charges against 15 broker-dealers and one investment adviser for pervasive and longstanding failures to maintain and preserve electronic communications. Monetary penalties ranged from $50 million to $125 million for the charged firms. The settlements also required the firms to retain a compliance consultant to review and assess the firm’s remedial steps relating to recordkeeping practices, policies and procedures, related supervisory practices, and employment actions. The SEC’s investigation found that the firm’s employees, including supervisors and executives, routinely used text-messaging applications on personal devices to communicate about business matters. The SEC determined that the substantial majority of these communications were not maintained or preserved by the firms, which violated federal securities laws.

Regarding a focus on managers in the settlements, Bloomberg News in its reporting on the SEC’s action said: “The SEC’s decision to call out executives -- based on a sampling of messages that banks were asked to gather for the investigation -- may ramp up the pressure on firms to ensure certain managers are held accountable.”

Yesterday’s SEC press release comes less than a year after a similar action by the SEC involving J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (JPMS) was announced in December 2021. In that instance, JPMS’ settlement with the SEC included a $125 million penalty.

CRC believes that the best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of this enforcement activity and using it as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468 

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

The post SEC Charges 16 Wall Street Firms with Widespread Recordkeeping Failures appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/sec-charges-16-wall-street-firms-with-widespread-recordkeeping-failures%ef%bf%bc/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-august-2022%ef%bf%bc/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-august-2022%ef%bf%bc/#respond Tue, 06 Sep 2022 13:37:17 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13554

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-17, FINRA is soliciting comment on a proposal to amend Rule 6730 to reduce the Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (TRACE) trade reporting timeframe for transactions in all TRACE-Eligible Securities that currently are subject to a 15-minute reporting timeframe. Specifically, members would be required to submit a report to TRACE as soon as practicable (as is currently the case), but no later than one minute from the time of execution, for transactions in corporate bonds, agency debt securities, asset-backed securities and agency pass-through mortgage-backed securities traded to-be-announced for good delivery. As is the case today, FINRA would make information on the reported transactions publicly available immediately upon receipt of the trade report.

Per Notice 22-18, FINRA has received an increasing number of reports regarding registered representatives and associated persons (representatives) forging or falsifying customer signatures, and in some cases signatures of colleagues or supervisors, through third-party digital signature platforms. Firms have, for example, identified signature issues involving a wide range of forms, including account opening documents and updates, account activity letters, discretionary trading authorizations, wire instructions and internal firm documents related to the review of customer transactions.

These types of incidents underscore the need for member firms that allow digital signatures to have adequate controls to detect possible instances of signature forgery or falsification.

To help firms address the risks these signature forgeries and falsifications present, FINRA is sharing information in this Notice about:

  • relevant regulatory obligations;
  • forgery and falsification scenarios firms have reported to FINRA; and
  • methods firms have used to identify those scenarios.

Per Notice 22-19, the NSCC administers ACATS, a system that automates and imposes specified duties and performance timeframes to facilitate the transfer of accounts, in whole or in part, from one firm to another. The NSCC recently announced a change to ACATS that will allow a receiving member (the firm slated to receive the customer’s account) to use the “receiver delete” function to remove alternative investments from an ACATS transfer.

This Notice reminds members of their obligations under FINRA Rule 11870 (Customer Account Transfer Contracts), including that:

  • members must expedite and coordinate their activities when a customer gives authorized instructions to transfer securities account assets;
  • notwithstanding the availability of the receiver delete function, a member may not remove an asset from an ACATS transfer unless the member has determined that the asset is a “nontransferable asset” as defined in Rule 11870; and
  • a receiving member that uses the receiver delete function to remove certain nontransferable assets from an ACATS transfer is required to provide the customer with a list of the nontransferable assets and request in writing, and prior to the time it designates the assets as nontransferable, instructions from the customer with respect to the disposition of the assets.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in August.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-95607, the SEC is adopting amendments to implement Section 14(i) (“Section 14(i)”) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), as added by Section 953(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”). Section 14(i) directs the SEC to adopt rules requiring registrants to provide disclosure of pay versus performance. The disclosure is required in proxy or information statements in which executive compensation disclosure is required. The disclosure requirements do not apply to emerging growth companies, registered investment companies, or foreign private issuers.

Per Release No. 34-95620, the SEC is adopting amendments to the SEC’s rules implementing its whistleblower program. Section 21F of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and the SEC’s implementing rules provide that the SEC shall pay an award to eligible whistleblowers who voluntarily provide the SEC with original information about a violation of the federal securities laws that leads to the successful enforcement of a covered judicial or administrative action or a non-SEC related action. The amendments: expand the scope of related actions eligible for an award under the SEC’s whistleblower program; clarify that the SEC may use its statutory authority under Section 21F to consider the dollar amount of a potential award to increase an award but provide that the SEC will not use any statutory authority it might have to decrease the amount of an award; and make several conforming changes and technical corrections.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-95431, the SEC is proposing rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to help improve the governance of clearing agencies registered with the Commission (“registered clearing agencies”) by reducing the likelihood that conflicts of interest may influence the board of directors or equivalent governing body (“board”) of a registered clearing agency. The proposed rules would identify certain responsibilities of the board, increase transparency into board governance, and, more
generally, improve the alignment of incentives among owners and participants of a registered clearing agency. In support of these objectives, the proposed rules would establish new requirements for board and committee composition, independent directors, management of conflicts of interest, and board oversight.

Per Release No. IA-6083, the CFTC and the SEC are proposing to amend Form PF, the confidential reporting form for certain SEC-registered investment advisers to private funds, including those that also are registered with the CFTC as a commodity pool operator (“CPO”) or commodity trading adviser (“CTA”). The amendments are designed to enhance the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s (“FSOC’s”) ability to monitor systemic risk as well as bolster the SEC’s regulatory oversight of private fund advisers and investor protection efforts. In connection with the amendments to Form PF, the SEC proposes to amend a rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”) to revise instructions for requesting a temporary hardship exemption. The Commissions also are soliciting comment on the proposed rules and a number of alternatives, including whether certain possible changes to the proposal should apply to Form ADV.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in August.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in August.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in August.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-22-18

August 30, 2022

SD notice filing requirements under CFTC Regulation 23.154

CFTC Regulation 23.154 requires swap dealer (SD) Members that are subject to the CFTC Margin Rules and approved by NFA to use initial margin (IM) models to notify the CFTC and NFA of certain events related to an NFA-approved IM model. Starting September 1, 2022, SD Members must file these notices through NFA's WinJammer filing system and not via email.

The specific notices required are detailed below.

Modifications to an Approved Model

SD Members are required to notify the CFTC and NFA in writing 60 days prior to:

  • Extending the use of a previously approved IM model to an additional product type;
  • Making any change to any previously approved IM model that would result in a material change to the SD's assessment of IM requirements; or
  • Making any material change to modeling assumptions used by the IM model.

This notification requirement does not apply to new releases of ISDA SIMM made by ISDA.

Material Issues with an Approved Model

SD Members must promptly notify the CFTC and NFA if the IM model validation process reveals any material problems with the model. The SD also must describe any remedial actions taken and adjust the model to ensure an appropriately conservative amount of required IM is being calculated. This requirement extends to material issues identified during ongoing monitoring and the validation activities of each new version of SIMM, in light of its application to the SD Member's specific portfolio. At a minimum, an SD Member must notify NFA and the CFTC when it identifies problems with its IM model exceeding internal remediation thresholds. The notice filing must include:

  • Counterparty and portfolio IDs;
  • When and how the problem was identified, including relevant thresholds and testing results;
  • Detailed description of the model performance issue (e.g., risk factors causing exceedances, sensitivity amounts, market volatility relative to IM model calibration, nonlinear effects, risks-not-in-IM-model);
  • Remediation plan, including associated compensating controls;
  • Identified need for add-ons/multipliers, including amounts/values;
  • Current status of negotiations with the counterparty; and
  • Remediation timeline.

An SD Member should not delay filing the required notice due to incomplete information related to the remediation plan and timeline. The SD Member must amend its initial notice to provide updated information on remediation, if necessary.

Step-by-step notice filing instructions are available in the Margin Model WinJammer Notice User Guide.

News Releases

August 18, 2022

NFA orders London, U.K. firm Makor Securities London Ltd. to pay a $375,000 fine

August 18, Chicago—NFA has ordered Makor Securities London Ltd. (Makor) to pay a $375,000 fine.  Makor is a former introducing broker (IB) and current provisionally registered swap dealer Member of NFA located in London, U.K.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Makor, in which the firm neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint. The BCC's Complaint alleged that Makor, in its capacity as an IB, failed to disclose to NFA intra-month transfers of assets with an affiliate between August 2021 and February 2022, which gave the impression Makor was holding the assets at all times during this period. The Complaint also alleged that Makor represented to NFA, through a former associated person (AP) of Makor, that the firm held the assets as inventory when the AP should have known the firm transferred the assets to its affiliate and, therefore, was not holding them as inventory. In addition, the Complaint alleged that Makor failed to maintain at all times the required minimum adjusted net capital during various periods since July 2017 and failed to give timely notice to NFA of the firm's capital shortfalls. Lastly, the Complaint alleged that Makor failed to adequately supervise its employees and agents in the conduct of their commodity interest activities for or on behalf of the firm.

In its Decision, the BCC found that Makor violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-4 and 2-9(a) and NFA Financial Requirement Sections 4, 5(a) and 5(c).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

August 18, 2022

NFA permanently bars Denver-based commodity pool operator Yas Castellum LLC and its principal Marcus Brisco from membership

August 18, Chicago—NFA has permanently barred Yas Castellum LLC (Yas), a former NFA Member and commodity pool operator located in Denver, Colorado, and Marcus Brisco, its former principal, and associated person, from membership and from acting as a principal of an NFA Member.

The default Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and Yas and Brisco's failure to file an Answer. The BCC found that Yas failed to operate its commodity pool as a separate legal entity, failed to receive funds in the name of its commodity pool, and commingled pool funds with the property of other persons. The BCC also found that Yas and Brisco failed to uphold high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade by, among other things, operating the commodity pool in a manner that showed no regard for safeguarding the money they solicited and accepted from the pool participants. In addition, the BCC found that Yas and Brisco failed to cooperate in NFA's examination of Yas.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

August 24, 2022

NFA Board appoints Dale Spoljaric as new Vice President, Capital & Exams

August 24, Chicago—NFA's Board of Directors approved the appointment of Dale Spoljaric as Vice President, Capital & Exams at its August meeting.

"We are extremely pleased to promote Dale to this important leadership position," says NFA's CEO and President Thomas Sexton. "With his significant regulatory experience and expertise in futures commission merchant and swap dealer capital, segregation, and margin, Dale will play an important role leading our rigorous regulatory oversight programs."

Mr. Spoljaric has been with NFA for close to ten years. He has served as a Managing Director in both NFA's Futures Compliance and OTC Derivatives Compliance departments. Before joining NFA, Mr. Spoljaric served as U.S. Head of Agency Derivative Services Compliance at Barclays Capital, Inc. He began his career as an FCM Examiner with CME Group. Mr. Spoljaric holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Marquette University and is a registered CPA in Illinois.Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

In June, the SEC charged a broker-dealer and five of its registered representatives with violating Best Interest Obligation rules (Regulation Best Interest or Reg BI). The SEC alleged that the defendants failed to comply with Reg BI’s Care Obligation both because they did not exercise reasonable diligence, care, and skill to understand the risks, rewards, and costs associated with an unrated, high-risk debt security, and also because they recommended such security to at least seven particular customers without a reasonable basis to believe they were in their customers’ best interests. The SEC also alleged that the broker-dealer failed to comply with Reg BI’s “Compliance Obligation” because it did not adequately establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance with Reg BI.

Reg BI continues to be a focus area for regulators, and it is important to review your program to ensure that it addresses all aspects of Reg BI as it relates to your business.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA August 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Release 2022-110
  • NFA Notice to Members
  • NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-august-2022%ef%bf%bc/feed/ 0
News Update: SEC Approves FINRA Rules Change https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-approves-finra-rules-change%ef%bf%bc/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-approves-finra-rules-change%ef%bf%bc/#respond Thu, 01 Sep 2022 15:27:01 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13549

In an order[1] dated July 30, 2021, the SEC approved the adoption of new FINRA […]

The post News Update: SEC Approves FINRA Rules Change appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

In an order[1] dated July 30, 2021, the SEC approved the adoption of new FINRA Rule 4111 and Rule 9561 and the amendment of Rule 9559. FINRA has extended the effective date for the proposed rule change to no later than 180 days after publication of a Regulatory Notice announcing this Commission approval. At time of this update, FINRA has not yet published such a Regulatory Notice.

From the SEC’s approval order:

The proposal to establish a process in new Rule 4111 to identify members firms that present a high degree of risk to the investing public, based on numeric thresholds of firm-level and individual-level disclosure events, and then impose a Restricted Deposit Requirement, conditions, or restrictions on the member firm’s operations, or both, will help protect investors and encourage such member firms to change their behavior. FINRA has designed the proposed rule change to establish an annual, multi-step process to determine whether a member firm raises investor protection concerns substantial enough to require the imposition of additional obligations, while allowing identified firms several means of challenging FINRA’s decisions and affecting the ultimate outcome.

The Department would begin each member firms’ annual Rule 4111 review process by calculating specified “Preliminary Identification Metrics” for each firm for each of six categories of events or conditions, collectively defined as the “Disclosure Event and Expelled Firm Association Categories.”

The six categories are: (1) Registered Person Adjudicated Events; (2) Registered Person Pending Events; (3) Registered Person Termination and Internal Review Events; (4) Member Firm Adjudicated Events; (5) Member Firm Pending Events; and (6) Registered Persons Associated with Previously Expelled Firms (also referred to as the Expelled Firm Association category).

There are numeric thresholds for seven different firm sizes, to provide that each member firm would be compared only to its similarly sized peers.

If the Department determines that a member firm warrants further review under Rule 4111, and such member firm would be meeting the Preliminary Criteria for Identification for the first time, the member firm would have a one-time opportunity to reduce its staffing level to avoid meeting the Preliminary Criteria for Identification, within 30 business days after being informed by the Department that it met the Preliminary Criteria for Identification. However, if the Department determines that the member firm still meets the Preliminary Criteria for Identification (or if the member firm did not opted to reduce staffing levels) the Department would determine the firm’s maximum Restricted Deposit Requirement, and the member firm would proceed to a “Consultation” with the Department.

During the Consultation, the Department would give the member firm an opportunity to demonstrate why it does not meet the Preliminary Criteria for Identification, why it should not be designated as a Restricted Firm, and why it should not be subject to the maximum Restricted Deposit Requirement. (42930) Pursuant to Proposed Rule 4111(e)(2), the Department would provide the member firm with written notice of its decision no later than 30 days from the date of FINRA’s letter scheduling the Consultation, stating any conditions or restrictions to be imposed, and the ability of the member firm to request a hearing with the Office of Hearing Officers in an expedited proceeding.

Under new Rule 9561(a)(1), the Department would serve to the member firm a notice of the Department’s decision following the Rule 4111 process. The proposed rule change would also provide that if a member firm does not request a hearing, the decision would constitute final FINRA action. In general, a request for a hearing would not stay any of the Rule 4111 Requirements imposed in the Department’s decision, which would be immediately effective with one exception being when member requests review of imposition of Restricted Deposit Requirement. In that case, the firm would be required to deposit the lesser of 25% of its Restricted Deposit Requirement or 25% of its average excess net capital over the prior year, while the proceeding is pending.

If a member firm fails to comply with any of the requirements imposed on it under Rule 4111, the Department would be authorized to serve a notice pursuant to proposed Rule 9561 stating that the member firm’s continued failure to comply within seven days of service of the notice would result in a suspension or cancellation of membership.

If a member firm requests a hearing under proposed Rule 9561, the hearing would be subject to Rule 9559 (Hearing Procedures for Expedited Proceedings Under the Rule 9550 Series).

Opportunities for CRC to Assist Your Firm:

  • CRC can proactively conduct a review of your current compliance program to identify opportunities to potentially implement enhancements before the annual Rule 4111 reviews begin.
  • Between now and the effective date of this rule, CRC can help your firm to quickly scale up its compliance program with CRC resources to address concern areas.
  • CRC can develop and implement enhanced diligence processes relative to hiring or acquisition processes designed to avoid scrutiny under Rule 4111.

Please contact Mitch Avnet for more information:

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

p. (646)346-2468


[1] SR-FINRA-2020-041 Approval Order, https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2021-08/sr-finra-2020-041-approval-order.pdf

The post News Update: SEC Approves FINRA Rules Change appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-approves-finra-rules-change%ef%bf%bc/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-july-2022%ef%bf%bc/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-july-2022%ef%bf%bc/#respond Thu, 04 Aug 2022 13:24:28 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13540

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-15, FINRA amended the Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes (Code) to align the Code with the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021. Among other things, the amendments permit persons with sexual assault claims and sexual harassment claims to elect not to enforce predispute arbitration agreements in cases that relate to those disputes. The amendments also make a conforming change to FINRA Rule 2263 (Arbitration Disclosure to Associated Persons Signing or Acknowledging Form U4).

The text of the rule change is available as Attachment A.

Per Notice 22-16, FINRA has adopted changes to its rules to permit, and in some instances require, electronic service and filing of documents in disciplinary and other proceedings and appeals. FINRA has also amended its rules to require parties in proceedings before the Office of Hearing Officers (OHO) to file and serve the parties with their current email address and contact information at the time of their first appearance, and to file and serve any change in email address or contact information during the course of the proceeding. These amendments will become effective August 22, 2022.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in July.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-95266, the SEC is adopting amendments to the Federal proxy rules governing proxy voting advice as part of its reassessment of those rules and in light of feedback from market participants on those rules, certain developments in the market for proxy voting advice, and comments received regarding the proposed amendments. The amendments remove a condition to the availability of certain exemptions from the information and filing requirements of the Federal proxy rules for proxy voting advice businesses. The release also rescinds certain guidance that the SEC issued to investment advisers about their proxy voting obligations. In addition, the amendments remove a note that provides examples of situations in which the failure to disclose certain information in proxy voting advice may be considered misleading within the meaning of the Federal proxy rules’ prohibition on material misstatements or omissions. Finally, the release discusses the SEC’s views regarding the application of that prohibition to proxy voting advice, in particular with respect to statements of opinion.

Per Release No. 33-11082, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. The EDGAR system was upgraded on June 21, 2022.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-95267, the SEC is proposing to update certain substantive bases for the exclusion of shareholder proposals under the SEC’s shareholder proposal rule. The proposed amendments would amend the substantial implementation exclusion to specify that a proposal may be excluded if the company has already implemented the essential elements of the proposal. The SEC also proposes to specify when a proposal substantially duplicates another proposal for purposes of the duplication exclusion. In addition, the SEC proposes to amend the resubmission exclusion to provide that a proposal constitutes a resubmission if it substantially duplicates another proposal. Under the proposed amendments, for purposes of both the duplication exclusion and the resubmission exclusion, a proposal would substantially duplicate another proposal if it addresses the same subject matter and seeks the same objective by the same means.

Per Release No. 34-95388, the SEC is re-proposing amendments to a rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act” or “Exchange Act”) that exempts certain registered brokers or dealers from membership in a registered national securities association (“Association”). The re-proposed amendments would replace the rule’s de minimis allowance, including the exclusion therefrom for proprietary trading, with narrower exemptions from Association membership for any registered broker or dealer that is a member of a national securities exchange, carries no customer accounts, and effects transactions in securities otherwise than on a national securities exchange of which it is a member. The re-proposed amendments would create exemptions for such a registered broker or dealer that affects transactions off an exchange of which it is a member that results solely from orders that are routed by a national securities exchange of which it is a member to comply with order protection regulatory requirements or are solely for the purpose of executing the stock leg of a stock-option order.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in July

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in July.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in July.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-22-17

July 13, 2022

Forex Dealer Members: Effective date for amendment to NFA Compliance Rule 2-43

NFA Compliance Rule 2-43 prohibits a forex dealer member (FDM) from cancelling or adjusting a customer account in a manner that would directly or indirectly change the price of the executed order except under two limited circumstances. The first exception permits a cancellation or adjustment if it is favorable to the customer and done as part of settling a customer complaint, provided the FDM adjusts all adversely affected customer orders. The second exception permits an FDM to adjust or cancel an order if the FDM exclusively uses straight-through processing and the counterparty to the offsetting position with the FDM cancels or adjusts that order. NFA recently amended NFA Compliance Rule 2-43 to specify that the second exception is limited to FDMs that exclusively use straight-through processing with a counterparty that is not an affiliate of the FDM.

This amendment was unanimously approved by the Board and will become effective on September 15, 2022.

More information regarding this amendment can be found in NFA's June 7, 2022 submission letter to the CFTC.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in July.

Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

In June, the SEC charged a broker-dealer and five of its registered representatives with violating Best Interest Obligation rules (Regulation Best Interest or Reg BI). The SEC alleged that the defendants failed to comply with Reg BI’s Care Obligation both because they did not exercise reasonable diligence, care, and skill to understand the risks, rewards, and costs associated with an unrated, high-risk debt security, and also because they recommended such security to at least seven particular customers without a reasonable basis to believe they were in their customers’ best interests. The SEC also alleged that the broker-dealer failed to comply with Reg BI’s “Compliance Obligation” because it did not adequately establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance with Reg BI.

Reg BI continues to a be a focus area for regulators, and it is important to review your program to ensure that it addresses all aspects of Reg BI as it relates to your business.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA July 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC Press Release 2022-110
  • NFA Notices to Members

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-july-2022%ef%bf%bc/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-june-2022/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-june-2022/#respond Wed, 13 Jul 2022 15:45:26 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13526

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-13, FINRA has adopted amendments to Rule 6732 (Exemption from Trade Reporting Obligation for Certain Transactions on an Alternative Trading System) to expand the scope of the exemption to include eligible ATS transactions that involve only one member (other than the ATS). As amended, a member ATS may apply for the exemption for transactions between a member subscriber and a non-member entity (e.g., a bank). The amendments to Rule 6732 will take effect on October 3, 2022.

The amended rule text is available in the online FINRA Manual.

Per Notice 22-14, FINRA is soliciting comment on a proposal to establish a new trade reporting requirement for transactions in over-the-counter options on securities with terms that are identical or substantially similar to listed options. FINRA is proposing to require firms to report this information to FINRA on a daily basis (end-of-day) for regulatory purposes only.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in June.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11070, the SEC is adopting rule and form amendments that mandate the electronic filing or submission of documents that are currently permitted electronic submissions, including the “glossy” annual report to security holders, notices of exempt solicitations and exempt preliminary roll-up communications, notices of sales of securities of certain issuers, filings of required reports by foreign private issuers and filings made by multilateral development banks on the SEC’s Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (“EDGAR”) system. The SEC is also adopting rules that will mandate the electronic submission of the “glossy” annual report to security holders, the electronic filing of the certification made pursuant to the Exchange Act and its rules that a security has been approved by an exchange for listing and registration, the use of Inline eXtensible Business Reporting Language (“Inline XBRL”) for the filing of the financial statements and accompanying notes to the financial statements required in the annual reports of employee stock purchase, savings and similar plans, and that will allow for the electronic submission of certain foreign language documents. comment period for a release proposing amendments to its rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that would amend a rule under the Exchange Act, which defines certain terms used in the statutory definition of “exchange” under the Exchange Act, re-propose amendments to Regulation ATS for ATSs that trade government securities as defined under the Exchange Act or repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements on government securities (“Government Securities ATSs”), re-propose amendments to Regulation SCI to apply to ATSs that meet certain volume thresholds in U.S. Treasury Securities or in a debt security issued or guaranteed by a U.S. executive agency or government-sponsored enterprise (“Agency Securities”), amend the fair access rule for ATSs, and amend Form ATS-N, Form ATS-R, and Form ATS (“Exchange Act Proposing Release”). These actions will allow interested persons additional time to analyze the issues and prepare their comments, which would benefit the SEC in its consideration of final rules.

The comment periods for the proposed rules published in the Federal Register on March 24, 2022, at 87 FR 16886, and March 18, 2022, at 87 FR 15496 were reopened. Comments were to have been received on or before June 13, 2022.

Per Release No. 33-11075, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. The EDGAR system was upgraded on June 21, 2022.

Per Release No. 34-95148, the SEC is adopting amendments to rules to convert the filing of certain applications, confidential treatment requests, and forms from paper to electronic submission. Specifically, the SEC is amending its rules to require that the following types of filings be submitted via its Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (“EDGAR”) system: applications for orders under any section of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) and confidential treatment requests for filings made under section 13(f) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). The SEC is also adopting rule amendments to harmonize the requirements for the submission of applications for orders under the Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”). In addition, the SEC is amending other rules and a form to require the electronic submission of Form ADV-NR through the Investment Adviser Registration Depository (“IARD”) system. The SEC is also adopting requirements for non-resident general partners and non-resident managing agents to amend their Form ADV-NR within 30 days whenever any information contained in the form becomes inaccurate by filing with the Commission a new Form ADV-NR. Further, the SEC is adopting amendments to Form 13F to require managers to provide additional identifying information and to allow managers to disclose, for any security reported on Form 13F, the security’s share class level Financial Instrument Global Identifier (“FIGI”). Finally, the SEC is adopting certain technical amendments to Form 13F, including modernizing the structure of data reporting and amending the instructions on Form 13F for confidential treatment requests in light of a recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-11071, the SEC is reopening the comment period for its proposal for Listing Standards for Recovery of Erroneously Awarded Compensation, Exchange Act Release No. 34-75342 (July 1, 2015) (the “Proposing Release”). The proposed rules would direct the national securities exchanges and national securities associations to establish listing standards that would require each issuer to develop and implement a policy providing for the recovery, under certain circumstances, of incentive-based compensation based on financial information required to be reported under the securities laws that is received by current or former executive officers, and require disclosure of the policy. The SEC reopened the comment period for Proposing Release in the Reopening of Comment Period for Listing Standards for Recovery of Erroneously Awarded Compensation Release, Exchange Act Release No. Release No. 34-93311 (Oct. 14, 2021) (the “Reopening Release”). The SEC is re-opening the comment period to allow interested persons to analyze and comment on the additional analysis and data on compensation recovery policies and accounting restatements contained in a staff memorandum that was added to the public comment file on June 8, 2022.

The comment period for the proposed rule published July 14, 2015, at 80 FR 41144, which was initially reopened on October 21, 2021, at 86 FR 58232, is again reopened. Comments should be received on or before July 14, 2022.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in June.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in June.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in June.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-22-16

June 28, 2022

FCM and IB Members—FinCEN updates its list of FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies

On June 23, 2022, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a news release announcing that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) reissued its list of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. NFA Member futures commission merchants (FCM) and introducing brokers (IB) should review this release to ensure that their AML programs have the most current information on FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies and revise their AML programs accordingly. A copy of the news release is available on FinCEN's website.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in June.Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

As part of its 2022 Examination Priorities, the SEC announced that it will continue to prioritize its focus on RIAs to private funds. Examinations will review issues under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (Advisers Act), including an adviser’s fiduciary duty, and will assess risks, including a focus on compliance programs, fees and expenses, custody, fund audits, valuation, conflicts of interest, disclosures of investment risks, and controls around material nonpublic information (MNPI). Additionally, Reg BI continues to be an area of heightened focus, in line with regulatory prioritization of main street investor protection.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. CRC continuously follows regulatory trends and focus areas, particularly with regard to fintech and digital currency.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA June 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • SEC 2022 Examination Priorities
  • NFA Notices to Members

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-june-2022/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (May 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-may-2022/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-may-2022/#respond Wed, 08 Jun 2022 13:42:03 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13504

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (May 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-12, FINRA has adopted amendments to Rule 6730 (Transaction Reporting) to require members to append a modifier to a corporate bond trade that is part of a portfolio trade when reporting to FINRA’s Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (TRACE). The amendments to Rule 6730 will take effect on May 15, 2023.

The amended text of the rule is set forth in Attachment A.

Special Notices

There were no special notices in May.

SEC

Final Rules

There were no final rules in May.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-94868, the SEC is reopening the comment period for a release proposing new rules and amendments to an existing rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) that would affect private fund advisers and proposing amendments to the Advisers Act compliance rule, which would affect all registered
investment advisers (“Advisers Act Proposing Release”). The SEC is also reopening the comment period for a release proposing amendments to its rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that would amend a rule under the Exchange Act, which defines certain terms used in the statutory definition of “exchange” under the Exchange Act, re-propose amendments to Regulation ATS for ATSs that trade government securities as defined under the Exchange Act or repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements on government securities (“Government Securities ATSs”), re-propose amendments to Regulation SCI to apply to ATSs that meet certain volume thresholds in U.S. Treasury Securities or in a debt security issued or guaranteed by a U.S. executive agency or government-sponsored enterprise (“Agency Securities”), amend the fair access rule for ATSs, and amend Form ATS-N, Form ATS-R, and Form ATS (“Exchange Act Proposing Release”). These actions will allow interested persons additional time to analyze the issues and prepare their comments, which would benefit the SEC in its consideration of final rules.

The comment periods for the proposed rules published in the Federal Register on March 24, 2022, at 87 FR 16886, and March 18, 2022, at 87 FR 15496 are reopened. Comments should be received on or before June 13, 2022.

Per Release No. 33-11067, the SEC is extending the comment period for a release proposing amendments to its rules under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that would require registrants to provide certain climate-related information in their registration statements and annual reports. The comment period for the release was originally scheduled to close on May 20, 2022. The new comment period will end on June 17, 2022. This action will allow interested persons additional time to analyze the issues and prepare their comments, which would benefit the SEC in its consideration of final rules.

Per Release No. 33-11068, the SEC is proposing to amend rules and forms under both the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) to require registered investment advisers, certain advisers that are exempt from registration, registered investment companies, and business development companies, to provide additional information regarding their environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) investment practices. The proposed amendments to these forms and associated rules seek to facilitate enhanced disclosure of ESG issues to clients and shareholders. The proposed rules and form amendments are designed to create a consistent, comparable, and decision-useful regulatory framework for ESG advisory services and investment companies to inform and protect investors while facilitating further innovation in this evolving area of the asset management industry. In addition, we are proposing an amendment to Form N-CEN applicable to all Index Funds, as defined in Form N-CEN, to provide identifying information about the index.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in May.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in May.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in May.

NFA

Notices to Members

Notice I-22-15

May 18, 2022

Proxies and Approximations Related to Alternative Reference Rates and Other Indices for Initial Margin Model Purposes

Since October 2020, NFA has allowed swap dealers (SD) to include the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) in ISDA's Standard Initial Margin Model (SIMM) calculations by using an overnight index swap proxy, subject to certain conditions. NFA is aware that SDs may use alternative reference rates or indices other than SOFR for discounting purposes and trade products based on these reference rates or indices. Since these rates or indices may not be directly modeled in the SIMM framework, SDs using these alternative reference rates or indices must map each rate to a proxy (i.e., the closest equivalent curve in the IM calculations) to include the exposures in the SIMM's calculations.

CFTC Regulation 23.154(b)(2)(xi) prohibits an SD from incorporating any proxy or approximation used to capture the risks of the SD's uncleared swaps unless it first demonstrates to the CFTC or NFA that the proxy or approximation is appropriate. NFA will not object to an SD including alternative reference rates or indices in SIMM calculations by appropriate proxy or approximation subject to the following conditions:

  • The SD emails NFA at swapsmarginmodel@nfa.futures.org that it is incorporating alternative reference rates or indices by proxy or approximation (and identifies the alternative reference rates or indices) in its risk management system;
  • The SD's model risk management (MRM) team issues an approval, a preliminary positive opinion or a waiver to include alternative reference rates or indices for the exposure margined via SIMM (which may include establishing effective compensating controls or an enhanced monitoring framework to ensure the conservativeness of IM calculated using SIMM); and
  • If the SD's MRM team authorizes alternative reference rates or indices by waiver, the team must establish a timeframe to conduct its in-depth review of the introduced proxy or approximation in the IM framework within six months of production implementation.

As part of the MRM team's validation activities to include an alternative reference rate or index exposure in SIMM, via a proxy or approximation, the MRM team must, at a minimum, consider the following:

  • Scope of the approximation for each curve (i.e., new products and/or discounting and affected trade volumes as measured by trade count, notional amount and risk sensitivity amounts);
  • Impact on the SD's risk profile of its existing portfolios; and
  • Anticipated impact on SIMM ongoing monitoring testing results (backtesting, benchmarking and risks-not-in-SIMM) for current portfolios due to the introduction of new products and discounting curve changes.

SDs must have policies and procedures for identifying and evaluating proxies and approximations used in the SIMM framework, as well as for identifying and addressing deteriorating performance, including:

  • A methodology to conduct a quantitative assessment of the proxy or approximation's impact on the IM amount;
  • Thresholds for escalation;
  • Compensating controls; and
  • Remediation.

NFA will review each SD's implementation of alternative reference rates or indices in its risk management system and in SIMM (via proxy) at a later date and will focus on the MRM team's validation activities.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in May.

Hot Issues

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends.

FINRA has released its Examination and Risk Monitoring Program for 2022. Similarly, the SEC has also released its 2022 Examination Priorities. Firms should review these reports to identify if the regulators’ exam priorities intersect with the firm’s business lines.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA May 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices to Members

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (May 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-may-2022/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (April 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-april-2022%ef%bf%bc/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-april-2022%ef%bf%bc/#respond Thu, 05 May 2022 11:49:08 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13489

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (April 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-11, FINRA recently took enforcement action against several firms for failing to establish or maintain a reasonably designed supervisory system for recommendations of alternative mutual funds, also sometimes referred to as “alt funds” or “liquid alts” (“Alt Funds”). FINRA is continuing to note such deficiencies in its examinations and communications reviews of such products.

This Notice reminds member firms of their sales practice and supervisory obligations for such funds, and, to that end:

  • describes frequent findings in recent examinations and enforcement matters;
  • shares effective practices FINRA observed at member firms; and
  • notes considerations member firms may wish to take into account to improve their supervisory and compliance programs.

Special Notices

Per Special Notice 4/22/22, FINRA conducts annual elections to fill positions on the Small Firm Advisory Committee (SFAC), Regional Committees, National Adjudicatory Council (NAC) and FINRA Board of Governors (FINRA Board). This Notice provides:

  • a description of responsibilities for the various groups;
  • an overview of each elected vacancy to be filled in 2022; and
  • a summary of how eligible individuals can become candidates for election. 

FINRA will issue an Election Notice describing the nomination and election procedures for each specific election at the start of each election cycle. Individuals interested in being considered for nomination to positions on the Regional Committees, SFAC, NAC or FINRA Board may submit an indication of interest through FINRA’s online Engagement Portal

FINRA is committed to promoting greater representation of underrepresented minorities and women across the industry and is seeking to increase such representation on its committees. FINRA encourages those with diverse backgrounds and perspectives to consider running for the vacancies discussed in this Notice.

SEC

Final Rules

There were no final rules in April.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-94615, the SEC is proposing a set of rules (“Regulation SE”) and forms under Section 3D of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“SEA”) that would create a regime for the registration and regulation of security-based swap execution facilities (“SBSEFs”) and address other issues relating to security-based swap (“SBS”) execution generally. One of the rules being proposed as part of Regulation SE would implement Section 765 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which is intended to mitigate conflicts of interest at SBSEFs and national securities exchanges that trade SBS (“SBS exchanges”). Other rules being proposed as part of Regulation SE would address the cross-border application of the SEA’s trading venue registration requirements and the trade execution requirement for SBS. In addition, the SEC is proposing to amend an existing rule to exempt, from the SEA definition of “exchange,” certain registered clearing agencies as well as registered SBSEFs that provide a market place only for SBS. The SEC also is proposing a new rule that, while affirming that an SBSEF would be a broker under the SEA, would exempt a registered SBSEF from certain broker requirements. Finally, the SEC is proposing certain new rules and amendments to its Rules of Practice to allow persons who are aggrieved by certain actions by an SBSEF to apply for review by the SEC. The SEC also is withdrawing all previously proposed rules regarding these subjects.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in April.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in April.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in April.

NFA

Notices to Members

There were no Notices to Members in April.

News Releases

April 14, 2022

NFA orders Connecticut-based Interactive Brokers LLC to pay a $250,000 fine

April 14, Chicago—NFA has ordered Connecticut-based futures commission merchant and forex dealer Member Interactive Brokers LLC to pay a $250,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Interactive Brokers, in which the firm neither admitted nor denied the allegations in the Complaint. In its Complaint, the BCC alleged that Interactive Brokers canceled retail customer forex orders contrary to the reasons permitted under NFA Compliance Rule 2-43(a)(1) and failed to adequately supervise its employees in the conduct of their forex activities on behalf of the firm to ensure compliance with the relevant NFA requirements, contrary to NFA Compliance Rule 2-36(e). In its Decision, the BCC found that Interactive Brokers violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-43(a)(1) and 2-36(e).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends.

FINRA has released its Examination and Risk Monitoring Program for 2022. Similarly, the SEC has also released its 2022 Examination Priorities. Firms should review these reports to identify if the regulators’ exam priorities intersect with the firm’s business lines.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA April 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA News Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (April 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-april-2022%ef%bf%bc/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (March 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-march-2022/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-march-2022/#respond Tue, 05 Apr 2022 14:01:26 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13466

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (March 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-07, FINRA established an accounting support fee (GASB Accounting Support Fee) to adequately fund the annual budget of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) in February 2012, pursuant to an SEC order. The GASB Accounting Support Fee is collected on a quarterly basis from member firms that report trades to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB). Each member firm’s assessment is based on its portion of the total par value of municipal securities transactions reported by all FINRA member firms to the MSRB during the previous quarter. FINRA will assess and collect a total of $12,508,400 to adequately fund GASB’s annual budget by collecting $3,127,100 from its member firms each calendar quarter beginning in April 2022.

Per Notice 22-08, the availability of complex products and options can potentially expand the investment opportunities for retail investors and, if properly understood, offer favorable investment outcomes (e.g., enhancing returns, limiting losses or improving diversification). However, important regulatory concerns arise when investors trade complex products without understanding their unique characteristics and risks. Like complex products, trading in options may pose risks if investors do not have the financial experience to understand options and options trading strategies. Therefore, FINRA has taken steps to address complex products and options over the years, including publishing guidance regarding sales practice concerns raised by complex products and options; issuing investor-focused alerts to highlight the risks of these products; adopting rules with specific requirements for particular complex products and for options; and examining members for compliance with SEC and FINRA rules.

The number of accounts trading in complex products and options has increased significantly in recent years. As a result, FINRA is again reminding members of their current regulatory obligations, including, as discussed below, the application of Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) when broker-dealers and their associated persons make securities recommendations, and recommendations of investment strategies involving securities, to retail customers. In addition, FINRA is soliciting comment on: (1) effective practices that members have developed for complex products and options, particularly when retail investors are involved; and (2) whether the current regulatory framework, which was adopted at a time when the majority of individuals accessed financial products through financial professionals, rather than through self-directed platforms, is appropriately tailored to address current concerns raised by complex products and options.

Per Notice 22-09, FINRA seeks comment on a proposal to accelerate arbitration case processing when requested by parties who are seriously ill or are at least 75 years old. The proposal would help ensure that these parties are able to participate meaningfully in FINRA arbitration by shortening certain case processing deadlines for parties and arbitrators under the Codes.

The text of the proposed amendments is set forth in Attachment A.

Per Notice 22-10, Chief Compliance Officers (CCOs) at member firms play a vital role. For example, CCOs and their compliance teams help design and implement compliance programs, help educate and train firm personnel, and work in tandem with senior business management and legal departments to foster compliance with regulatory requirements. In this way, CCOs help promote strong compliance practices that protect investors and market integrity, as well as the member firm itself.

Rule 3110 (Supervision) imposes specific supervisory obligations on member firms. The responsibility to meet these obligations rests with a firm’s business management, not its compliance officials. The CCO’s role, in and of itself, is advisory, not supervisory. Accordingly, FINRA will look first to a member firm’s senior business management and supervisors to determine responsibility for a failure to reasonably supervise. FINRA will not bring an action against a CCO under Rule 3110 for failure to supervise except when the firm conferred upon the CCO supervisory responsibilities and the CCO then failed to discharge those responsibilities in a reasonable manner. As a result, charges against CCOs for supervisory failures represent a small fraction of the enforcement actions involving supervision that FINRA brings each year.

Special Notices

Per Special Notice 3/31/22, FINRA has multiple committees that facilitate effective engagement with its member firms and representatives of the public regarding regulatory and policy initiatives related to FINRA’s mission of promoting market integrity and investor protection. The purpose of this Notice is to encourage employees of member firms and other interested parties with diverse skills, backgrounds, perspectives and experiences to become involved in these committees so they can provide innovative feedback and support FINRA’s mission of investor protection and market integrity. Interested individuals should use FINRA’s Engagement Portal to submit an online form to be considered for future committee vacancies.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-11043, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volumes I and II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. The EDGAR system was upgraded on March 21, 2022.

The updated EDGAR Filer Manual is available at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/filer-
information/current-edgar-filer-manual. Typically, the EDGAR Filer Manual is also available for website viewing and printing in the Commission’s Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Room 1580, Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Operating conditions may limit access to the Commission’s Public Reference Room.

Per Release No. 33-11047, the SEC is adopting technical amendments to various rules and forms under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Investment Company Act”), and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Investment Advisers Act”). These revisions make technical changes to correct typographical errors and erroneous cross-references, as well as to clarify instructions.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-11038, the SEC is proposing rules to enhance and standardize disclosures regarding cybersecurity risk management, strategy, governance, and cybersecurity incident reporting by public companies that are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the SEC is proposing amendments to require current reporting about material cybersecurity incidents. The SEC is also proposing to require periodic disclosures about a registrant’s policies and procedures to identify and manage cybersecurity risks, management’s role in implementing cybersecurity policies and procedures, and the board of directors’ cybersecurity expertise, if any, and its oversight of cybersecurity risk. Additionally, the proposed rules would require registrants to provide updates about previously reported cybersecurity incidents in their periodic reports. Further, the proposed rules would require the cybersecurity disclosures to be presented in Inline eXtensible Business Reporting Language (“Inline XBRL”). The proposed amendments are intended to better inform investors about a registrant’s risk management, strategy, and governance and to provide timely notification of material cybersecurity incidents. Comments should be received on or before May 9, 2022.

Per Release No. 33-11042, the SEC is proposing for public comment amendments to its rules under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that would require registrants to provide certain climate-related information in their registration statements and annual reports. The proposed rules would require information about a registrant’s climate-related risks that are reasonably likely to have a material impact on its business, results of operations, or financial condition. The required information about climate-related risks would also include disclosure of a registrant’s greenhouse gas emissions, which have become a commonly used metric to assess a registrant’s exposure to such risks. In addition, under the proposed rules, certain climate-related financial metrics would be required in a registrant’s audited financial statements. Comments should be received on or before 30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register or May 20, 2022 (which is 60 days after issuance), whichever is later.

Per Release No. 34-94499, the SEC is re-proposing amendments to remove the references to credit ratings included in certain Commission rules. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”), among other things, requires the Commission to remove any references to credit ratings from its regulations. In one rule governing the activity of distribution participants, the SEC is proposing to remove the reference to credit ratings, substitute alternative measures of credit-worthiness, and impose related recordkeeping obligations in certain instances. In another rule governing the activity of issuers and selling security holders during a distribution, the SEC is proposing to eliminate the exception for investment-grade nonconvertible debt, nonconvertible preferred securities, and asset-backed securities. Comments should be received on or before May 23, 2022.

Per Release No. 34-94524, the SEC is proposing new rules to further define the phrase “as a part of a regular business” as used in the statutory definitions of “dealer” and “government securities dealer” under Sections 3(a)(5) and 3(a)(44), respectively, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). Comments should be received on or before 30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register or May 27, 2022 (which is 60 days after issuance), whichever is later.

Per Release No. 33-11048, the SEC is proposing rules intended to enhance investor protections in initial public offerings by special purpose acquisition companies (“SPACs”) and in subsequent business combination transactions between SPACs and private operating companies. Specifically, the SEC is proposing specialized disclosure requirements with respect to, among other things, compensation paid to sponsors, conflicts of interest, dilution, and the fairness of these business combination transactions. The proposed new rules and amendments to certain rules and forms under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 would address the application of disclosure, underwriter liability, and other provisions in the context of, and specifically address concerns associated with, business combination transactions involving SPACs as well as the scope of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Further, the SEC is proposing a rule that would deem any business combination transaction involving a reporting shell company, including a SPAC, to involve a sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s shareholders and are proposing to amend a number of financial statement requirements applicable to transactions involving shell companies. In addition, the SEC is proposing to update our guidance regarding the use of projections in SEC filings as well as to require additional disclosure regarding projections when used in connection with business combination transactions involving SPACs. Finally, the SEC is proposing a new safe harbor under the Investment Company Act of 1940 that would provide that a SPAC that satisfies the conditions of the proposed rule would not be an investment company and therefore would not be subject to regulation under that Act. Comments should be received on or before 30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register or May 31, 2022 (which is 60 days after issuance), whichever is later.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in March.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in March.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in March.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-22-08: 

March 02, 2022

NFA encourages Members to monitor U.S. sanctions on Russia and be vigilant of cybersecurity threats

NFA is monitoring the U.S. government's sanctions imposed in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the impact of this activity on the global financial markets. NFA encourages Members to monitor the Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) webpage for more information on current sanctions.

Additionally, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) issued a joint Cybersecurity Advisory describing destructive malware that has been used to target organizations in Ukraine, as well as guidance on detecting cyber threats and protecting networks. While no specific, credible threat to the U.S. currently exists, CISA and the FBI encourage firms to assess and bolster their cybersecurity efforts.

Per Notice I-22-09: 

March 09, 2022

FinCEN issues alert on potential Russian sanctions evasion efforts and reminds financial institutions of SAR and other reporting obligations

On March 7, 2022, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued an alert reminding all financial institutions to be vigilant against efforts to evade the expansive sanctions (e.g., Office of Foreign Assets Control) and other U.S.-imposed restrictions implemented in connection with Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine. The alert contains examples of select red flag indicators to assist financial institutions in identifying potential sanctions evasions and reminds financial institutions of their Bank Secrecy Act reporting (e.g., suspicious activity report (SAR)) obligations. All NFA Members should carefully review the alert. A copy of the alert is available on FinCEN's website.

Per Notice I-22-10: 

March 11, 2022

Reminder: CPO notice filing requirements under Compliance Rule 2-50

Given the recent market volatility in a number of asset classes, NFA reminds commodity pool operator (CPO) Members of their obligation under Compliance Rule 2-50 to notify NFA when specified market or other events affect a commodity pool's ability to fulfill its participant obligations.

Any required notice must be filed using NFA's EasyFile Extensions and Notice Filings and must identify all relevant subsections of Compliance Rule 2-50 and the impacted pool(s) and include a summary of the event. Step-by-step instructions for filing any type of notice are available in the Filing Extensions and Notice Filings with NFA Help Guide.

Per Notice I-22-11: 

March 17, 2022

FCM and IB Members—FinCEN updates its list of FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies

On March 10, 2022, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a news release announcing that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) reissued its list of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. NFA Member futures commission merchants (FCM) and introducing brokers (IB) should review this release to ensure that their AML programs have the most current information on FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies and revise their AML programs accordingly. A copy of the news release is available on FinCEN's website.

Per Notice I-22-12: 

March 23, 2022

FinCEN issues additional alert regarding the importance of identifying and quickly reporting suspicious transactions involving Russian elites and their proxies

On March 16, 2022, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued an additional alert on the importance of all financial institutions identifying and quickly reporting any suspicious transactions involving assets of sanctioned Russian elites and their proxies. The alert also reminds futures commission merchants (FCM) and introducing brokers (IB) of their general AML program obligations and specifically highlights customer due diligence (CDD) requirements which may facilitate the identification of a legal entity owned or controlled by a foreign politically exposed person (PEP). Additionally, FinCEN's alert reminds FCMs and IBs to comply with their general due diligence obligations for correspondent accounts. A copy of the alert is available on FinCEN's website.

Per Notice I-22-13: 

March 31, 2022

FCM and RFED filing requirements for Juneteenth

On June 18, 2021, Juneteenth (June 19th) was designated as a U.S. Federal Holiday. The following futures commission merchant (FCM) and retail foreign exchange dealer (RFED) regulatory filings will be impacted as follows by Juneteenth:

Juneteenth (observed)—Monday, June 20, 2022

  • Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Friday, June 17, 2022 are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, June 21; and
  • Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customers collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Monday, June 20, 2022 are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, June 21.

Any information filed by FCMs or RFEDs after its due date must be accompanied by a fee for each business day that it is late.

Visit NFA's website to view a complete schedule of daily filing requirements for 2022 holidays.

For more information about filing financial reports, visit NFA's website.

Per Notice I-22-14: 

March 31, 2022

SD filing requirements for Juneteenth

On June 18, 2021, Juneteenth (June 19th) was designated as a U.S. Federal Holiday. As such, NFA has updated its schedule of 2022 holiday filing requirements for swap dealers (SD) to include Juneteenth.

For more information about SD filing requirements, visit NFA's website.

News Releases

March 30, 2022

NFA orders London, U.K. introducing broker Marex Spectron International Limited to pay a $250,000 fine

March 30, Chicago—NFA has ordered London, U.K. introducing broker Member Marex Spectron International Limited (Marex) to pay a $250,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Marex, in which it neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Complaint alleged that Marex allowed unregistered individuals to act as associated persons without being registered as such. The Complaint also alleged that Marex failed to diligently supervise its employees and agents. In its Decision, the BCC found that Marex violated NFA Bylaw 301(b) and Compliance Rule 2-9(a).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

March 30, 2022

NFA permanently bars Chennai, India commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor eDeal Market LLC and its principal Nithya Narasimhan from membership

March 30, Chicago—NFA has permanently barred eDeal Market LLC (eDeal), a former NFA Member commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor located in Chennai, India, and Nithya Narasimhan, its former principal and associated person, from membership and from acting as a principal of an NFA Member.

The default Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and eDeal and Narasimhan's failure to file an Answer. The BCC found that eDeal and Narasimhan failed to cooperate fully with an NFA examination and failed to supervise the firm's operations. The BCC also found that eDeal acted in the capacity of a futures commission merchant or retail foreign exchange dealer without registration or exemption, failed to list two individuals as principals and allowed one of those individuals to act as an associated person of eDeal without registration, made prohibited representations regarding NFA, and used misleading promotional material.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

March 30, 2022

NFA orders Dallas, Texas introducing broker and commodity trading advisor Member Coquest Incorporated to pay a $275,000 fine

March 30, Chicago—NFA has ordered Coquest Incorporated (Coquest), an NFA Member introducing broker and commodity trading advisor located in Dallas, Texas, to pay a $275,000 fine. John Alan Vassallo, a principal and associated person (AP) of Coquest, shares liability with the firm jointly and severally for $150,000.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the Committee and a settlement offer submitted by Coquest, Vassallo and Dennis Todd Weinmann, another firm principal and AP, in which they neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Complaint alleged, among other things, that Coquest violated NFA Bylaw 1101 by doing futures business with an affiliate that was not an NFA Member but was required to be registered with the CFTC and was not. In addition, the Complaint alleged that Coquest and Vassallo negligently misrepresented to NFA that the non-Member affiliate was eligible for an exemption from CFTC registration. The Complaint also alleged that Vassallo facilitated a decade-long violation of Bylaw 1101, both while serving as an AP and principal of a former Member firm and while serving as an AP and principal of Coquest. Additionally, the Complaint alleged that Coquest, Vassallo and Weinmann failed to supervise. In its Decision, the BCC found that Coquest violated NFA Bylaw 1101 and NFA Compliance Rules 2-4 and 2-9(a); that Vassallo violated NFA Compliance Rules 2-4 and 2-9(a); and that Weinmann violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(a).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

March 31, 2022

NFA orders New York, N.Y. swap dealer Goldman Sachs & Co., LLC to pay a $2,500,000 fine

March 31, Chicago—NFA has ordered New York, N.Y. swap dealer Member Goldman Sachs & Co., LLC (Goldman) to pay a $2,500,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Goldman, in which it neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Complaint alleged that Goldman did not collect or post variation margin (VM) on uncleared swaps with counterparties that were covered by the CFTC VM regulations. The Complaint also alleged that Goldman did not implement policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure compliance with its pre-trade mid-market mark (PTMM) obligations and did not provide PTMM to uncleared swaps counterparties when required. Additionally, the Complaint alleged that Goldman failed to promptly submit accurate and complete reports, documents and supplemental information to NFA, did not diligently supervise all activities relating to its business and did not monitor the firm's compliance with certain external business conduct standards policies and procedures. In its Decision, the BCC found that Goldman violated NFA Compliance Rule 2-49(a) and 2-49(b).

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

CyberCrime

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures.

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA March 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices
  • NFA News Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (March 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-march-2022/feed/ 0
News Update: Biden Takes Step to Regulate Cryptocurrencies https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-biden-takes-step-to-regulate-cryptocurrencies/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-biden-takes-step-to-regulate-cryptocurrencies/#respond Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:45:08 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13449

March 2022 Overview & Summary President Biden signed an executive order on Wednesday, March 9 […]

The post News Update: Biden Takes Step to Regulate Cryptocurrencies appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

March 2022

Overview & Summary

President Biden signed an executive order on Wednesday, March 9 that will direct the federal government to produce a plan to regulate cryptocurrencies. This Executive Order will outline the first approach to addressing the risks and potential benefits of digital assets and their underlying technology. The order lays out a national policy for digital assets across six key priorities: consumer and investor protection; financial stability; illicit finance; U.S. leadership in the global financial system and economic competitiveness; financial inclusion; and responsible innovation.

Notably, the order directs the Federal Reserve to research and potentially develop its own digital dollar, which would be similar to cryptocurrencies. The order also directs the Treasury Department to develop guidelines for Americans trading and using cryptocurrency to facilitate the mitigation and reduction of fraud or market volatility. The Treasury will conduct further research on the potential role of digital assets and blockchain in future payment systems. In addition, other agencies will examine cryptocurrency's role as a speculative asset and its role in illicit finance.

The current administration has been under pressure to play more of a coordinating role in Washington’s approach regarding this asset class, as industry executives continue to lament what they believe is a lack of clarity on rules; this executive order takes a step in that direction.

Our Take

The cryptocurrency market is now worth more than $3 trillion. Surveys suggest that around 16 percent of adult Americans – approximately 40 million people – have invested in, traded, or used cryptocurrencies.

Whether you are an adviser looking to expand your investment strategy to include digital assets, or you are looking to participate in ICOs or build out a platform for trading cryptocurrency as a broker-dealer, it is wise to consider partnering with an established compliance team who can help you navigate this imminent regulation and provide assistance from initial registration to regulatory examination.

CRC recommends that firms prepare to ensure that appropriate controls and procedures are developed to allow sufficient oversight into this area.

As with any compliance initiative or change to regulation, CRC recommends that all personnel are well trained, and that such training is both highly specific to firm policies and procedures and appropriately documented.

Opportunities for CRC to Assist Your Firm

  • CRC is available for outsourced support with respect to cryptocurrency.
  • CRC can proactively conduct a review of your existing compliance program to identify opportunities to potentially implement enhancements in preparation for regulatory examinations.
  • CRC is available to assist with examination responses.
  • CRC can prepare written electronic communications and record retention policies and procedures designed to comply with relevant industry rules, regulations, and laws.
  • CRC offers best practices guidance to firms that seek to improve current protocols or to further strengthen existing program compliance.

Please contact Mitch Avnet for more information.

Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com  or (646) 346.2468

The post News Update: Biden Takes Step to Regulate Cryptocurrencies appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-biden-takes-step-to-regulate-cryptocurrencies/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-february-2022%ef%bf%bc/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-february-2022%ef%bf%bc/#respond Wed, 02 Mar 2022 15:23:30 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13443

Monthly Regulatory Summary As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Monthly Regulatory Summary

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-05, FINRA has adopted amendments to Rule 2165 (Financial Exploitation of Specified Adults) to permit member firms to: (1) place a hold on a securities transaction (in addition to the already-permitted hold on a disbursement of funds or securities) where there is a reasonable belief of financial exploitation; and (2) extend a temporary hold on a disbursement or transaction for an additional 30 business days, beyond the current maximum of 25 business days (for a total of 55 business days), if the member firm has reported the matter to a state regulator or agency, or a court of competent jurisdiction. The amendments to Rule 2165 become effective March 17, 2022.

The rule text is available in Attachment A.

Per Notice 22-06, the U.S. government has imposed sanctions in response to Russia’s actions in Ukraine. FINRA is issuing this Notice to provide member firms with information about these recent actions. FINRA encourages member firms to continue to monitor the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) website for relevant information.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in February.

SEC

Final Rules

There were no Final Rules in February.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. IA-5955, the SEC is proposing new rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act” or the “Act”). The SEC proposes to require registered investment advisers to private funds to provide transparency to their investors regarding the full cost of investing in private funds and the performance of such private funds. The SEC also is proposing rules that would require a registered private fund adviser to obtain an annual financial statement audit of each private fund it advises and, in connection with an adviser-led secondary transaction, a fairness opinion from an independent opinion provider. In addition, the SEC is proposing rules that would prohibit all private fund advisers, including those that are not registered with the Commission, from engaging in certain sales practices, conflicts of interest, and compensation schemes that are contrary to the public interest and the protection of investors. All private fund advisers would also be prohibited from providing preferential treatment to certain investors in a private fund, unless the adviser discloses such treatment to other current and prospective investors. The SEC is proposing corresponding amendments to the Advisers Act books and records rule to facilitate compliance with these proposed new rules and assist our examination staff. Finally, the SEC is proposing amendments to the Advisers Act compliance rule, which would affect all registered investment advisers, to better enable SEC staff to conduct examinations.

Per Release No. 33-11028, the SEC is proposing new rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) to require registered investment advisers (“advisers”) and investment companies (“funds”) to adopt and implement written cybersecurity policies and procedures reasonably designed to address cybersecurity risks. The SEC also is proposing a new rule and form under the Advisers Act to require advisers to report significant cybersecurity incidents affecting the adviser, or its fund or private fund clients, to the Commission. With respect to disclosure, the SEC is proposing amendments to various forms regarding the disclosure related to significant cybersecurity risks and cybersecurity incidents that affect advisers and funds and their clients and shareholders. Finally, the SEC is proposing new recordkeeping requirements under the Advisers Act and Investment Company Act.

Per Release No. 34-94196, the SEC proposes rules to shorten the standard settlement cycle for most broker-dealer transactions from two business days after the trade date (“T+2”) to one business day after the trade date (“T+1”). To facilitate a T+1 standard settlement cycle, the SEC also proposes new requirements for the processing of institutional trades by broker-dealers, investment advisers, and certain clearing agencies. These requirements are designed to protect investors, reduce risk, and increase operational efficiency. The SEC proposes to require compliance with a T+1 standard settlement cycle, if adopted, by March 31, 2024. The SEC also solicits comment on how best to further advance beyond T+1.

Per Release No. 33-11030, the SEC is proposing to amend certain rules that govern beneficial ownership reporting. The proposed amendments would modernize the filing deadlines for initial and amended beneficial ownership reports filed on Schedules 13D and 13G. The proposed amendments also would deem holders of certain cash-settled derivative securities as beneficial owners of the reference equity securities and clarify the disclosure requirements of Schedule 13D with respect to derivative securities. In addition, the proposed amendments would clarify and affirm the operation of the regulation as applied to two or more persons that form a group under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and provide new exemptions to permit such persons to communicate and consult with each other, jointly engage issuers and execute certain transactions without being subject to regulation as a group. The SEC also is proposing to amend provisions regarding the date on which Schedules 13D and 13G filings are deemed to have been made. Finally, the SEC is proposing to require that Schedules 13D and 13G be filed using a structured, machine-readable data language.

Per Release No. 34-94212, the SEC is proposing for public comment amendments to the SEC’s rules implementing its whistleblower program. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) provides for, among other things, the issuance of monetary awards to any eligible whistleblower who voluntarily provides the SEC with original information about a securities law violation that leads to the SEC’s success in obtaining a monetary order of more than a million dollars in a covered judicial or administrative action brought by the SEC (“covered action”). If an eligible whistleblower qualifies for an award, Section 21F requires an award that is at least 10 percent, but no more than 30 percent, of the amount of the monetary sanctions collected in the covered action. The receipt of an award in a covered action also enables a whistleblower to qualify for an award in connection with judicial or administrative actions based on the whistleblower’s same original information and brought by the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and certain other statutorily identified agencies or entities (“related actions”). The proposed rules would make two substantive changes to the Commission’s whistleblower rules that implement the whistleblower program, as well as several conforming amendments and technical corrections.

Per Release No. 34-94313, the SEC is proposing a new rule and related form pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), including Section 13(f)(2), which was added by Section 929X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“DFA”). The proposed rule and related form are designed to provide greater transparency through the publication of short sale related data to investors and other market participants. Under the rule, institutional investment managers that meet or exceed a specified reporting threshold would be required to report, on a monthly basis using the proposed form, specified short position data and short activity data for equity securities. In addition, the SEC is proposing a new rule under the Exchange Act to prescribe a new “buy to cover” order marking requirement, and proposing to amend the national market system plan governing the consolidated audit trail (“CAT”) created pursuant to the Exchange Act to require the reporting of “buy to cover” order marking information and reliance on the bona fide market making exception in the Commission’s short sale rules. The SEC is publishing the text of the proposed amendments to the CAT NMS Plan in a separate notice.

Per Release No. 34-94314, the SEC is publishing notice of the text of the proposed amendments to the National Market System Plan Governing the Consolidated Audit Trail (“CAT NMS Plan”) in connection with the Commission’s issuance of Release No. 34-94313, the “Short Position and Short Activity Reporting by Institutional Investment Managers” (the “Proposing Release”).

Per Release No. 34-94315, on November 18, 2021, the SEC issued for comment a proposed rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) in Release No. 34-93613 (Nov. 18, 2021), 86 FR 69802 (Dec. 8, 2021) regarding the reporting of securities loans. The Commission is reopening the comment period for the proposed rule in light of the proposed Exchange Act rule regarding short sale disclosure. In particular, the SEC is soliciting comment on any potential effects of the proposed Exchange Act rule regarding short sale disclosure that the Commission should consider in determining whether to adopt the proposed Exchange Act rule regarding the reporting of securities loans.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in February.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in February.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in February.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-22-05: 

February 01, 2022

Extension of relief from the on-site annual inspection of branch offices and guaranteed IBs

Due to COVID-19, NFA allowed Members to conduct all calendar year 2020 and 2021 annual inspections of branch offices and guaranteed introducing brokers (IB) remotely (see Notices to Members I-20-35 and I-21-25). NFA is extending the relief provided in Notices I-20-35 and I-21-25 through the end of 2022. Although Members must conduct the required annual inspection of each branch office and guaranteed IB by December 31, 2022, firms may conduct these inspections remotely. A Member that conducts a remote examination in 2022 based on this relief may still conduct a remote examination in 2023 if its risk assessment indicates it is appropriate to do so. This risk assessment should take into account when the firm most recently conducted an on-site exam.

Per Notice I-22-06: 

February 02, 2022

Notice of Members Elected to NFA's Board of Directors and Nominating Committee

Board of Directors

This year there was one contested election in the CPO/CTA category of NFA's Board of Directors. The result of the election is as follows:

CPO/CTA Category:

  • Douglas L. Bry, Augur Trading Company

During its meeting on January 20, 2022, NFA's Executive Committee, pursuant to Article VII, Section (3)(c) and Article X, Section 3 of NFA's Articles of Incorporation, elected the following nominees to the Board and Nominating Committee:

Board of Directors

FCM Category:

  • Scott Andersen*, SG Americas Securities LLC
  • Gerald F. Corcoran, R.J. O'Brien & Associates LLC
  • Maureen C. Downs, Phillip Capital, Inc.

IB Category:

  • Scott W. Stewart, Stewart-Peterson Group, Inc.

CPO/CTA Category:

  • Constance R. Wick, Crabel Capital Management LLC

SD/MSP/RFED Category:

  • Mark L. Maurer, StoneX Markets LLC
  • William F. McCoy, Morgan Stanley
  • Don Thompson, JP Morgan Chase & Co.

2022 NFA Nominating Committee

FCM Category:

  • David Allocco*, Citigroup Global Markets, Inc.

IB Category:

  • Trent Hurley*, Hurley & Associates, Inc.

CPO/CTA Category:

  • Simon Raykher*, Kepos Capital LP

SD/MSP/RFED Category:

  • Syed Ali*, Barclays Bank PLC

The terms of NFA's Board of Directors and Nominating Committee members will begin on February 17, 2022. Board members representing contract markets serve one-year terms. All other Board members serve two-year terms. Nominating Committee members serve three-year terms.

* Newly elected

Per Notice I-22-07: 

February 22, 2022

NFA's Board of Directors re-elects Maureen C. Downs to serve as Chair

At its February meeting, NFA's Board of Directors re-elected Maureen C. Downs, Phillip Capital, Inc., to serve a one-year term as Chair. The Board also re-elected Don Thompson, JPMorgan Chase & Co., to serve as Vice-Chair.

In addition, the Board elected the following individuals to serve as public directors for two-year terms:

  • Ana Beskin, Amazon People Experience and Tech;
  • Ronald F. Filler, New York Law School;
  • Arthur W. Hahn;
  • Mary M. McDonnell, McDonnell & Associates; and
  • Michael H. Moskow, The Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

The Board also elected the following individuals to serve one-year terms on NFA's Executive Committee:

  • Mark G. Bagan, Minneapolis Grain Exchange;
  • Seth P. Bender, HSBC Bank PLC;
  • Douglas L. Bry, Augur Trading Company;
  • Michael T. Burke, HighGround Trading LLC;
  • Michael C. Dawley, Bluefin Partners LLC;
  • Arthur W. Hahn;
  • Julie Holzrichter, CME Group, Inc.;
  • Ernest L. Jaffarian, Efficient Capital Management LLC;
  • Thomas R. Kadlec, ADM Investor Services, Inc.;
  • Mary M. McDonnell, McDonnell & Associates;
  • Michael H. Moskow, The Chicago Council on Global Affairs;
  • Todd E. Petzel, Offit Capital Advisors LLC; and
  • Don Thompson, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Ms. Downs, NFA Permanent Special Advisor Leo Melamed, and NFA's President also serve on the Executive Committee.

News Releases

February 28, 2022

NFA orders Newport Beach, Calif. commodity trading advisor Plus EV Capital LLC never to reapply for NFA membership

February 28, Chicago—NFA has ordered Plus EV Capital LLC (EV Capital), a former NFA Member commodity trading advisor located in Newport Beach, Calif., never to reapply for membership or act as a principal of an NFA Member. NFA also ordered Rohit Chopra, EV Capital's sole owner, principal and associated person, not to reapply for membership or act as a principal of an NFA Member for three years. If Chopra seeks NFA membership following the three-year period, he must pay a $100,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by an NFA Hearing Panel, is based on a Complaint issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee and a settlement offer submitted by EV Capital and Chopra, in which they neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Complaint alleges that EV Capital and Chopra placed unauthorized trades in customers' accounts, misrepresented to customers about the trades placed in their accounts, made highly risky trades in a customer's account and manipulated allocation instructions to benefit Chopra to the detriment of customers.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

CyberCrime

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures.

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA February 2022 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices
  • NFA News Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (February 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-february-2022%ef%bf%bc/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2022) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-january-2022/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-january-2022/#respond Fri, 25 Feb 2022 13:25:35 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13436

Monthly Regulatory Summary As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Monthly Regulatory Summary

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Rule Filings

Per File No. SR-FINRA-2022-001, FINRA filed with the SEC a proposed rule change to extend temporary Supplementary Material .17 (Temporary Relief to Allow Remote Inspections for Calendar Years 2020 and 2021, and Through June 30 of Calendar Year 2022) under FINRA Rule 3110 (Supervision) to include calendar year 2022 inspection obligations through December 31, 2022 within the scope of the supplementary material. The proposed additional six-month extension of Rule 3110.17 is necessary to address the operational challenges resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic that many member firms continue to face in planning for and timely conducting, during the second half of calendar year 2022, the on-site inspection component of Rule 3110(c) (Internal Inspections) at locations requiring inspection in calendar year 2022.

FINRA has designated the proposed rule change as constituting a “non-controversial” rule change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under the Act, which renders the proposal effective upon receipt upon of the filing by the SEC.

At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the SEC summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the SEC that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the SEC takes such action, the SEC shall institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

Per File No. SR-FINRA-2022-002, FINRA is filing with the SEC a proposed rule change to amend FINRA Rule 7620A (FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility Reporting Fees) to modify the query fee applicable to non-retail participants that use the FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility Carteret (the “FINRA/Nasdaq TRF Carteret”) and the FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility Chicago (the “FINRA/Nasdaq TRF Chicago”) (collectively, the “FINRA/Nasdaq TRF”).

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 22-01, FINRA issued this Notice to help firms review, reconcile and respond to their Final Statements in E-Bill as well as view the reports that are currently available in the Central Registration Depository (CRD) and Investment Adviser Registration Depository (IARD) systems for the annual registration renewal process.

The deadline to remit payment for any additional amounts owed and to report any discrepancies to FINRA was Jan. 28, 2022. It is critical that firms ensure they paid in full or reported discrepancies by this deadline.

Per Notice 22-02, FINRA has amended, with immediate effectiveness, the provisions of FINRA Rule 2251 regarding rates of reimbursement for expenses incurred in processing and forwarding proxy and other issuer-related materials. As specified in more detail within the Notice, the amendments apply the notice and access fees set forth under the rule to the distribution of investment company shareholder reports and further prohibit fees on accounts containing only shares that were transferred to the account holder by the member without charge. These amendments conform Rule 2251 to provisions in the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) rules approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The text of the rule change is available as Attachment A.

Per Notice 22-03, FINRA has adopted amendments to its rules to clarify the application of FINRA rules to security-based swaps (SBS):

  • FINRA has adopted a new Rule 0180 (Application of Rules to Security-Based Swaps), which, along with conforming amendments to Rule 9610 (Procedures for Exemptions—Application), became effective February 6, 2022. The new rule replaces the expiring temporary Rule 0180 and generally applies FINRA rules to members’ activities and positions with respect to SBS, with limited exceptions.
  • FINRA has amended its financial responsibility and operational rules, including Rule 4120 (Regulatory Notification and Business Curtailment), to conform to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC or Commission) SBS-related capital, margin and segregation requirements. These amendments became effective February 6, 2022.
  • FINRA has adopted a new SBS-specific margin rule, Rule 4240 (Security-Based Swap Margin Requirements), which replaces the expiring interim pilot program establishing margin requirements for credit default swaps (CDS). The new margin rule, along with related amendments to Rules 4210 (Margin Requirements) and 4220 (Daily Record of Required Margin), will become effective April 6, 2022.

The amended text of the rules is set forth in Attachment A.

Per Notice 22-04, FINRA issued this Notice toremind member firms of their obligation to execute marketable customer orders fully and promptly. FINRA also reminded firms of their obligation to ensure that their supervisory systems are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with this obligation.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in January.

SEC

Final Rules

There were no Final Rules in January.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-11013, the SEC proposed amendments to Rule 10b5-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The proposed amendments would add new conditions to the availability of the affirmative defense under Exchange Act Rule 10b5-1(c)(1) that are designed to address concerns about abuse of the rule to opportunistically trade securities on the basis of material nonpublic information in ways that harm investors and undermine the integrity of the securities markets. The SEC also proposed new disclosure requirements regarding the insider trading policies of issuers, and the adoption and termination (including modification) of Rule 10b5‑1 and certain other trading arrangements by directors, officers, and issuers. In addition, the SEC proposed amendments to the disclosure requirements for executive and director compensation regarding the timing of equity compensation awards made in close proximity in time to the issuer’s disclosure of material nonpublic information. Finally, the SEC proposed amendments to Forms 4 and 5 to require corporate insiders subject to the reporting requirements of Exchange Act Section 16 to identify transactions made pursuant to a Rule 10b5-1(c)(1) trading arrangement, and to disclose all gifts of securities on Form 4.

Per Release No. IA-5950, the SEC proposed to amend Form PF, the confidential reporting form for certain SEC-registered investment advisers to private funds to require current reporting upon the occurrence of key events. The proposed amendments also would decrease the reporting threshold for large private equity advisers and require these advisers to provide additional information to the SEC about the private equity funds they advise. Finally, the SEC proposed to amend requirements concerning how large liquidity advisers report information about the liquidity funds they advise. The proposed amendments are designed to enhance the Financial Stability Oversight Counsel’s (“FSOC”)
ability to monitor systemic risk as well as bolster the SEC’s regulatory oversight of private fund advisers and investor protection efforts.

Per Release No. 34-94062, the SEC proposed to amend a rule which defines certain terms used in the statutory definition of “exchange” under Section 3(a)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to include systems that offer the use of non-firm trading interest and communication protocols to bring together buyers and sellers of securities. In addition, the SEC re-proposed amendments to Regulation ATS under the Exchange Act that were initially proposed in September 2020 for alternative trading systems (“ATSs”) to take into consideration systems that may fall within the definition of exchange because of the proposed amendments and operate as an ATS. The SEC re-proposed, with certain revisions, amendments to Regulation ATS for ATSs that trade government securities as defined under Section 3(a)(42) of the Exchange Act (“government securities”) or repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements on government securities (“Government Securities ATSs”) to: eliminate the exemption from compliance with Regulation ATS for an ATS that limits its securities activities to government securities or repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements on government securities (“repos”), and registers as a broker-dealer or is a bank; require Government Securities ATSs to file public revised Forms ATS-N, which would be subject to SEC review and effectiveness process, and would require a Government Securities ATS to disclose information about its manner of operations and the ATS-related activities of the registered broker-dealer or government securities broker or government securities dealer that operates the ATS and its affiliates; and apply the fair access rule to Government Securities ATSs that meet certain volume thresholds in U.S. Treasury Securities or in a debt security issued or guaranteed by a U.S. executive agency, or government-sponsored enterprise (“Agency Securities”). The SEC also proposed to amend Form ATS-N for NMS Stock ATSs, which would require existing NMS Stock ATSs to file an amendment to their existing disclosures. In addition, the SEC proposed to amend the Regulation ATS fair access rule. The SEC also proposed to require electronic filing of and to modernize Form ATS-R and Form ATS, which would require existing Form ATS filers to amend their existing disclosures. Further, the SEC re-proposed amendments to Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity (“Regulation SCI”) to apply it to ATSs that meet certain volume thresholds in U.S. Treasury Securities or Agency Securities.

Per Release No. 34-94074, the SEC reopened the comment period for its proposal to implement Section 953(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”). The proposed rule would amend the current executive compensation disclosure rule to require a description of how executive compensation actually paid by a registrant related to the financial performance of that company (“Proposed Rules”). The Proposed Rules were first set forth in a release published in the Federal Register on May 7, 2015 (Release No. 34-74835) (“Proposing Release”), and the related comment period ended on July 6, 2015. The reopening of this comment period is intended to allow interested persons further opportunity to analyze and comment upon the Proposed Rules in light of developments since the publication of the Proposing Release and our further consideration of the Section 953(a) mandate, including by responding to the additional requests for comment included in this release.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in January.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in January.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in January.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-22-01: 

January 12, 2022

Member obligations under NFA Bylaw 1101 and Compliance Rule 2-36(d) with respect to CPOs/CTAs exempt from registration

The CFTC requires any person that claims an exemption from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3), 4.13(a)(5), an exclusion from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.5 or an exemption from CTA registration under 4.14(a)(8) (collectively, exemption) to annually affirm the applicable notice of exemption within 60 days of the calendar year end. Persons that fail to file the affirmation notice by March 1, 2022, will be deemed to have requested a withdrawal of the exemption and, therefore, may be required to be registered and NFA Members.

Since exempt CPOs/CTAs have until March 1, 2022, to complete the affirmation process, NFA recognizes that it may be difficult for a Member to conclusively determine prior to that date whether a previously exempt CPO/CTA continues to be eligible for a current exemption.

Therefore, Members that take reasonable steps to determine the registration and membership status of these previously exempt persons will not be in violation of NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d) if, between January 1 and March 31, 2022, they transact customer business with a previously exempt person that fails to become registered and an NFA Member, file a notice affirming its exemption from CPO/CTA registration, or provide a written representation as to why the person is not required to register or file the notice affirming the exemption.

How to identify whether an exempt CPO/CTA has affirmed its exemption

Members should compare their list of exempt CPO/CTAs with which the Member transacts customer business to the information NFA makes available to assist Members in determining whether an exempt CPO/CTA has affirmed its exemption(s).

Members can review exemption information in two ways. Members can view individual persons or entities by navigating to NFA's BASIC System, opening the person or entity's record, and, if applicable, clicking 'View All' in the Firm Exemptions box and/or the Pools & Pool Exemptions box. The Firm Exemptions page and/or the Pools & Pool Exemptions page will reflect an affirmation date if an exempt person or entity has properly filed a notice affirming an exemption, if applicable. Any exemption that was not affirmed in the previous year will no longer appear in BASIC.

Alternatively, Members can access a spreadsheet that includes a list of all persons or entities that have exemptions on file with NFA that must be affirmed on an annual basis. This spreadsheet, which is updated nightly, can be found in the Member's Annual Questionnaire which can be accessed by logging into the system. The spreadsheet includes all persons or entities with an exemption(s) that requires an annual affirmation, as well as the most recent affirmation date, if applicable, and the affirmation due date. If the affirmation due date is March 1, 2021, the exemption has not yet been affirmed. Once the exemption has been affirmed, the affirmation due date will change to March 1, 2022. Any exemptions not affirmed after March 1, 2022 will be withdrawn.

Expectations for Members transacting customer business with an exempt CPO/CTA that has not affirmed its exemption

NFA expects any Member transacting customer business with a person that previously claimed an exemption from CPO/CTA registration under the regulations listed above, and that has not filed a notice in NFA's Exemption System affirming the exemption, not filed a notice of exemption for another available exemption, or not properly registered and become an NFA Member by December 31, 2021, to promptly contact the person to determine whether the person intends to file a notice affirming the exemption.

If the Member learns that the person does not intend to file a notice affirming the exemption, or the person does not file a notice affirming the exemption by March 1, 2022, then the Member must promptly obtain a written representation as to why the person is not required to register or file a notice of exemption and evaluate whether the representation appears adequate. If the Member determines that this written representation is inadequate and the person is required to be registered, then the Member must put a plan in place (e.g., liquidation-only trades) to cease transacting customer business with the person or risk violating NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d).

Any Member that acts in accordance with the information provided in this Notice will not be charged with violating NFA Bylaw 1101 or Compliance Rule 2-36(d). Members should be aware, however, that this Notice does not relieve their regulatory obligations pursuant to the Commodity Exchange Act and the CFTC's Regulations.

Per Notice I-22-02: 

January 13, 2022

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for FCM, FDM and IB Members

This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Futures Commission Merchants (FCM)

Forex Dealer Members (FDM)

Introducing Brokers (IB)

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes a number of regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations of Member FCMs for which NFA is the DSRO, FDMs and IBs.

Self-Examination Questionnaire: NFA Members must annually review their operations using NFA's Self-Examination Questionnaire. This questionnaire is designed to aid Members in recognizing potential problem areas and to alert them to procedures that need to be revised or strengthened.

Supervision: Pursuant to NFA Compliance Rules 2-9 and 2-36, FCM, FDM and IB Members are required to diligently supervise their employees and agents in the conduct of their commodity interest activities. NFA expects firms to ensure that they have written supervisory policies and procedures to address the manner, frequency and results of monitoring written and oral communications. Such supervision includes, when required, maintaining a record of all oral and written communications provided or received concerning quotes, solicitations, bids, offers, instructions, trading and prices that lead to the execution of a transaction in a commodity interest and related cash or forward transaction, whether communicated by telephone, voicemail, facsimile, instant messaging, chat rooms, electronic mail, mobile device or other digital or electronic media. With respect to trading activity, firms should monitor to ensure any transfers or trades are not made to customers' detriment.

Third-Party Service Providers: Members that outsource regulatory functions must adopt and implement a written supervisory framework over outsourced functions to mitigate outsourcing-related risks pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9079. Firms must maintain records demonstrating that they have addressed the items outlined in the Interpretive Notice and are following their procedures.

Cybersecurity: FCM, FDM and IB Members must adopt a written information systems security program (ISSP) pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9070 to address the risk of unauthorized access to or attack of their information technology systems and to respond appropriately should unauthorized attacks occur. Members are also required to notify NFA of certain cybersecurity incidents related to their commodity interest activities via NFA's Cyber Notice Filing System. One common deficiency in this area is failure to provide cybersecurity training to employees upon hiring and annually thereafter.

Members that fail to establish and implement an ISSP may be subject to disciplinary action.

Notifications (FCMs only): Under certain circumstances, an FCM must transmit a notice filing (PDF) to NFA via WinJammerTM. For example, an FCM must notify its DSRO within 24 hours if it becomes the subject of a formal investigation by the SEC, a securities SRO or a futures SRO. An FCM must provide its DSRO a copy of any examination report issued to the FCM by the SEC or a securities SRO. An FCM must also provide notice of any correspondence received from the SEC or a securities SRO that raises issues with the adequacy of its capital position, liquidity to meet its obligations or ability to operate its business or internal controls.

Public Disclosures (FCMs only): Under CFTC Regulation 1.55, FCMs must provide disclosures on certain material business operations to customers prior to opening an account and must make those disclosures available to the general public. Firms must update this disclosure information, including any changes to the principals of the firm, as changes to firm operations arise.

Risk Management Programs (FCMs only): CFTC Regulation 1.11 requires FCMs that holds customer funds to establish, maintain and enforce a system of risk management policies and procedures designed to monitor and manage the risks associated with the FCM's activities. Firms must provide its senior management and its governing body with a quarterly Risk Exposure Report (RER), as well as interim RERs at any time the FCM detects a material change in the FCM's risk exposure. FCMs must file a copy of the quarterly RER and any interim RERs within five business days of providing the report to its senior management.

Ongoing Updates

On an ongoing basis, each NFA Member must update its Annual Questionnaire in the event of a material change to its operations. For example, if a Member begins soliciting for virtual currency or micro contract products or begins doing business, the Member must immediately update its Annual Questionnaire. Keeping the Annual Questionnaire up-to-date ensures firms receive all applicable notices relating to their reporting requirements in a timely manner and ensures that BASIC displays accurate information about firms' business activities when applicable.

Recent Amendments and Reminders

The Notice also provides additional links to certain Notices to Members regarding reminders and recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Per Notice I-22-03: 

January 13, 2022

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for CPO and CTA Members

This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Commodity Pool Operators (CPO)

Commodity Trading Advisors (CTA)

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes a number of regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations of CPO and CTA Members.

Self-Examination Questionnaire

NFA Members must annually review their operations using NFA's Self-Examination Questionnaire. This questionnaire is designed to aid Members in recognizing potential problem areas and to alert them to procedures that must be revised or strengthened.

Third-Party Service Providers

Members that outsource regulatory functions must adopt and implement a written supervisory framework over outsourced functions to mitigate outsourcing-related risks pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9079. Firms must maintain records demonstrating that they have addressed the items outlined in the Interpretive Notice and are following their procedures.

Cybersecurity

CPO and CTA Members must adopt a written information systems security program (ISSP) pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9070 to address the risk of unauthorized access to or attack of their information technology systems and to respond appropriately should unauthorized attacks occur. Members are also required to notify NFA of certain cybersecurity incidents related to their commodity interest activities via NFA's Cyber Notice Filing System. One common deficiency in this area is failure to provide cybersecurity training to employees upon hiring and annually thereafter.

Members that fail to establish and implement an ISSP may be subject to disciplinary action.

Pool Financial Reporting—Notification Requirements

Notice Filing Requirements: CPOs are required to file notice with NFA when a market or other event affects a commodity pool's ability to fulfill its participant obligations. Notice must be filed by 5:00 p.m. CT the next business day following one of the events outlined in Compliance Rule 2-50 and Interpretive Notice 9080.

Changes in Fiscal Year End: If a CPO elects a fiscal year end other than the calendar year end for a pool, it must give written notice of the election to all participants and file notice with NFA via EasyFile pursuant to CFTC Regulation 4.22(g) within 90 calendar days after the pool's formation. If this notice is not given, the CPO will be deemed to have elected the calendar year end as the pool's fiscal year end. The CPO must continue to use the elected fiscal year end for the pool unless it provides written notice of any proposed change to all participants and files such notice with NFA via EasyFile at least 90 days before the change.

Changes in Certified Public Accountant (CPA): In the event that a CPO changes the independent CPA engaged to audit a pool's financial statements, the CPO must file notice with NFA via EasyFile pursuant to CFTC Regulation 1.16(g) no more than 15 days after the CPA's resignation or dismissal by the CPO.

Extension Requests: If a CPO requests an extension to file an annual pool financial statement, the extension must be filed with NFA via EasyFile prior to the due date of the filing.

Cessation of Trading: When a pool ceases trading, the CPO must promptly update the Annual Questionnaire. With few exceptions, a CPO must also distribute to participants a final Annual Report and file the Annual Report with NFA. This Annual Report is due within 90 days after the pool ceases trading, absent an extension.

Calculation of Financial Ratios

CPO and CTA Members must compute financial ratios using the accrual method of accounting and in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles or another internationally recognized accounting standard as outlined in Interpretive Notice 9071. Members should consult Notice I-18-20 for additional guidance on calculating these ratios.

Ongoing Updates

On an ongoing basis, each NFA Member must update its Annual Questionnaire in the event of a material change to its operations. For example, if a Member begins soliciting for virtual currency or micro contract products or begins doing business, the Member must immediately update its Annual Questionnaire. Keeping the Annual Questionnaire up-to-date ensures firms receive all applicable notices relating to their reporting requirements in a timely manner and ensures that BASIC displays accurate information about firms business activities when applicable.

Recent Amendments and Reminders

The Notice also provides additional links to certain Notices to Members regarding reminders and recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Per Notice I-22-04: 

January 13, 2022

Educational resources, common deficiencies and other important regulatory information for SD Members

This Notice covers educational resources, common deficiencies and links to Notices to Members regarding recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Members Section of NFA's Website

From the Members section of NFA's website, swap dealer (SD) Members can access information detailing their regulatory obligations including the following:

Regulatory Obligations Related to Common Deficiencies

The following section describes a number of regulatory obligations related to common deficiencies noted during NFA examinations.

Third-Party Service Providers: Members that outsource regulatory functions must adopt and implement a written supervisory framework over outsourced functions to mitigate outsourcing-related risks pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9079. Firms must maintain records demonstrating that they have addressed the items outlined in the Interpretive Notice and are following their procedures.

Cybersecurity: SD Members must adopt a written information systems security program (ISSP) pursuant to Interpretive Notice 9070 to address the risk of unauthorized access to or attack of their information technology systems and to respond appropriately should unauthorized attacks occur. Members are also required to notify NFA of certain cybersecurity incidents related to their commodity interest activities via NFA's Cyber Notice Filing System. Common deficiencies in this area include:

  • Failure to provide cybersecurity training to employees upon hiring and at least annually thereafter; and
  • Failure to establish appropriate identity and access controls to their systems and data.

Members that fail to establish and implement an ISSP may be subject to disciplinary action.

Daily Trading Records: SD Members are required to make and keep daily trading records of all swaps executed, including all documents on which transaction information is originally recorded, pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.202.

Supervision: SD Members are required to have a supervisory program and must diligently supervise all activities relating to their business pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.602.

Business Conduct Standards: SD Members are required to obtain and retain a record of essential facts to accurately categorize their counterparties to facilitate compliance with various regulatory requirements pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.402. The failure to properly identify and classify counterparties may result in non-compliance with other transaction-specific requirements. Additionally, SD Members are required to make several disclosures to non-SD counterparties pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.431. A common deficiency in this area is a failure to disclose material information and pre-trade mid-market marks to counterparties prior to entering into uncleared swap transactions.

Market Practice: SD Members are required to implement policies and procedures designed to prevent fraud, manipulation, and other abusive practices prohibited by CFTC Regulation 23.410. Additionally, SD Members are required to communicate with counterparties in a fair and balanced manner as detailed in CFTC Regulation 23.433. Common deficiencies in this area include:

  • Failure to implement adequate trade surveillance to detect fraud, manipulation and abusive practices; and
  • Failure to conduct communication surveillance reasonably designed to ensure fair and balanced communications and the prohibition of fraud, manipulation and other abusive practices.

Portfolio Reconciliation: SD Members must engage in portfolio reconciliation pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.502. Firms are required to establish, maintain and follow written procedures to resolve discrepancies identified by portfolio reconciliation.

Swap Data Reporting: SD Members must report swap transaction data to swap data repositories pursuant to CFTC Regulation 23.204 and CFTC Regulation 23.205. Additionally, they must report corrections of identified errors or omissions as soon as technologically practicable (ASATP) after discovery. Common deficiencies in this area include:

  • Failure to report required regulatory messages, either at all or within the regulatory timeframes;
  • Failure to report accurately required data fields to the SDR; and
  • Failure to remediate errors and omissions ASATP after discovery.

Ongoing Updates

On an ongoing basis, each NFA Member must update its Annual Questionnaire in the event of a material change to its operations. For example, if a Member begins soliciting for virtual currency or micro contract products or begins doing business, the Member must immediately update its Annual Questionnaire. Keeping the Annual Questionnaire up-to-date ensures firms receive all applicable notices relating to their reporting requirements in a timely manner and ensures that BASIC displays accurate information about firms' business activities when applicable.

Recent Amendments and Reminders

The Notice also provides additional links to certain Notices to Members regarding reminders and recent amendments to NFA Rules and Interpretive Notices.

Recent CFTC Amendments

Capital Requirements: In July 2020, the CFTC approved its final rules for SD capital requirements. Pursuant to the final rules, SDs that are not subject to prudential regulation are required to compute regulatory capital using either standardized market and credit risk charges or internal models approved by the CFTC or NFA to calculate market and credit risk exposures. SDs electing to use internal models can use the net liquid assets method, the bank-based method, or the tangible net worth method to meet minimum capital requirements, based on the nature of their business. The compliance date for the new capital requirements was October 6, 2021.

Phase VI Margin Requirements: In December 2020, the CFTC approved its final rules for margin requirements for uncleared swaps for SD Members without a prudential regulator. The final rules include revisions to the calculation method for determining which entities are in the initial margin requirement scope for Phase VI and the timing for compliance with the initial margin requirements. Additionally, the final rules address minimum transfer amount rules for separately managed accounts and allows for separate minimum transfer amounts for initial and variation margin. Phase VI margin requirements begin on September 1, 2022.

Reporting Requirements: In September 2020, the CFTC approved its final rules for SD reporting. The final rules revise the current CFTC reporting requirements in order to improve the quality, accuracy, and completeness of the reporting data. The compliance date for the new reporting requirements is May 25, 2022.

News Releases

There were no NFA news releases in January.

Bottom of Form

Hot Issues

CyberCrime

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures.

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA January 2022 Industry Notices
  • FINRA Rule Filings
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (January 2022) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-january-2022/feed/ 0
SEC Offers Guidance on Form CRS https://compliance-risk.com/sec-offers-guidance-on-form-crs/ https://compliance-risk.com/sec-offers-guidance-on-form-crs/#respond Tue, 18 Jan 2022 15:41:14 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13413

Overview As firms prepare their annual ADV updates or review their compliance programs, one area […]

The post SEC Offers Guidance on Form CRS appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Overview

As firms prepare their annual ADV updates or review their compliance programs, one area where advisers and brokers who provide services to retail clients should highlight is Form CRS. 

On December 17, 2021, the staff of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission issued observations and guidance regarding Form CRS disclosures required of SEC-registered broker-dealers and investment advisers who offer services to retail investors. The statement provides insight into CRS findings for recently examined firms. While SEC staff notes that they did observe appropriately drafted Form CRS samples from various firms, there were consistent issues found across a broad sampling within the industry. Areas where CRS improvements were most frequently noted are described below and represent areas where firms should pay close attention when reviewing the CRS to see if updates are necessary, whether or not material changes have occurred this year.

Areas of Focus

Plain English

The purpose of Regulation Best Interest and the Form CRS is to create transparency within the financial service industry. As such, the Form CRS should not contain legal jargon or esoteric industry terms that may inhibit comprehension amongst retail investors.  

Live Hyperlinks

Firms were cited for including the text of links in their Form CRS which did not navigate to the correct destination or were not actually live hyperlinks. All hyperlinks to regulatory resources or additional disclosure must be live. 

Delivery

Perhaps the most common deficiency cited amongst broker-dealers and investment advisers was their failure to properly deliver or evidence such delivery of Form CRS. Ensure that the Form CRS is delivered at the appropriate point in a retail client’s relationship with the firm. Policies, procedures, training, and recordkeeping should all support this distribution process. 

Proper Format

Many firms were cited for failure to comply with the formatting requirements imposed by the Form CRS instructions. Firms should take care to confirm that all required headings, conversation starters, emphasized text, etc. are included throughout the document. 

Website

Form CRS should be prominently linked, along with other documents such as the firm’s Form ADV Part 2 and privacy policy, on a firm’s publicly available website. This should always be updated whenever the Form CRS is updated to ensure that the most current version is available on the website. 

Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest are not static and can evolve over time as industry relationships, products, client-base, fee structures, etc. change and develop. As such, firms should be aware that all new conflicts (whether real, potential, or perceived) must be reported to compliance for possible inclusion in Form CRS, Form ADV Part 2, or other relevant disclosure documents. 

Monitoring For Updates

CRC recommends that firms adopt a process whereby trigger events for Form CRS updates are recognized, tracked, and implemented within Form CRS by compliance. Such process should also include identifying material updates and tracking and confirmation of related re-distributions of the Form to current retail investors, clients, and customers. Such trigger events could include updates and changes to offerings, fees, compensation structure, or any other content within Form CRS. 

Conclusion

The Commission is not likely to give firms a break regarding Form CRS in 2022; in fact, CRC anticipates quite the opposite. We consider that 2021 was the honeymoon period for Regulation Best Interest, and even so, it brought 27+ enforcement actions related to Form CRS alone. Those actions, in conjunction with the most recent guidance and findings from the SEC should serve as both a warning and a road map as firms review and update their Form CRS. 

Next Steps for Advisers and Broker-Dealers

As always, CRC believes that the most effective compliance program is a proactive one. Accordingly, CRC recommends that advisers take this opportunity to review existing Form CRS content, format, and any related practices, policies, and procedures to ensure they adhere to current rules, and evaluate and implement any process re-engineering that might be necessary to comply fully with both Regulation Best Interest and the Form CRS instructions.

Contact Us

To discuss the Form CRS, contact a regulatory specialist at CRC. Our team is available to assist with outsourced policy and procedure management, gap analysis, policy implementation, and training. 

The post SEC Offers Guidance on Form CRS appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/sec-offers-guidance-on-form-crs/feed/ 0
News Reminder: SEC Approves FINRA Rules Change https://compliance-risk.com/news-reminder-sec-approves-finra-rules-change/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-reminder-sec-approves-finra-rules-change/#respond Thu, 13 Jan 2022 12:53:22 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13407

Overview In an order[1] dated July 30, 2021, the SEC approved the adoption of new FINRA […]

The post News Reminder: SEC Approves FINRA Rules Change appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Overview

In an order[1] dated July 30, 2021, the SEC approved the adoption of new FINRA Rule 4111 and Rule 9561 and the amendment of Rule 9559. FINRA has extended the effective date for the proposed rule change to no later than 180 days after publication of a Regulatory Notice announcing this Commission approval. At time of this update, FINRA has not yet published such a Regulatory Notice.

From the SEC’s approval order:

The proposal to establish a process in new Rule 4111 to identify members firms that present a high degree of risk to the investing public, based on numeric thresholds of firm-level and individual-level disclosure events, and then impose a Restricted Deposit Requirement, conditions or restrictions on the member firm’s operations, or both, will help protect investors and encourage such member firms to change their behavior. FINRA has designed the proposed rule change to establish an annual, multi-step process to determine whether a member firm raises investor protection concerns substantial enough to require the imposition of additional obligations, while allowing identified firms several means of challenging FINRA’s decisions and affecting the ultimate outcome.

The Department would begin each member firms’ annual Rule 4111 review process by calculating specified “Preliminary Identification Metrics” for each firm for each of six categories of events or conditions, collectively defined as the “Disclosure Event and Expelled Firm Association Categories.”

The six categories are: (1) Registered Person Adjudicated Events; (2) Registered Person Pending Events; (3) Registered Person Termination and Internal Review Events; (4) Member Firm Adjudicated Events; (5) Member Firm Pending Events; and (6) Registered Persons Associated with Previously Expelled Firms (also referred to as the Expelled Firm Association category).

There are numeric thresholds for seven different firm sizes, to provide that each member firm would be compared only to its similarly sized peers.

If the Department determines that a member firm warrants further review under Rule 4111, and such member firm would be meeting the Preliminary Criteria for Identification for the first time, the member firm would have a one-time opportunity to reduce its staffing level to avoid meeting the Preliminary Criteria for Identification, within 30 business days after being informed by the Department that it met the Preliminary Criteria for Identification. However, if the Department determines that the member firm still meets the Preliminary Criteria for Identification (or if the member firm did not opted to reduce staffing levels) the Department would determine the firm’s maximum Restricted Deposit Requirement, and the member firm would proceed to a “Consultation” with the Department.

During the Consultation, the Department would give the member firm an opportunity to demonstrate why it does not meet the Preliminary Criteria for Identification, why it should not be designated as a Restricted Firm, and why it should not be subject to the maximum Restricted Deposit Requirement. (42930) Pursuant to Proposed Rule 4111(e)(2), the Department would provide the member firm with written notice of its decision no later than 30 days from the date of FINRA’s letter scheduling the Consultation, stating any conditions or restrictions to be imposed, and the ability of the member firm to request a hearing with the Office of Hearing Officers in an expedited proceeding.

Under new Rule 9561(a)(1), the Department would serve to the member firm a notice of the Department’s decision following the Rule 4111 process. The proposed rule change would also provide that if a member firm does not request a hearing, the decision would constitute final FINRA action. In general, a request for a hearing would not stay any of the Rule 4111 Requirements imposed in the Department’s decision, which would be immediately effective with one exception being when member requests review of imposition of Restricted Deposit Requirement. In that case, the firm would be required to deposit the lesser of 25% of its Restricted Deposit Requirement or 25% of its average excess net capital over the prior year, while the proceeding is pending.

If a member firm fails to comply with any of the requirements imposed on it under Rule 4111, the Department would be authorized to serve a notice pursuant to proposed Rule 9561 stating that the member firm’s continued failure to comply within seven days of service of the notice would result in a suspension or cancellation of membership.

If a member firm requests a hearing under proposed Rule 9561, the hearing would be subject to Rule 9559 (Hearing Procedures for Expedited Proceedings Under the Rule 9550 Series).

Opportunities for CRC to Assist Your Firm

  • CRC can proactively conduct a review of your current compliance program to identify opportunities to potentially implement enhancements before the annual Rule 4111 reviews begin.
  • Between now and the effective date of this rule, CRC can help your firm to quickly scale up its compliance program with CRC resources to address concern areas.

Please contact Mitch Avnet or for more information.

Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com  or (646) 346.2468 


[1] SR-FINRA-2020-041 Approval Order, https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2021-08/sr-finra-2020-041-approval-order.pdf

The post News Reminder: SEC Approves FINRA Rules Change appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-reminder-sec-approves-finra-rules-change/feed/ 0
News Update: JP Morgan to pay $200M for Electronic Recordkeeping Lapses https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-jp-morgan-to-pay-200m-for-electronic-recordkeeping-lapses/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-jp-morgan-to-pay-200m-for-electronic-recordkeeping-lapses/#respond Wed, 12 Jan 2022 14:39:13 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13403

December 2021 Overview & Summary JP Morgan has agreed to pay the SEC and CFTC […]

The post News Update: JP Morgan to pay $200M for Electronic Recordkeeping Lapses appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

December 2021

Overview & Summary

JP Morgan has agreed to pay the SEC and CFTC a combined $200 million in response to regulatory findings which include “widespread and longstanding failures” surrounding the retention of employee electronic communications. The settlement order alleges that JP Morgan employees regularly communicated using personal email accounts, text messages, and WhatsApp as a means of conducting business. Such communication also took place on personal devices rather than firm-issued and controlled devices despite JP Morgan’s written policies and procedures and industry recordkeeping regulations. 

According to the settlement order, the failures stemmed from communications-related misconduct between January 2018 and November 2020. The settlement order also states that supervisory personnel participated in the misconduct it should have been supervising and preventing; this makes the offense particularly egregious. The settlement order enumerates various specific issues relative to the failures in recordkeeping as well as JP Morgan’s responsiveness and level of cooperation with the SEC during the examination process with respect to the producing of requested communications documents. 

Our Take

Electronic communications and related recordkeeping practices have been a hot topic amongst regulators in recent years. This landmark settlement is a clear indication that regulatory interest in this area is not waning and, as such, should be on the forefront of all compliance teams’ focus areas in 2022. 

As always, CRC reminds firms that the best compliance program is a proactive one. Accordingly, we suggest that firms (whether registered with FINRA as a BD or with the SEC as an RIA) who permit the use of text messages, chat features, and use of personal devices for the purpose of conducting firm-related business have sufficient oversight over such processes and have appropriate record-keeping practices in place for such communication methods.  Further, where firm policies and procedures have clear prohibitions or limitations on use of personal email, personal devices, chat features of social media platforms and other chat applications, text messages, etc., CRC recommends that firms ensure that controls and procedures in place allow sufficient oversight into this area. 

As with any compliance initiative, CRC recommends that all personnel are well trained, and that such training is highly specific to firm policies and procedures and is appropriately documented. 

Opportunities for CRC to Assist Your Firm

  • CRC is available for outsourced support with respect to email review and electronic communications archiving solutions. We are versed with industry-leading email review and retention platforms (e.g., Global Relay, Smarsh) and can advise on appropriate compliance-driven configuration that meets regulatory standards. 
  • CRC can proactively conduct a review of your current compliance program and electronic communications to identify opportunities to potentially implement enhancements in preparation for regulatory examinations.
  • CRC is available to assist with examination responses.
  • CRC can prepare written electronic communications and record retention policies and procedures designed to comply with relevant industry rules, regulations and laws. 
  • CRC offers best practices guidance to firms that seek to improve current protocols or to further strengthen current program compliance. 

Please contact Mitch Avnet for more information.

Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com or (646) 346.2468 

The post News Update: JP Morgan to pay $200M for Electronic Recordkeeping Lapses appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-jp-morgan-to-pay-200m-for-electronic-recordkeeping-lapses/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2021) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-december-2021/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-december-2021/#respond Tue, 04 Jan 2022 14:31:33 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13399

Monthly Regulatory Summary As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Monthly Regulatory Summary

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 21-42, FINRA alerted firms to a recently identified vulnerability in Apache Log4J software, which is an open-source, Java-based logging utility widely used by enterprise applications and cloud services. The “Log4Shell” vulnerability presents risk for member firms because they may be using this software in internal applications, or the software may be embedded in third-party software packages. In addition, many applications written in Java are potentially vulnerable.

Bad actors may take advantage of this vulnerability to compromise systems to potentially steal information or engage in fraudulent activities. For example, a remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability to take control of an affected system.

FINRA reminded firms that the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Regulation S-P Rule 30 requires firms to have written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to safeguard customer records and information and FINRA Rule 4370 (Business Continuity Plans and Emergency Contact Information) also applies to denials of service and other interruptions to members’ operations. In addition to firms’ compliance with SEC regulations, FINRA expects firms to develop reasonably designed cybersecurity programs and controls that are consistent with their risk profile, business model and scale of operations.

For more information, firms should review the resources provided on FINRA’s Cybersecurity Topic Page.

 Per Notice 21-43, in August 2019, FINRA launched a retrospective review that, among other things, sought stakeholders’ input on the effectiveness of Rule 3240 (Borrowing from or Lending to Customers). Based on feedback received during the review, FINRA is proposing amendments to Rule 3240 to:

  • emphasize that the rule generally prohibits registered persons from entering into borrowing or lending arrangements with their customers;
  • clarify that the rule applies to borrowing or lending arrangements that pre-exist the broker-customer relationship;
  • extend the rule to prohibit entering into borrowing or lending arrangements within six months after the broker-customer relationship ends;
  • extend the rule to prohibit borrowing or lending arrangements with persons related to either the registered person or the customer, such as an arrangement between the registered person and the customer’s spouse or between the registered person’s outside business and the customer;
  • modernize the “immediate family” definition;
  • narrow the scope of the “personal relationship” exception; and
  • provide factors for evaluating whether an arrangement is within the “personal relationship” or “business relationship” exceptions.

This Notice seeks comment on the proposed amendments to Rule 3240. This Notice also summarizes the predominant themes that emerged from stakeholder feedback, provides guidance to aid member firms when evaluating whether to approve a borrowing or lending arrangement that is within one of the limited exceptions to the general prohibition, and invites a broader consideration of the distinctions between Rule 3240 and federal and state approaches for regulating borrowing and lending arrangements between investment adviser representatives and their clients.

Per Notice 21-44, in February 2019, FINRA published Regulatory Notice 19-06, launching a retrospective review of Rule 4370 (Business Continuity Plans and Emergency Contact Information) to assess its effectiveness and efficiency (the BCP Rule Review). The COVID-19 pandemic, beginning in early 2020, caused unprecedented regulatory and operational impacts on member firms and other market participants, as well as regulators. During the early stages of the pandemic and while the BCP Rule Review was still underway, FINRA published Regulatory Notice 20-08 (March 2020) encouraging each member firm to review its business continuity plan (BCP) to consider pandemic preparedness and to review its emergency contacts to ensure that FINRA has a reliable means of contacting the firm.

Further, to understand broader pandemic-related regulatory and operational impacts on member firms and other stakeholders, in December 2020, through Regulatory Notice 20-42, FINRA launched a retrospective review on lessons learned from member firms and their customers’ experiences during the pandemic (the Pandemic Review).

Based on the BCP Rule Review and the Pandemic Review, both of which involved extensive feedback from a wide range of internal and external stakeholders, FINRA has determined to maintain Rule 4370 without change. This Notice summarizes the retrospective rule review process, the predominant themes that emerged from stakeholder feedback and resulting actions in both reviews, and provides guidance to member firms.

Per Notice 21-45, FINRA is updating the imbedded text of Securities Exchange Act (SEA) financial responsibility rules in the Interpretations of Financial and Operational Rules to reflect the effectiveness of amendments the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted. The updated imbedded text relates to SEA Rules 15c3-1, 15c3-1a, 15c3-1b, 15c3-1d, 15c3-1e, 15c3-3, 15Fi-1 through 15Fi-5, 17a-3, 17a-4, 17a-5, 17a-11 and 18a-3. FINRA is also making available related updates of the Interpretations of Financial and Operational Rules that have been communicated to FINRA by the staff of the SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets (SEC staff). The updated interpretations relate to SEA Rules 15c3-1, 17a-3, 17a-4 and 17a-5.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in December.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-93701, the SEC adopted amendments to finalize interim final rules that revised Forms 20-F, 40-F, 10-K, and N-CSR to implement the disclosure and submission requirements of the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (“HFCA Act”). The final amendments apply to registrants that the SEC identifies as having filed an annual report with an audit report issued by a registered public accounting firm that is located in a foreign jurisdiction and that the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) is unable to inspect or investigate completely because of a position taken by an authority in that jurisdiction. Consistent with the HFCA Act, the amendments require the submission of documentation to the SEC establishing that such a registrant is not owned or controlled by a governmental entity in that foreign jurisdiction and also require disclosure in a foreign issuer’s annual report regarding the audit arrangements of, and governmental influence on, such registrants.

Per Release No. 33-11016, the SEC adopted amendments to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms. The EDGAR system was upgraded on December 20, 2021.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-11013, the SEC is proposing amendments to Rule 10b5-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The proposed amendments would add new conditions to the availability of the affirmative defense under Exchange Act Rule 10b5-1(c)(1) that are designed to address concerns about abuse of the rule to opportunistically trade securities on the basis of material nonpublic information in ways that harm investors and undermine the integrity of the securities markets. The SEC is also proposing new disclosure requirements regarding the insider trading policies of issuers, and the adoption and termination (including modification) of Rule 10b5‑1 and certain other trading arrangements by directors, officers, and issuers. In addition, the SEC is proposing amendments to the disclosure requirements for executive and director compensation regarding the timing of equity compensation awards made in close proximity in time to the issuer’s disclosure of material nonpublic information. Finally, the SEC is proposing amendments to Forms 4 and 5 to require corporate insiders subject to the reporting requirements of Exchange Act Section 16 to identify transactions made pursuant to a Rule 10b5-1(c)(1) trading arrangement, and to disclose all gifts of securities on Form 4.

Per Release No. 34-93783, the SEC is proposing amendments to modernize and improve disclosure about repurchases of an issuer’s equity securities that are registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the proposed amendments would require an issuer to provide more timely disclosure on a new Form SR regarding purchases of its equity securities for each day that it, or an affiliated purchaser, makes a share repurchase. The proposed amendments would also enhance the existing periodic disclosure requirements about these purchases.

Per Release No. IC-34441, the SEC is proposing amendments to certain rules that govern money market funds under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The proposed amendments are designed to improve the resilience and transparency of money market funds. The proposal would remove the liquidity fee and redemption gate provisions in the existing rule, which would eliminate an incentive for preemptive redemptions from certain money market funds and could encourage funds to more effectively use their existing liquidity buffers in times of stress. The proposal would also require institutional prime and institutional tax-exempt money market funds to implement swing pricing policies and procedures to require redeeming investors to bear the liquidity costs of their decisions to redeem. The SEC is also proposing to increase the daily liquid asset and weekly liquid asset minimum liquidity requirements, to 25% and 50% respectively, to provide a more substantial buffer in the event of rapid redemptions. The proposal would amend certain reporting requirements on Forms N-MFP and N-CR to improve the availability of information about money market funds, as well as make certain conforming changes to Form N-1A to reflect our proposed changes to the regulatory framework for these funds. In addition, the SEC is proposing rule amendments to address how money market funds with stable net asset values should handle a negative interest rate environment. Finally, the SEC is proposing rule amendments to specify how funds must calculate weighted average maturity and weighted average life.

Per Release No. 34-93784, the SEC is re-proposing for comment a rule under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), which would be a new rule designed to prevent fraud, manipulation, and deception in connection with effecting transactions in, or inducing or attempting to induce the purchase or sale of, any security-based swap. The rule is designed specifically to take into account the unique features of a security-based swap and would explicitly reach misconduct in connection with the ongoing payments and deliveries that typically occur throughout the life of a security-based swap. The SEC also is proposing a new rule, which would make it unlawful for any officer, director, supervised person, or employee of a security-based swap dealer or major security-based swap participant, or any person acting under such person’s direction, to directly or indirectly take any action to coerce, manipulate, mislead, or fraudulently influence the security-based swap dealer’s or major security-based swap participant’s chief compliance officer (“CCO”) in the performance of their duties under the federal securities laws or the rules and regulations thereunder. Finally, the SEC is using its authority under the Exchange Act to propose for comment a new rule, which would require any person with a security-based swap position that exceeds a certain threshold to promptly file with the Commission a schedule disclosing certain information related to its security-based swap position.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in December.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in December.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in December.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-21-38: 

December 01, 2021

Guidance on the annual affirmation requirement for entities currently operating under an exemption from CPO or CTA registration

The CFTC requires any person that claims an exemption from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3), 4.13(a)(5), an exclusion from CPO registration under CFTC Regulation 4.5 or an exemption from CTA registration under 4.14(a)(8) (collectively, exemption) to annually affirm the applicable notice of exemption within 60 days of the calendar year end, which is March 1, 2022 for this affirmation cycle.

Persons re-affirming an exemption under 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3) and 4.13(a)(5) will be required to attest that neither the person nor its principals has in its background any statutory disqualifications listed under Section 8a(2) of the Commodity Exchange Act.

Failure to affirm an active exemption from CPO or CTA registration will result in the exemption being withdrawn on March 2, 2022. For registered CPOs or CTAs, withdrawal of the exemption will result in the entity being subject to Part 4 Requirements regardless of whether the entity otherwise remains eligible for the exemption. For non-registrants, the withdrawal of the exemption may subject the person or entity to enforcement action by the CFTC, if either continues to operate without registration or exemption.

The Notice includes instructions on how to complete the affirmation process.

The Notice also includes frequently asked questions about exemptions.

Per Notice I-21-39: 

December 01, 2021

Reminder: Increases to NFA Member swap dealer and major swap participant dues effective January 1, 2022

NFA Bylaw 1301 imposes annual dues on NFA Member swap dealers (SD) and major swap participants (MSP). The current annual dues amounts have remained unchanged, except for a reduction in MSP annual dues, since NFA established its swap regulatory program in 2013. Given the expansion of NFA's swaps regulatory program over the past eight years, NFA's Board of Directors unanimously approved the following increases to these annual dues amounts, which will become effective January 1, 2022 for dues payable after that date:

  • Annual dues for large financial institution (LFI) SD Members will increase from $1,000,000 to $1,300,000;
  • Annual dues for non-LFI SD Members will increase from $250,000 to $325,000;
  • Annual dues for SD Members that are affiliates of SD Members paying dues in one of the above categories will increase from $150,000 to $200,000; and
  • Annual dues for MSP Members will increase from $150,000 to $200,000.

For more information on the increases, see Notice to Members I-21-16.

Per Notice I-21-40: 

December 02, 2021

FCM and RFED filing requirements for Christmas and New Year's Day—Reminder for upcoming holidays

This is a reminder that the following futures commission merchant (FCM) and retail foreign exchange dealer (RFED) regulatory filings will be impacted as follows by the Christmas and New Year's Day holidays:

Christmas Day—Saturday, December 25, 2021

  • Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Thursday, December 23, 2021 are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Friday, December 24, 2021; and
  • Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements are required to be prepared as of Friday, December 24, 2021 and are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Monday, December 27, 2021.

New Year's Day—Saturday, January 1, 2022

  • Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Thursday, December 30, 2021 are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Friday, December 31, 2021;
  • Daily segregated, 30.7 secured, cleared swaps customer collateral and daily forex statements prepared as of Friday, December 31, 2021 are required to be submitted by 12:00 noon on Monday, January 3, 2022.

Any information filed by FCMs or RFEDs after its due date must be accompanied by a fee for each business day that it is late.

Holiday Filing Schedule

Visit NFA's website to view a complete schedule of daily filing requirements for upcoming holidays and an updated calendar of Segregated Investment Detail Report (SIDR) due dates. NFA recommends viewing the calendars and keeping this Notice as a reference for the upcoming 2022 holiday filing requirements.

For more information about filing financial reports, visit NFA's website.

Per Notice I-21-41: 

December 02, 2021

SD holiday filing requirements

Visit NFA's website to view schedules of 2022 swap dealer (SD) holiday filingsrisk data and margin monitoring filingsand financial reporting due dates. We recommend viewing the schedules and keeping this Notice as a reference for the upcoming 2022 holiday filing requirements.

For more information about SD filing requirements visit NFA's website.

Per Notice I-21-42: 

December 06, 2021

Action required: NFA adds virtual currency and micro contract-related questions to Annual Questionnaire

NFA Members must complete the Annual Questionnaire annually and update it throughout the year to reflect significant changes in business activity. Due to recent increased interest and activity in virtual currency and micro contract products, NFA has updated the Questionnaire to address Members' spot/physical virtual currency, virtual currency derivatives and micro contract transactions.

NFA requires all CPO, CTA, FCM, FDM and IB Members to complete the new questions as soon as possible to avoid unnecessary inquiries.

Per Notice I-21-43: 

December 07, 2021

Action encouraged: CPO and CTA Members should ensure Executive Representative information is accurate prior to December 27, 2021 to facilitate voting in upcoming contested election

Contested Election in CPO and CTA Category

The upcoming 2022 Board of Directors election includes a contested election in the CPO and CTA category for a position with no conditions as to funds under management, as of June 30, 2021. Two individuals have been nominated for this position and therefore NFA will be conducting an election for CPO and CTA Members to vote for the individual to fill this Board position. More information on the candidates and the election process will be provided prior to the election period.

Who Can Vote in a Contested Election

Bylaw 409 requires each Member to designate an Executive Representative who has the sole authority, among other things, to cast votes on a Member's behalf in a contested election for an NFA Director position. Therefore, it is important that each CPO and CTA Member ensure that the individual currently listed as the Member's Executive Representative and their contact information are accurate. CPO and CTA Members should review, and if necessary, update this information prior to December 27, 2021 to ensure that NFA distributes the election materials to the appropriate Executive Representative.

Designate/Update Executive Representative

Each Member may designate or update its Executive Representative by accessing NFA's Executive Representative Contact form found on NFA's Electronic Filing Systems page. Only firm employees who are Security Manager(s) or are authorized to "View, Update, and File" information in ORS may complete this form.

If a Member has not designated an Executive Representative, the Membership Contact listed on the Member's Form 7-R will be deemed to be the Member's Executive Representative and will have the authority to cast votes on the Member's behalf.

Votes submitted by any person other than the Executive Representative (or the Membership Contact if no Executive Representative is designated) will be not be counted.

Per Notice I-21-44: 

December 20, 2021

Effective date for amendment to exclude certain associated persons from the Branch Office Manager Examination requirement 

NFA Compliance Rule 2-7 generally prohibits a Member from permitting an associated person (AP) to act as a branch office manager unless the individual has taken and passed NFA's Branch Office Manager Examination (Series 30). NFA recently amended NFA Compliance Rule 2-7 to exclude from the Series 30 requirement any swap AP acting as a branch office manager for a Member engaged solely in swap activities. NFA adopted this amendment because swap APs are also required to pass NFA's Swaps Proficiency Requirements, which include a section on supervision and are directly related to a Member's swap activities. Passing the Series 30, which in addition to supervision covers topics not directly applicable to a branch office solely engaged in swaps, is no longer necessary for these APs. 

This amendment was unanimously approved by the Board and will become effective on January 3, 2022. 

More information regarding this amendment can be found in NFA's November 22, 2021 submission letter to the CFTC.

Per Notice I-21-45: 

December 21, 2021

Effective date for amendment to NFA Financial Requirements Section 18

NFA Financial Requirements Section 18 requires each swap dealer (SD) Member that is also a broker-dealer or security-based SD (SBSD) to file financial reports with NFA using the SEC's FOCUS report. NFA recently learned that certain SDs intend to comply with the CFTC's capital, margin, segregation, recordkeeping and reporting requirements in lieu of the equivalent SEC regulations, pursuant to SEC Rule 18a-10, and will not file the FOCUS report with the SEC. Therefore, NFA amended Financial Requirements Section 18 to require SBSDs that do not file the FOCUS report with the SEC to use one of the other two forms developed by NFA: Form FR-CSE-NLA or FR-CSE-BHC.

This amendment was unanimously approved by NFA's Board of Directors and is effective immediately.

NFA's November 22, 2021 submission letter to the CFTC contains more detailed information regarding this amendment.

Per Notice I-21-46: 

December 29, 2021

Notice of Annual Meeting of NFA Members and Board and Nominating Committee Election

Notice of Annual Meeting

NFA will hold its Annual Meeting of Members (Annual Meeting) on Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. (CST), at its offices located at 300 S. Riverside Plaza, Suite 1800, Chicago, IL. The agenda of the meeting is:

  1. Opening remarks
  2. Election of one (1) individual to NFA's Board of Directors (NFA Board) in the CPO and CTA category for a position with no conditions on its ranking of CPOs and CTAs reporting any funds under management allocated to futures and swaps on NFA Form PQR and NFA Form PR as of June 30, 2021 (At-Large position).
  3. Members' questions regarding NFA-related topics.
  4. Any other business that may properly come before the Annual Meeting.

To register to attend the Annual Meeting, please email your name, NFA ID# and contact email to membermeeting2022@nfa.futures.org. Registration is due by Friday, January 28, 2022, at 5:00 p.m. (CST).

News Releases

December 09, 2021

NFA orders Chicago, Ill. commodity trading advisor K-Ratio Advisory LLC and former introducing broker K-Ratio Brokerage LLC never to reapply for NFA membership

December 9, Chicago—NFA has ordered K-Ratio Advisory LLC (KRA), a CFTC-registered commodity trading advisor and former NFA Member located in Chicago, Ill., and K-Ratio Brokerage LLC (KRB), a previously CFTC-registered introducing broker Member located in Chicago, Ill., never to reapply for membership or act as a principal of an NFA Member.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by KRA and KRB, in which they neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Complaint alleges that KRA and KRB operated an unregulated trading program without having adequate financial wherewithal to do so. The Complaint also alleges that KRA and KRB used misleading and deceptive promotional material and communications. The Complaint also alleges that KRA and KRB allowed an unregistered individual to act as an associated person without being registered in such capacity and an NFA Associate. Finally, the Complaint alleges that KRA and KRB failed to supervise.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

December 16, 2021

NFA statement regarding confirmation of Russ Behnam as CFTC Chairman

December 16, Chicago—NFA congratulates Rostin (Russ) Behnam on his confirmation as Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. His deep knowledge and experience are integral to advancing our common mission of protecting investors and ensuring market integrity. We look forward to working with Chairman Behnam and the Commission on our industry's important regulatory matters.

- Thomas W. Sexton, III, NFA President and CEO

Hot Issues

CyberCrime

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures. 

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends. 

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA December 2021 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (December 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-december-2021/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2021) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-november-2021/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-november-2021/#respond Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:29:44 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13362

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 21-41, FINRA has adopted important changes to its continuing education (CE) and registration rules to train registered persons more effectively while accommodating registered persons, particularly women and underrepresented minorities, whose personal circumstances take them away from the industry for a time. The changes to Rules 1210 and 1240: (1) provide eligible individuals who terminate any of their representative or principal registration categories the option of maintaining their qualification for any terminated registration categories by completing annual CE through a new program, the Maintaining Qualifications Program (MQP); (2) require registered persons to complete CE Regulatory Element annually for each representative or principal registration category that they hold; and (3) expressly allow firms to consider other required training toward satisfying an individual’s annual CE Firm Element and extend the Firm Element requirement to all registered persons.

The changes relating to the MQP (paragraph (c) of Rule 1240) and the Financial Services Affiliate Waiver Program (FSAWP) (Rule 1210.09) will become effective March 15, 2022.

All other changes, including the changes relating to the Regulatory Element, Firm Element and the two-year qualification period, will become effective January 1, 2023.

The amended text of the rules is set forth in Attachment A. FINRA is also providing frequently asked questions relating to the changes on its website.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in November.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. IA-5904, the SEC adopted amendments to the rule under the Advisers Act that permits investment advisers to charge performance-based compensation to “qualified clients.” The rule defines “qualified client” with reference to specific dollar amount thresholds, which are required to be adjusted every five years to account for the effects of inflation. These amendments replace specific dollar amount thresholds in the rule’s “qualified client” definition with references to the SEC’s “most recent order,” as defined by the amended rule, containing the specific dollar amount thresholds adjusted for inflation. 

The amendments were effective on November 10, 2021.

Per Release No. 34-93596, the SEC amended the Federal proxy rules to enhance the ability of shareholders to elect directors though the proxy process in a manner consistent with their ability to vote in person at a shareholder meeting. Specifically, the SEC is requiring the use of a universal proxy card in all non-exempt solicitations involving director election contests, except those involving registered investment companies and business development companies. To facilitate the use of a universal proxy card, the SEC also amended the Federal proxy rules to establish certain notice, minimum solicitation, filing, formatting and presentation requirements, along with other related rule changes consistent with the adoption of a universal proxy requirement. In addition, the SEC adopted new disclosure requirements relating to voting standards and further requiring certain voting options for all director elections, whether or not contested.

The rules are effective January 31, 2022.

Compliance Date: 

The rule changes the SEC adopted in this document will become effective for any shareholder meeting featuring an election contest held after August 31, 2022. 

Some of the rule amendments adopted in this document will apply to all director elections, not just those that are contested. While these changes do not require coordination and notice to the other party, as is required in a contested election, they do involve enhanced disclosure of the legal effect of votes under the applicable voting standard for the election. The amendments also impose new voting options where the applicable voting standards give effect to abstain or withhold votes. Given these changes, the SEC determined that the same transition period for compliance (for shareholder meetings held after August 31, 2022) is appropriate for all of the rule amendments adopted in this document.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-93518, the SEC is proposing amendments to rules to convert the filing of certain applications, confidential treatment requests, and forms from paper to electronic submission. Specifically, the SEC proposes to amend its rules to require that the following types of filings be submitted via its Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (“EDGAR”) system: applications for orders under any section of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) and confidential treatment requests for filings made under section 13(f) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). The SEC also proposes rule amendments to harmonize the requirements for the submission of applications for orders under the Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”). In addition, the SEC proposes to amend other rules and a form to require the electronic submission of Form ADV-NR through the Investment Adviser Registration Depository (“IARD”) system. The SEC also proposes to require non-resident general partners and non-resident managing agents to amend their Form ADV-NR within 30 days whenever any information contained in the form becomes inaccurate by filing with the Commission a new Form ADV-NR. Further, the SEC is re-proposing  amendments to Form 13F to require managers to provide additional identifying information. Finally, the SEC is re-proposing certain technical amendments to Form 13F, including modernizing the structure of data reporting and amending the instructions on Form 13F for confidential treatment requests in light of a recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Per Release No. 33-11005, the SEC is proposing rule and form amendments to update filing requirements under its Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (“EDGAR”) system. The proposed amendments would mandate the electronic filing or submission of most of the documents that are currently permitted electronic submissions under Regulation S-T, including all filings on Form 6-K and filings made by multilateral development banks; mandate the electronic submission in portable document format (“PDF format”) of the “glossy” annual report to security holders; mandate the electronic filing of the certification made pursuant to the Exchange Act and its rules that a security has been approved by an exchange for listing and registration; mandate the use of Inline eXtensible Business Reporting Language (“Inline XBRL”) for the filing of the financial statements and accompanying notes to the financial statements required by Form 11-K; and allow for the electronic submission in PDF format of certain foreign language documents.

Per Release No. 34- 93595, the SEC is proposing amendments to the Federal proxy rules governing proxy voting advice. The SEC is proposing these amendments in light of feedback from market participants on those rules and certain developments in the market for proxy voting advice. The proposed amendments would remove a condition to the availability of certain exemptions from the information and filing requirements of the Federal proxy rules for proxy voting advice businesses. In addition, the proposed amendments would remove a note that provides examples of situations in which the failure to disclose certain information in proxy voting advice may be considered misleading within the meaning of the Federal proxy rules’ prohibition on material misstatements or omissions. Finally, the release includes a discussion regarding the application of that prohibition to proxy voting advice, in particular with respect to statements of opinion.

Per Release No. 34-93613, the SEC is proposing a rule to increase the transparency and efficiency of the securities lending market by requiring any person that loans a security on behalf of itself or another person to report the material terms of those securities lending transactions and related information regarding the securities the person has on loan and available to loan to a registered national securities association (“RNSA”). The proposed rule would also require that the RNSA make available to the public certain information concerning each transaction and aggregate information on securities on loan and available to loan.

Per Release No. 34-93614, the SEC is proposing amendments to the electronic recordkeeping requirements for broker-dealers, security-based swap dealers (“SBSDs”), and major security-based swap participants (“MSBSPs”). 

The SEC is proposing amendments to the introductory text of Rule 17a-4(f) to make the rule more technology neutral. In particular, the phrase “electronic storage media” would be replaced with the phrase “electronic recordkeeping system” throughout the rule, including in the introductory text. The SEC is proposing a conforming amendment to Rule 18a-6(e) to replace the phrase “electronic storage system” with the phrase “electronic recordkeeping system” throughout the rule, including in the introductory text. Consistent with this proposal, the amendments to Rule 18a-6(e) would replace the term “electronic storage system” throughout the rule with the term “electronic recordkeeping system,” including in the introductory text. In addition, the SEC is proposing amendments to the introductory text of Rules 17a-4(f) and 18a-6(e) solely to improve clarity and readability, but that otherwise are not intended to alter the meaning of either introductory text.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in November.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in November.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in November.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-21-34: 

FCM and IB Members—FinCEN updates its list of FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies

On October 26, 2021, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued a news release announcing that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) reissued its list of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. NFA Member futures commission merchants and introducing brokers should review this release to ensure that their AML programs have the most current information on FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies and revise their AML programs accordingly. A copy of the news release is available on FinCEN's website.

Per Notice I-21-35: 

NFA Announces Nominations Made by the 2021 Nominating Committee

In accordance with NFA Bylaw 406, the Office of the Secretary has received from the 2021 Nominating Committee a list of its nominees for positions on NFA's Board of Directors and 2022 Nominating Committee. The list of nominees included with this Notice shall serve as notification to NFA Members of the candidates proposed by the 2021 Nominating Committee.

NFA Bylaw 406 requires that each petition identify the position to which the nomination pertains, and that all petitions must be received by the Secretary within 21 days of the date of this Notice. Therefore, if you wish to submit nominations by petition, please make sure that such petitions are received by the Secretary of NFA on or before December 2, 2021. Petitions received after that date will not be considered.

NFA Bylaw 409 provides that each Member shall designate an Executive Representative, who among other things, has the sole authority to sign nomination petitions on behalf of the Member. Members may designate an Executive Representative through NFA's website by completing an electronic Executive Representative contact form. Only firm personnel who are Security Managers or are authorized to view, update and file information in NFA's Online Registration System (ORS) may complete the Executive Representative Contact form. If a Member does not complete this form and designate an Executive Representative, the Member's membership contact listed in ORS will be deemed to be the Executive Representative. If a Member designated an Executive Representative last year, it is not necessary to do so again unless the person designated as the Executive Representative has changed.

Per Notice I-21-36: 

Request for Public Representative Nominations for NFA's Board of Directors

The terms of five of NFA's current Public Representatives—Ronald H. Filler, Arthur W. Hahn, Jim Marshall, Mary M. McDonnell, and Michael H. Moskow—will expire at the Board of Directors' (Board) regular Annual Meeting on February 17, 2022. NFA is seeking nominations to fill the five Public Representative vacancies. NFA's Articles of Incorporation (Articles) permit Public Representatives to be nominated by either NFA Members or non-Members.

At its regular Annual Meeting, on February 17, 2022, the Board will elect, by majority vote, from among the nominees five Public Representatives to serve on the Board for two-year terms.

NFA requests that Public Representative nominations be submitted by January 7, 2022 so that NFA's Executive Committee can review the potential nominees at its meeting on January 20, 2022.

Per Notice I-21-37: 

Action encouraged: Complete Firm Application and Annual Registration Update processes prior to December 3, 2021

On December 4, 2021, NFA will update the Firm Application and Annual Registration Update in the Online Registration System (ORS). In order to complete these updates, all incomplete Firm Application (FIRMAPPL) and Annual Registration Update (FIRMARU) processes will be deleted. Therefore, NFA encourages firms to complete any FIRMAPPL or FIRMARU process listed on the Processes Not Complete page in ORS no later than December 3, 2021. This system implementation will not affect any completed applications or processes.

To implement these updates, ORS will be unavailable from 8:00 a.m. CT/9:00 a.m. ET until 5:00 p.m. CT/6:00 p.m. ET on Saturday, December 4, 2021.

If you have questions, please contact NFA's Information Center (312-781-1410 or 800-621-3570 or information@nfa.futures.org).

News Releases

There were no News Releases in November.

Hot Issues

CyberCrime

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures. 

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends. 

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA November 2021 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (November 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-november-2021/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2021) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-october-2021/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-october-2021/#respond Wed, 03 Nov 2021 12:23:18 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13306

Monthly Regulatory Summary As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Monthly Regulatory Summary

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 21-35, FINRA requests comment on a proposal to require members to publish quarterly order routing disclosure reports for held orders in OTC Equity Securities. The proposed new quarterly reports would be similar to those required for NMS stocks under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Rule 606(a) of Regulation NMS, with certain modifications reflecting the different structure of the OTC market. FINRA also requests input on possible steps to further facilitate investor access and understanding of current order routing disclosures for NMS securities.

FINRA encourages all interested parties to comment on this proposal. Comments must be received by December 6, 2021.

Per Notice 21-36, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has issued the first government-wide priorities for anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism policy, which was mandated by the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 (AML Act). FinCEN also issued a statement to provide covered non-bank financial institutions (NBFIs), including broker-dealers, with guidance on how to approach the AML/CFT Priorities. 

FINRA is issuing this Notice to inform member firms of the AML/CFT Priorities and the Statement, and to encourage member firms to consider how to incorporate the AML/CFT Priorities into their risk-based anti-money laundering (AML) compliance programs.

FinCEN has clarified that the publication of the AML/CFT Priorities does not create an immediate change in the BSA requirements or supervisory expectations for covered NBFIs, including broker-dealers. FinCEN has noted further that covered NBFIs are not required to incorporate the AML/CFT Priorities into their risk-based AML programs until the effective date of final regulations promulgated by it. The BSA, as amended by the AML Act, requires that FinCEN promulgate any appropriate regulations regarding the AML/CFT Priorities within 180 days of their establishment.

FinCEN has stated that the final regulations will specify how financial institutions should incorporate the AML/CFT Priorities into their risk-based AML programs, and that not every priority will be relevant to every covered institution. FinCEN has also stated that covered NBFIs may nevertheless wish to start considering how they will incorporate the AML/CFT Priorities into their risk-based AML programs, such as by assessing the potential risks associated with the products and services they offer, the customers they serve, and the geographic areas in which they operate.

Per Notice 21-37, the NAC has revised FINRA’s Sanction Guidelines to incorporate a new guideline for violations of the Consolidated Audit Trail System (CAT) industry member compliance rules.

The revised Sanction Guidelines are effective immediately and available on FINRA’s website.

Per Notice 21-38, on November 8, 2021, FINRA will cease operation of the OTC Bulletin Board (OTCBB)—a FINRA-operated inter-dealer quotation system—and delete the OTCBB-related rules from the FINRA rulebook.

Per Notice 21-39, FINRA’s Renewal Program supports the collection and disbursement of fees related to the renewal of broker-dealer (BD) and investment adviser (IA) registrations, exempt reporting and notice filings with participating self-regulatory organizations (SRO) and jurisdictions. FINRA communicates information about renewal fees BD and IA firms owe via a Preliminary Statement in November, and publishes a Final Statement in January to confirm or reconcile the actual renewal fees BD and IA firms owe after Jan. 1, 2022. Renewal statements reflect all applicable renewal fees assessed for BD and IA firms, branches and individuals.

It is critical that firms ensure that they pay in full by the Preliminary Statement deadline. If payment is late, firms should ensure that the Preliminary Statement is paid in full before the year-end system shutdown. Payments received after the Preliminary Statement deadline for FINRA-registered firms are subject to a late fee.

Firms should note that, as announced in SR-FINRA-2020-032, FINRA’s Branch Office Processing fee, which includes the branch renewal processing fee, will increase from $20 to $75 on Jan. 1, 2022. This new fee amount will affect 2022 renewal fees assessed for branches registered with FINRA. See the Renewal Fees & Payment Methods section in the Notice for additional information.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in October.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-10997, the SEC (or “Commission”) is adopting amendments that will modernize filing fee disclosure and payment methods.  The Commission is amending most fee-bearing forms, schedules, statements, and related rules to require each filing fee table and accompanying disclosure to include all required information for fee calculation in a structured format.  The amendments will add options for fee payment via Automated Clearing House (“ACH”) and debit and credit cards, and eliminate options for fee payment via paper checks and money orders.  The amendments are intended to improve filing fee preparation and payment processing by facilitating both enhanced validation through filing fee structuring and lower-cost, easily routable payments through the ACH and debit and credit card payment options.  Finally, the Commission is adopting other amendments to enhance the efficiency of the fee process.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 33-10998, the SEC (or “Commission”) is reopening the comment period for its proposal to implement the provisions of Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”).  The proposed rule and rule amendments would direct the national securities exchanges and national securities associations to establish listing standards that would require each issuer to develop and implement a policy providing for the recovery, under certain circumstances, of incentive-based compensation based on financial information required to be reported under the securities laws that is received by current or former executive officers, and require disclosure of the policy (the “Proposed Rules”).  The Proposed Rules were set forth in a release published in the Federal Register on July 14, 2015 (Release No. 34-75342) (the “Proposing Release”), and the related comment period ended on September 14, 2015.  The reopening of this comment period is intended to allow interested persons further opportunity to analyze and comment upon the Proposed Rules in light of developments since the publication of the Proposing Release and the Commission’s further consideration of the Section 954 mandate.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in October.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in October.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in October.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-21-33: 

NFA has received a number of requests from swap dealers (SD) to extend NFA's approval of its IM model to include security-based swaps (SBS) in initial margin (IM) calculations on a net portfolio basis. NFA will extend its IM Model approval to include SBS under the conditions outlined below.

Starting November 1, 2021, SDs may include SBS in IM model calculations on a net portfolio basis subject to the following three conditions:

  • The SD notifies NFA in writing via email at SwapsMarginModel@nfa.futures.org that it meets the requirements outlined in CFTC No Action Letter 16-71 (PDF download) or the SEC Margin Rules (PDF) and intends both to post and collect margin on a net portfolio basis for swaps and SBS and include SBS in the IM Model calculation;
  • The SD's Model Risk Management (MRM) team has issued either an approval, a preliminary positive opinion, or a waiver on the inclusion of SBS in the IM model, which may include establishing effective compensating controls or an enhanced monitoring framework to ensure the conservativeness of the IM calculated on a net portfolio basis using an IM Model; and
  • If the SD's MRM team authorizes the inclusion of SBS in IM portfolios via waiver, the MRM team must establish, and the SD must communicate to NFA, the timeframe (no longer than six months after its implementation in production) for conducting its in-depth review of the product types introduced in the IM model.

To ensure SBS exposure is properly treated when calculating IM using an IM model, the SD's MRM team must adequately validate the inclusion of SBS exposure in the SD's portfolios. As part of its validation activities, the MRM team must, at a minimum:

  • Identify the products to be added and the expected volumes;
  • Assess the model assumptions and limitations specifically relating to SBS and on a net portfolio basis;
  • Complete an impact analysis on the compositions and risk profiles of the existing portfolios due to the introduction of SBS;
  • Perform an assessment of material proxies and approximations introduced by SBS into the IM model framework, including remediation and compensating controls for material proxies and approximations; and
  • Assess testing results for SBS at the product level as well as the overall impact of the introduction of SBS on the quarterly model performance testing results of the current portfolios approved to be margined on the IM model. The assessment must cover, at a minimum:
    • Backtesting (covering a minimum period of three months);
    • Benchmarking to relevant internal and external data sources or estimation techniques (including a corporate risk measure integrated into the SD's risk management systems, such as corporate VaR, and observable margin standards such as a derivatives' clearing organization); and
    • Risks not in the IM model.

In order to ensure the conservativeness of IM model calculations, the MRM team must also assess whether compensating controls, thresholds and/or an enhanced monitoring framework should be added. Any compensating controls previously established should also be reviewed by the MRM team.

NFA will review each SD's implementation of SBS in its IM model at a later date, which will focus on the MRM team's validation activities.

News Releases

October 28, 2021

NFA orders London, U.K. introducing broker Freight Investor Services Limited to pay a $140,000 fine

October 28, Chicago—NFA has ordered Freight Investor Services Limited (Freight), an NFA Member introducing broker located in London, U.K., to pay a $140,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Freight, in which it neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Committee found that Freight failed to keep full, complete and systematic records of all transactions relating to Freight's business of dealing in commodity interests. The Committee also found that Freight allowed an unregistered individual to act as an associated person without being registered in such capacity and an NFA Associate. 

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issues

CyberCrime

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures. 

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends. 

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA October 2021 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices
  • NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (October 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-october-2021/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2021) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-september-2021/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-september-2021/#respond Wed, 06 Oct 2021 13:56:01 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13292

FINRA Regulatory Notices Per Notice 21-31, FINRA has established a new Supplemental Liquidity Schedule (SLS). The new […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 21-31, FINRA has established a new Supplemental Liquidity Schedule (SLS). The new SLS, which members subject to the requirement will need to file as a supplement to the FOCUS Report, is designed to improve FINRA’s ability to monitor for events that signal an adverse change in the liquidity risk of the members with the largest customer and counterparty exposures. FINRA is issuing this Notice to provide further information on the new requirement, which will become effective on March 1, 2022. For members subject to the requirement, the first SLS must be completed as of the end of March 2022 and will be due by May 4, 2022.

The SLS, and instructions thereto, is available in Attachment A. FINRA will make the SLS available through FINRA Gateway. 

Per Notice 21-32, FINRA requests comment on a proposed change to its current policy relating to the assignment of OTC symbols to unlisted equity securities. Specifically, FINRA is considering whether it should begin assigning OTC symbols to unlisted equity securities that do not have a valid CUSIP identifier, in the limited circumstance where a member firm demonstrates its best efforts to obtain a CUSIP identifier and provides documentation to identify the security.

Per Notice 21-33, FINRA adopted amendments to Rule 6432 (Compliance with the Information Requirements of SEA Rule 15c2-11) in light of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) amendments to SEC Rule 15c2-11 (SEC Rule 15c2-11). As amended, Rule 6432 will require a qualified inter-dealer quotation system (Qualified IDQS) to submit a modified Form 211 filing to FINRA in connection with each initial information review, and a daily security file to FINRA containing summary information for all securities quoted on its system on each day that it makes a publicly available determination permitted under SEC Rule 15c2-11, among other amendments. The amendments to Rule 6432 will take effect on September 28, 2021—in line with the compliance date for the amendments to SEC Rule 15c2-11.

The amended rule text is available in the online FINRA Manual.

Per Notice 21-34, FINRA has adopted new rules to address firms with a significant history of misconduct. New Rule 4111 (Restricted Firm Obligations) requires member firms that are identified as “Restricted Firms” to deposit cash or qualified securities in a segregated, restricted account; adhere to specified conditions or restrictions; or comply with a combination of such obligations. New Rule 9561 (Procedures for Regulating Activities Under Rule 4111) and amendments to Rule 9559 (Hearing Procedures for Expedited Proceedings Under the Rule 9550 Series) establish a new expedited proceeding to implement Rule 4111.

The new rules and rule amendments become effective on January 1, 2022.

The rule text is available in Attachment A. A flow chart of the Rule 4111 process is available in Attachment B.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in September.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 33-10984, The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is adopting amendments to Volumes I and II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“Filer Manual”) and related rules and forms.  The EDGAR system was upgraded on September 20, 2021.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-91603, The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is proposing to amend Form N-PX under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) to enhance the information mutual funds, exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), and certain other funds currently report annually about their proxy votes and to make that information easier to analyze. The Commission also is proposing rule and form amendments under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) that would require an institutional investment manager subject to section 13(f) of the Exchange Act to report annually on Form N-PX how it voted proxies relating to executive compensation matters, as required by section 14A of the Exchange Act. The proposed reporting requirements for institutional investment managers, if adopted, would complete implementation of section 951 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”).

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in September.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in September.

Policy Statements

There were no policy statements in September.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-21-28: 

Recognizing that Members may permanently adopt hybrid work environments and permit APs to work remotely, NFA recently amended its definition of branch office. The amended definition excludes any remote working location or flexible shared workspace where one or more APs from the same household live or rent/lease, provided:

  • The AP(s) does not hold the location out publicly as the Member's office;
  • The AP(s) does not meet with customers or physically handle customer funds at the location; and
  • Any CFTC or NFA-required records created at the remote location are accessible at the firm's main or applicable branch office(s) as required under CFTC and NFA requirements.

Members may delist locations currently identified as branch offices if they fall outside of the amended definition.

These amendments will become effective on September 23, 2021, at which time the relief provided in Notice to Members I-20-12 will expire.

Per Notice I-21-29:

NFA has amended Financial Requirements Section 18 to specify that Swap Dealers (SD) Members subject to the filing requirements under CFTC Regulation 23.105(k) will satisfy NFA's requirement by filing the information specified by NFA in the form and manner provided by NFA. This amendment will become effective October 6, 2021.

NFA adopted the proposed amendments for two reasons. First, NFA has developed standardized tables available in WinJammer™ to collect the specific information from SD Members. The tables will facilitate NFA's collection and analysis of the information and will also provide SD Members with certainty on the format for filing the information. Second, NFA has identified certain information required by CFTC Regulation 23.105(k) that is similar in nature to information that NFA will collect under CFTC Regulation 23.105(l). NFA's standardized tables will not collect this similar information.

The information that will be required by the standardized tables includes:

  • Product category and the amount of the deduction for market risk on each product for which the SD calculates a deduction for market risk other than in accordance with a model;
  • Daily intra-month VaR;
  • Product category and the deduction for market risk on each product for which the SD uses scenario analysis;
  • 10 largest commitments listed by counterparty;
  • Number of business days for which the actual daily net trading loss exceeded the corresponding daily VaR; and
  • Backtesting results of all internal models used to compute allowable capital, including VaR, and credit risk models, indicating the number of backtesting exceptions.

Per Notice I-21-30:

NFA has amended Financial Requirements Section 10 to impose a $1,000 per business day late fee on each financial report or other filing required by Financial Requirements Section 17 submitted after its due date. This late fee is consistent with the late fee NFA imposes on futures commission merchant, introducing broker and forex dealer Members that submit late financial filings.

NFA also adopted a new Interpretive Notice to Financial Requirements Section 17 entitled Financial Requirements Section 17: Initial Margin Model Ongoing Monitoring Reports clarifying NFA's expectations regarding quarterly and annual initial margin (IM) model performance reporting. The Interpretive Notice specifies the information currently required to be submitted and clarifies due dates for these filings.

The amendment to Financial Requirements Section 10 and the new Interpretive Notice will become effective on October 6, 2021.

Per Notice I-21-31:

NFA utilizes an electronic voting process for contested Directors' elections, contested Nominating Committee member elections and Articles' amendments approval votes. If elections are necessary, NFA has engaged a third-party election service provider to administer the electronic voting process. To facilitate the electronic voting process, each Member shall designate an Executive Representative who will have the Member's sole authority to sign nominations made by petition, receive notices of Member meetings and proxy materials, complete proxy cards and provide voting instructions and cast votes on behalf of the Member. Members may designate an Executive Representative through NFA's website. Only firm personnel who are the Security Manager or are authorized to view, update and file information in ORS may complete the Executive Representative Contact form.

If a Member fails to complete this form and designate an Executive Representative, the Member's membership contact listed in ORS will be deemed to be the Executive Representative. If a Member has already designated an Executive Representative, it is not necessary to do so again unless the person designated as the Executive Representative has changed.

Board and Nominating Committee Members' Terms to Expire at 2022 Board of Directors' Regular Annual Meeting

The Notice provides a list of the FCM, IB, CPO/CTA and SD/MSP/RFED Board and Nominating Committee members whose terms shall expire at the Board of Directors' regular annual meeting on February 17, 2022.

The Nominating Committee relies heavily on the recommendations of the membership in making its nominating decisions. Please give this matter serious consideration and return your submission(s) to NFA by mail, email or fax for receipt no later than October 13, 2021.

Per Notice I-21-32:

NFA has amended Compliance Rule 2-49 to provide that any swap dealer (SD) Member that violates CFTC Regulation 37.12 or the Part 50 Regulations will be deemed to have also violated an NFA requirement. This amendment will become effective on September 30, 2021.

News Releases

September 16, 2021

NFA orders London, U.K. swap dealer ED&F Man Capital Markets Limited to pay a $150,000 fine

September 16, Chicago—NFA has ordered London, U.K. swap dealer ED&F Man Capital Markets Limited (ED&F Man) to pay a $150,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by ED&F Man, in which it neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Committee found that ED&F Man failed to comply with the qualification testing requirement as to certain associated persons by the compliance date.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issues

CyberCrime

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures. 

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends. 

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA September 2021 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices
  • NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (September 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-september-2021/feed/ 0
News Update: FINRA to Sweep BDs on Use of Social Media Influencers to Refer Clients https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-finra-to-sweep-bds-on-use-of-social-media-influencers-to-refer-clients/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-finra-to-sweep-bds-on-use-of-social-media-influencers-to-refer-clients/#respond Tue, 28 Sep 2021 14:36:22 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13287

September 2021 Overview & Summary FINRA announced that it is conducting a review of firm […]

The post News Update: FINRA to Sweep BDs on Use of Social Media Influencers to Refer Clients appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

September 2021

Overview & Summary

FINRA announced that it is conducting a review of firm practices related to the acquisition of customers through social media channels and how firms manage their obligations related to information collected from those customers and other individuals that may provide data to firms. Sweep effort review periods will begin (unless otherwise noted) starting January 1, 2020 and will likely carry through the date of examination (or most recent quarter end). Note that this sweep effort was announced following a request for comment by the SEC regarding “digital engagement practices” of advisers and broker dealers. View this request in full, here.

Our Take

As always, CRC reminds firms that the best compliance program is a proactive one. As such, we suggest that firms (whether registered with FINRA as a BD or with the SEC as an RIA) who are utilizing social media, as well as social media influencers, often known as finfluencers, review their current policies and procedures to ensure that recordkeeping, data tracking and protection, and disclosure requirements relative to investments, investment advice, and solicitation agreements are all addressed properly. In addition, CRC recommends that key personnel involved in such processes are well trained, and that such training is specific and documented. 

Some Key Takeaways:

  • FINRA is instituting this initial sweep effort, but investment advisory firms should prepare themselves as well for a similar initiative from the SEC. 
  • FINRA appears to be focused on determining whether firms have adequate written policies and procedures in place to ensure that obligations are met where finfluencers and social media are used to refer clients, as well as whether procedures are followed.
  • The SEC’s request for comment also notes “gamification” as an area of interest with respect to the collection of and engagement with client and prospect data. 
  • The full FINRA sweep exam scope is available here.

Opportunities for CRC to Assist Your Firm (list not exhaustive):

  • CRC can proactively conduct a review of your current compliance program and digital engagement activities to identify opportunities to potentially implement enhancements in preparation for sweep examinations.
  • CRC is available to assist with sweep exam responses.
  • CRC is available for outsourced support with respect to social media marketing in general, as well as where the use of finfluencers is applicable. 
  • CRC can produce written social media marketing/ influencer referral policies and procedures designed to comply with relevant regulatory implications. 
  • CRC can provide best practices to firms looking to expand into this area or to ensure current program compliance. 
  • CRC can perform a program analysis to ensure compliance with Reg SP relative to social media referral programs. 

Please contact Mitch Avnet for more information.

Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com  or (646) 346-2468 

The post News Update: FINRA to Sweep BDs on Use of Social Media Influencers to Refer Clients appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-finra-to-sweep-bds-on-use-of-social-media-influencers-to-refer-clients/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2021) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-august-2021/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-august-2021/#respond Fri, 03 Sep 2021 13:23:48 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13251

Monthly Regulatory Summary As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Monthly Regulatory Summary

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 21-28, FINRA has adopted new Rule 6439 (Requirements for Member Inter-Dealer Quotation Systems), which implements additional requirements for firms that operate systems that regularly disseminate the quotations of identified broker-dealers in OTC Equity Securities (each an “inter-dealer quotation system” or “IDQS”). Rule 6439 will become effective on October 1, 2021, except for paragraph (d)(1)(B), which relates to the collection of order-level information. The effective date for this paragraph will be announced at a later date to better coordinate, and avoid regulatory duplication, with reporting obligations to the Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) under Rule 6830 (Industry Member Data Reporting).

FINRA also is deleting the Rule 6500 Series and other rules related to the OTC Bulletin Board (OTCBB) – a FINRA-operated inter-dealer quotation system – and ceasing its operation. The permanent closure of the OTCBB will not occur prior to October 1, 2021. FINRA will announce the effective date of the deletion of the OTCBB-related rules and its closure in a separate communication.

Per Notice 21-29, FINRA is publishing this Notice to remind member firms of their obligation to establish and maintain a supervisory system, including written supervisory procedures (WSPs), for any activities or functions performed by third-party vendors, including any sub-vendors (collectively, Vendors) that are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and regulations and with applicable FINRA rules. This Notice reiterates applicable regulatory obligations; summarizes recent trends in examination findings, observations and disciplinary actions; and provides questions member firms may consider when evaluating their systems, procedures and controls relating to Vendor management.

This Notice—including the “Questions for Consideration”—does not create new legal or regulatory requirements or new interpretations of existing requirements. Many of the reports, tools or methods described herein reflect information firms have told FINRA they find useful in their Vendor management practices. FINRA recognizes that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to Vendor management and related compliance obligations, and that firms use risk-based approaches that may involve different levels of supervisory oversight, depending on the activity or function Vendors perform. Firms may consider the information in this Notice and employ the practices that are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with relevant regulatory obligations based on the firm’s size and business model.

FINRA also notes that the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency recently published and requested comment on proposed guidance designed to help banking organizations manage risks associated with third-party relationships. FINRA will monitor this proposed guidance and consider comparable action, where appropriate.

Per Notice 21-30, FINRA warns member firms of an ongoing phishing campaign that involves fraudulent emails (see sample in Appendix) purporting to be from FINRA and using one of at least three imposter FINRA domain names:

  • “@finrar-reporting.org”
  • “@Finpro-finrar.org”
  • “@gateway2-finra.org”

The email asks the recipient to click a link to “view request” and provide information to “complete” that request, noting that “late submission may attract penalties.”

FINRA recommends that anyone who clicked on any link or image in the email immediately notify the appropriate individuals in their firm of the incident.

None of these domain names are connected to FINRA and firms should delete all emails originating from any of these domain names.

FINRA reminds firms to verify the legitimacy of any suspicious email prior to responding, opening any attachments or clicking on any embedded links.

FINRA has requested that the relevant Internet domain registrars suspend services for all three domain names.

For more information, firms should review the resources provided on FINRA’s Cybersecurity Topic Page, including the Phishing section of our Report on Cybersecurity Practices - 2018.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in August.

SEC

Final Rules

Per Release No. 34-92727, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is making an amendment to the Commission’s Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) regulations to remove a provision stating that records that the FOIA requires to be made available for public inspection in an electronic format will be available to persons who do not have access to the internet in the Commission’s Public Reference Room. The Commission’s FOIA regulations will continue to provide that persons who do not have access to the internet can obtain the documents required to be made available for public inspection by telephone or email request to the Office of FOIA Services.

Effective Date: August 26, 2021

Proposed Rules

There were no proposed rules in August.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in August.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in August.

Policy Statements

Per Release No. 34-92565, The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”) is issuing this statement to clarify how the SEC will proceed when addressing certain issues under Exchange Act Rule 21F-3(b)(3) and Exchange Act Rule 21F-6 while the staff is preparing and the Commission is considering potential amendments to those rules (“Interim Policy-Review Period”). These procedures will remain in effect until withdrawn by the Commission.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-21-27: 

NFA Financial Requirements Section 12 requires forex dealer members to collect and maintain a minimum security deposit of 2% of the notional value of transactions in ten listed major currencies and 5% of the notional value of other transactions. In 2016, NFA's Executive Committee, pursuant to its authority under Section 12, increased the minimum security deposit for currency pairs involving the British pound to 5% and the minimum security deposit for currency pairs involving the Japanese yen to 4%.

The Executive Committee recently reviewed these increases and determined to reduce the minimum security deposit for currency pairs involving the British pound to 3% and for currency pairs involving the Japanese yen to 2%. The decreases are effective immediately.

News Releases

August 5, Chicago—NFA has ordered New York, N.Y. introducing broker Tullett Prebon Financial Services LLC(TPFS) to pay a $150,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by TPFS, in which it neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Committee found that TPFS failed to keep full, complete and systematic records of all transactions relating to TPFS's business of dealing in commodity interests. The Committee also found that TPFS failed to supervise its employees' recordkeeping activities and failed to review and supervise its associated persons' communications.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issues

CyberCrime

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures. 

Regulatory Exam Preparedness

Regulators have been out in force throughout the pandemic and continue to do so. We have observed trends toward lengthy, deeper dive exams, conducted remotely. Firms should consider initiatives aimed at identifying and remediating regulatory gaps in their programs, particularly with respect to current exam focus area trends. 

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. 

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

  • FINRA August 2021 Industry Notices
  • SEC Regulatory Actions
  • NFA Notices
  • NFA Press Releases

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (August 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-august-2021/feed/ 0
Breaking News Update SR-FINRA-2020-041 Approval https://compliance-risk.com/breaking-news-update-sr-finra-2020-041-approval/ https://compliance-risk.com/breaking-news-update-sr-finra-2020-041-approval/#respond Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:16:41 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13227

News Update: SEC Approves FINRA Rules Change August 18, 2021 Overview & Summary In an […]

The post Breaking News Update SR-FINRA-2020-041 Approval appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

News Update: SEC Approves FINRA Rules Change

August 18, 2021

Overview & Summary

In an order[1] dated July 30, 2021, the SEC approved the adoption of new FINRA Rule 4111 and Rule 9561 and the amendment of Rule 9559. FINRA has extended the effective date for the proposed rule change to no later than 180 days after publication of a Regulatory Notice announcing this Commission approval. At time of this update, FINRA has not yet published such a Regulatory Notice.

From the SEC’s approval order:

The proposal to establish a process in new Rule 4111 to identify members firms that present a high degree of risk to the investing public, based on numeric thresholds of firm-level and individual-level disclosure events, and then impose a Restricted Deposit Requirement, conditions, or restrictions on the member firm’s operations, or both, will help protect investors and encourage such member firms to change their behavior. FINRA has designed the proposed rule change to establish an annual, multi-step process to determine whether a member firm raises investor protection concerns substantial enough to require the imposition of additional obligations, while allowing identified firms several means of challenging FINRA’s decisions and affecting the ultimate outcome.

The Department would begin each member firms’ annual Rule 4111 review process by calculating specified “Preliminary Identification Metrics” for each firm for each of six categories of events or conditions, collectively defined as the “Disclosure Event and Expelled Firm Association Categories.”

The six categories are: (1) Registered Person Adjudicated Events; (2) Registered Person Pending Events; (3) Registered Person Termination and Internal Review Events; (4) Member Firm Adjudicated Events; (5) Member Firm Pending Events; and (6) Registered Persons Associated with Previously Expelled Firms (also referred to as the Expelled Firm Association category).

There are numeric thresholds for seven different firm sizes, to provide that each member firm would be compared only to its similarly sized peers.

If the Department determines that a member firm warrants further review under Rule 4111, and such member firm would be meeting the Preliminary Criteria for Identification for the first time, the member firm would have a one-time opportunity to reduce its staffing level to avoid meeting the Preliminary Criteria for Identification, within 30 business days after being informed by the Department that it met the Preliminary Criteria for Identification. However, if the Department determines that the member firm still meets the Preliminary Criteria for Identification (or if the member firm did not opted to reduce staffing levels) the Department would determine the firm’s maximum Restricted Deposit Requirement, and the member firm would proceed to a “Consultation” with the Department.

During the Consultation, the Department would give the member firm an opportunity to demonstrate why it does not meet the Preliminary Criteria for Identification, why it should not be designated as a Restricted Firm, and why it should not be subject to the maximum Restricted Deposit Requirement. (42930) Pursuant to Proposed Rule 4111(e)(2), the Department would provide the member firm with written notice of its decision no later than 30 days from the date of FINRA’s letter scheduling the Consultation, stating any conditions or restrictions to be imposed, and the ability of the member firm to request a hearing with the Office of Hearing Officers in an expedited proceeding.

Under new Rule 9561(a)(1), the Department would serve to the member firm a notice of the Department’s decision following the Rule 4111 process. The proposed rule change would also provide that if a member firm does not request a hearing, the decision would constitute final FINRA action. In general, a request for a hearing would not stay any of the Rule 4111 Requirements imposed in the Department’s decision, which would be immediately effective with one exception being when member requests review of imposition of Restricted Deposit Requirement. In that case, the firm would be required to deposit the lesser of 25% of its Restricted Deposit Requirement or 25% of its average excess net capital over the prior year, while the proceeding is pending.

If a member firm fails to comply with any of the requirements imposed on it under Rule 4111, the Department would be authorized to serve a notice pursuant to proposed Rule 9561 stating that the member firm’s continued failure to comply within seven days of service of the notice would result in a suspension or cancellation of membership.

If a member firm requests a hearing under proposed Rule 9561, the hearing would be subject to Rule 9559 (Hearing Procedures for Expedited Proceedings Under the Rule 9550 Series).

Our Take

As always, CRC reminds firms that the best compliance program is a proactive one. As such, we suggest that firms review their programs to identify areas where updates relative to Rule 4111 are necessary, and implement such updates prior to the effective date, which will formally be determined as 180 days following the publication of a Regulatory Notice noting approval of this Rule. 

Some Key Takeaways:

  • This appears to be intended to be a fast-moving process once it starts (e.g., FINRA must issue a written decision within 30 days of the date of the letter scheduling the “Consultation,” and in the case of alleged non-compliance with obligations under Rule 4111, there is a seven-day window from service of notice under Rule 9561 that can result in a suspension or cancellation of membership).
  • FINRA may still determine that a firm has met its preliminary criteria for identification even after the firm engages in a “staffing reduction” as a part of the Rule 4111 process.
  • It is designed to provide an opportunity for the firm to affect the outcome through the “Consultation” process – e.g., by demonstrating to FINRA why the firm should not be a Restricted Firm or why it should not be subject to the maximum Restricted Deposit Requirement.

Opportunities for CRC to Assist Your Firm:

  • CRC can proactively conduct a review of your current compliance program to identify opportunities to potentially implement enhancements before the annual Rule 4111 reviews begin.
  • Between now and the effective date of this rule, CRC can help your firm to quickly scale up its compliance program with our resources to address concern areas.

Please contact Mitch Avnet for more information.

Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com  or (646) 346.2468 


[1] SR-FINRA-2020-041 Approval Order, https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/2021-08/sr-finra-2020-041-approval-order.pdf

The post Breaking News Update SR-FINRA-2020-041 Approval appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/breaking-news-update-sr-finra-2020-041-approval/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2021) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-july-2021/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-july-2021/#respond Wed, 04 Aug 2021 13:23:01 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13218

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 21-24, FINRA announces, effective immediately, clarifications of interpretations of the FINRA margin rule regarding minimum equity requirements in FINRA Rule 4210(b). FINRA Rule 4210 (Margin Requirements) specifies the margin requirements applicable to securities held in margin accounts, including both strategy-based margin accounts and portfolio margin accounts. FINRA maintains interpretations regarding FINRA Rule 4210, available on the Interpretations of FINRA’s Margin Rule web page, where the interpretations immediately follow the section of the rule to which they relate.

Per Notice 21-25, FINRA appreciates members’ cooperation with its request to keep their risk monitoring analyst informed if the firm, or its associated persons or affiliates, engaged, or intended to engage, in activities related to digital assets, including digital assets that are non-securities. FINRA is encouraging firms to continue to keep their risk monitoring analyst abreast of their activities related to digital assets on an ongoing basis.

Per Notice 21-26, FINRA has adopted changes to FINRA Rules 5122 (Private Placements of Securities Issued by Members) and 5123 (Private Placements of Securities) to require members to file retail communications that promote or recommend private placement offerings that are subject to those rules’ filing requirements. The new filing requirements become effective on October 1, 2021. The amended text of the rules is set forth in Attachment A.

Per Notice 21-27, FINRA is making available updates to interpretations in the Interpretations of Financial and Operational Rules that have been communicated to FINRA by the staff of the SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets (SEC staff). The updated interpretations are with respect to Securities Exchange Act (SEA) Rules 15c3-1 and 15c3-3.

Special Notices

There were no Special Notices in July.

SEC

Final Rule

There were no final rules in July.

Proposed Rules

There were no proposed rules in July.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in July.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in July.

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (July 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary-july-2021/feed/ 0
News Update: SEC Fines 27 Firms for Form CRS Failures https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-fines-27-firms-for-form-crs-failures/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-fines-27-firms-for-form-crs-failures/#respond Thu, 29 Jul 2021 15:28:48 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13214

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced on July 26th that 21 investment advisers and 6 broker-dealers […]

The post News Update: SEC Fines 27 Firms for Form CRS Failures appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced on July 26th that 21 investment advisers and 6 broker-dealers have agreed to settle charges that they failed to timely file and deliver their client or customer relationship summaries to their retail investors. In the release the SEC’s Director of Enforcement, Gurbir Grewal, notes:

“Today’s cases reinforce the importance of meeting those obligations and providing retail investors with information that is intended to help them understand their relationships with their securities industry professionals.”

The penalties ranged from $10,000 to $97,523. 

The Cost of Non-Compliance

Appropriate implementation, maintenance, and distribution of a two-page document could have saved these firms the hassle and embarrassment of fines and reputational damage. At CRC, we firmly believe that the best compliance program is a proactive one; the fines above demonstrate that regulators agree. 

Our Take

Regulators have continued to display heightened focus on transparent communication and disclosure when interacting with retail investors. Recent examinations of both SEC-registered investment advisers and broker-dealers have shown a sharp emphasis on Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) related policies and procedures, particularly regarding the content and distribution (and subsequent evidence of delivery) of Form CRS. As such, firms should ensure that the Form CRS includes all mandated language and meets formatting requirements as specified by Reg BI. A firm’s compliance policies and procedures should also accurately reflect the processes implicated by Reg BI, including the delivery of Form CRS; firms should consider testing such procedures to ensure efficacy. If you have concerns regarding your firm’s Reg BI policies and procedures, please contact your Compliance Professional at CRC, or contact CRC using the method’s listed below so that we can connect you with a member of our team. 

For more information:

 Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com  or (646) 346.2468 

Kate Gibbs at kgibbs@compliance-risk.com or (781) 742.4688 

The post News Update: SEC Fines 27 Firms for Form CRS Failures appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-fines-27-firms-for-form-crs-failures/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2021) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary/#respond Fri, 16 Jul 2021 14:38:39 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=13206

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 21-19, FINRA is requesting comment on potential enhancements to its short sale reporting program. FINRA is considering whether amendments to its short interest reporting and dissemination program would be appropriate to improve the regulatory and public utility of the information. FINRA also is considering whether any changes to other aspects of its short sale regulatory program would be beneficial. FINRA is considering: (1) modifications to its short interest reporting requirements (Rule 4560); (2) a new rule to require that participants of a registered clearing agency report to FINRA information on allocations to correspondent firms of fail-to-deliver positions; and (3) other potential enhancements related to short sale activity. FINRA believes that these potential changes could improve the usefulness of short sale-related information to FINRA, other regulators, investors and other market participants. FINRA encourages all interested parties to comment on this request for comment. Comments must be received by August 4, 2021.

Per Notice 21-20, FINRA warns member firms of an ongoing phishing campaign that involves fraudulent emails (see sample in Appendix) purporting to be from FINRA and using the domain name “@gateway-finra.org.” The email asks the recipient to click a link to “view request” and provide information to “complete” that request, noting that “late submission may attract penalties.” FINRA recommends that anyone who clicked on any link or image in the email immediately notify the appropriate individuals in their firm of the incident. The domain of “gateway-finra.org” is not connected to FINRA and firms should delete all emails originating from this domain name. FINRA reminds firms to verify the legitimacy of any suspicious email prior to responding to it, opening any attachments or clicking on any embedded links. FINRA notes that it has requested that the Internet domain registrar suspend services for "gateway-finra.org." For more information, firms should review the resources provided on FINRA’s Cybersecurity Topic Page, including the Phishing section of our Report on Cybersecurity Practices - 2018.

Per Notice 21-21, effective September 1, 2021, FINRA is amending its rulebook to eliminate the Order Audit Trail System (OATS) rules in the FINRA Rule 7400 Series and FINRA Rule 4554 (Alternative Trading Systems — Recording and Reporting Requirements of Order and Execution Information for NMS Stocks) (collectively referred to as the “OATS Rules”). FINRA has determined that the accuracy and reliability of the Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) meet the standards approved by the SEC and has determined to retire OATS as of September 1, 2021. As of September 1, 2021, the updated rule text will be available in the FINRA Manual.

Per Notice 21-22, FINRA warns member firms of an ongoing phishing campaign that involves fraudulent emails (see sample in Appendix) purporting to be from “FINRA SUPPORT” with the email address “support@westour.org”. The email asks the recipient to pay attention “to the report attached below that requires your immediate response” and states that “[t]he attachment contains our updated Public Policy information.” The emails may not include an attachment.

FINRA recommends that anyone who clicked on any link or image in the email immediately notify the appropriate individuals in their firm of the incident. The domain of “westour.org” is not connected to FINRA and firms should delete all emails originating from this domain name. FINRA reminds firms to verify the legitimacy of any suspicious email prior to responding to it, opening any attachments or clicking on any embedded links. FINRA has requested that the Internet domain registrar suspend services for "westour.org".

For more information, firms should review the resources provided on FINRA’s Cybersecurity Topic Page, including the Phishing section of our Report on Cybersecurity Practices - 2018.

Per Notice 21-23, FINRA reminds member firms of longstanding Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and FINRA rules and guidance concerning best execution and payment for order flow, which the SEC has defined very broadly to refer to a wide range of practices including monetary payments and discounts, rebates, or other fee reductions or credits. Under these rules and guidance, member firms may not let payment for order flow interfere with their duty of best execution.

Special Notices

Per the Notice dated 6/30/21, FINRA requests comment of effective methods of educating new investors. FINRA seeks comments that will help inform and guide the investor education initiatives FINRA and the FINRA Investor Education Foundation (the FINRA Foundation) undertake. They seek input from firms, investors, investor advocates, academics and other stakeholders who are knowledgeable about investor behavior regarding the most effective methods for educating newer investors. This Notice is not focused on existing regulatory requirements applicable to member firms and their interactions with investors. FINRA encourages all interested parties to comment on the Special Notice. The comment period ends August 30, 2021. 

Questions concerning this Special Notice should be directed to:

  • Gerri Walsh, Senior Vice President, Office of Investor Education, at (202) 728-6964 or by email.

SEC

Final Rule

Per Release No. 33-10948, the SEC is adopting amendments to Volumes I and II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“EDGAR Filer Manual” or “Filer Manual”) and related rules. The EDGAR system was upgraded on June 18, 2021. The rule is upon publication to the federal register.

Proposed Rules

There were no proposed rules in June.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in June.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive releases in June.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-21-17: NFA has learned of an ongoing phishing campaign that involves fraudulent emails purporting to be from NFA staff, including Kathleen Clapper and Joe Hawrysz (see Sample Phishing Email below). Other staff member names may be used as well. These emails have a source domain name "@nfa-futures.com" and may include an attachment.

The domain of "@nfa-futures.com" is not connected to NFA. Firms should not open any attachments from this domain and should delete all emails originating from this domain.

NFA reminds all Members to be vigilant when it comes to email requests. All legitimate emails from NFA will come from an address ending in @nfa.futures.org, nfanotifications@mailer.nfa.org or @nfa-swaps-proficiency-requirements.moonami.com in the case of NFA's Swaps Proficiency Requirements. Always be sure to scrutinize the sender's address.

In general, Members should not trust unsolicited emails, especially emails that ask for personal or financial information. With any email, Members should verify the sender prior to responding and ensure the validity of links or attachments prior to clicking on them.

If you have any questions on this Notice, please contact NFA's Information Center (312-781-1410 or 800-621-3570 or information@nfa.futures.org).


Sample Phishing Email

Subject: [FIRM NAME] - NFA

Dear [INDIVIDUAL NAME],

I hope you're doing well. Following regulatory requirements, the National Futures Association (NFA) has released new information to its members.

Please see the letter above and update your files using the information in section 1 & 2A.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Joseph

Respectfully,

Joseph Hawrysz
Managing Director, Compliance
National Futures Association
One New York Plaza, #4300
New York, NY 10004
Cell: [(XXX) XXX-XXXX]

Per Notice I-21-18: Given the recent volatility in the virtual currency market, NFA reminds Members engaging in virtual currency activities that they must fulfill certain ongoing disclosure and reporting requirements.

Disclosure Requirements

NFA requires futures commission merchants (FCM), introducing brokers (IB), commodity pool operators (CPO) and commodity trading advisors (CTA) that engage in activities related to virtual currencies or virtual currency derivatives to comply with the customer disclosure requirements established in NFA's Interpretive Notice entitled Disclosure Requirements for NFA Members Engaging in Virtual Currency Activities.

Reporting Requirements

NFA requires FCMs and IBs that solicit or accept orders in virtual currency derivatives and CPOs and CTAs that execute transactions involving virtual currencies or virtual currency derivatives to immediately notify NFA by amending the Annual Questionnaire.

Per Notice I-21-19:  NFA is seeking committee members and arbitrators. For additional information about committees, duties of members, or duties of arbitrators, review the Notice.

Per Notice I-21-20:  Reminder: Effective date for NFA rules establishing CPO notice filing requirements

In April 2021, NFA issued Notice to Members I-21-15 announcing the adoption of Compliance Rule 2-50 and a related Interpretive Notice entitled Compliance Rule 2-50: CPO Notice Filing Requirements, which require commodity pool operator (CPO) Members to file notice with NFA when a market or other event affects a commodity pool's ability to fulfill its participant obligations. Compliance Rule 2-50 specifies four events that require NFA notification. The related Interpretive Notice further defines each of the notification events and provides guidance on events that do not trigger the requirement.

This rule and Interpretive Notice became effective on June 30, 2021.

To file notice with NFA, CPOs will use EasyFile Extensions and Notice Filings, which is currently utilized to file notices for pool extension requests and fiscal year-end changes. When filing notice pursuant to Compliance Rule 2-50, firms must upload a summary of the event, as well as specify all relevant subsection(s) of Compliance Rule 2-50 and the impacted pool(s). NFA covered the CPO notice filing requirements at its recent virtual Member Regulatory Workshop. Further, step-by-step instructions for filing any type of notice are available in NFA's EasyFile Extension and Notice Filing Help guide.

News Releases

Per the release on June 29th, NFA has ordered Chicago, Ill. swap dealer (SD) The Northern Trust Company (Northern Trust) to pay a $999,000 fine.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC and a settlement offer submitted by Northern Trust, in which it neither admitted nor denied the allegations. The Complaint alleged that Northern Trust failed to establish adequate written procedures reasonably designed to ensure the firm executed written swap trading relationship documentation with counterparties prior to or contemporaneously with entering into a swap transaction. The Complaint also alleged that Northern Trust failed to provide swap counterparties with certain material disclosures prior to entering into a swap transaction and failed to provide required pre-trade mid-market marks and daily marks to some counterparties. The Complaint also alleged that Northern Trust failed to sufficiently implement procedures designed to ensure compliance with CFTC business conduct standards and failed to establish and implement procedures reasonably designed for the handling, management response, remediation, retesting and resolution of non-compliance issues. Finally, the Complaint alleged that Northern Trust failed to establish and implement an adequate system to diligently supervise its SD activities.

In its Decision, the BCC found that Northern Trust committed the alleged rule violations and considered Northern Trust's recent remediation efforts in accepting the settlement offer.

The complete text of the Complaint and Decision can be viewed on NFA's website.

Hot Issues

Cybercrime is constantly developing. With attacks becoming more prevalent and sophisticated. Now is the time to perform a cybersecurity check for your firm to ensure not only compliance with industry standards, but confirm the firm’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to evolving cyber threats. Prevention begins with training; make certain that in addition to proper security measures, applicable personnel has been rigorously trained with respect to information and technology security measures.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet

p. (646) 346-2468  

mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster

p. (917) 568-6470

damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:
  • FINRA 2020 Exam Findings Report, FINRA 2021 Exam Priorities Letter
  • FINRA 2020 Industry Notices
  • SEC 2021 Exam Priorities Letter, SEC Notices
  • NFA Notices

The post Monthly Regulatory Summary (June 2021) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-summary/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (December 2020) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-december-2020/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-december-2020/#respond Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:59:40 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=12780 crc-monthly-regulatory-review-december-2020

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (December 2020) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
crc-monthly-regulatory-review-december-2020

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 20-40, FINRA warns member firms of an ongoing phishing campaign that involves fraudulent emails that include the domain “@invest-finra.org”. FINRA recommends that anyone who clicked on any link or image in the email immediately notify the appropriate individuals in their firm of the incident. The domain of “invest-finra.org” is not connected to FINRA and firms should delete all emails originating from this domain name. FINRA has requested that the Internet domain registrar suspend services for “invest-finra.org”. FINRA reminds firms to verify the legitimacy of any suspicious email prior to responding to it, opening any attachments or clicking on any embedded links.

For more information, firms should review the resources provided on FINRA’s Cybersecurity Topic Page, including the Phishing section of the Report on Cybersecurity Practices -2018.

Questions regarding this Notice should be directed to:

  • Dave Kelley, Director, Member Supervision Specialist Programs, at (816) 802-4729 or by email; or
  • Greg Markovich, Senior Principal Risk Specialist, Member Supervision Specialist Programs, at (312) 899 4604 or by email.

*REMINDER* Per Notice 20-39, the 2021 Renewal Program began on November 16, 2020, when FINRA makes the Preliminary Statements available to all firms in E-Bill. Preliminary Statements are not mailed to firms.

Firms should note the following key dates in the renewal process:

October 19, 2020         Firms may begin submitting post-dated Form U5 and BR Closing/Withdrawal filings via CRD/IARD.

November 1, 2020       Firms may begin submitting post-dated Form BDW and ADV-W filings via CRD/IARD.

Please Note: Registrations terminated by post-dated filings submitted by 11 p.m., Eastern Time (ET), November 13, 2020, do not appear on the firm’s Preliminary Statement. The only allowed date for post-dated filings is December 31, 2020.

November 16, 2020     Preliminary Statements are available in E-Bill.

December 14, 2020     Full payment of Preliminary Statements is due.

December 26, 2020     Final day to make payment to FINRA before firms, its branches and representatives fail to renew for nonpayment.

January 2, 2021           Final Statements are available in E-Bill.

January 22, 2021         Full payment of Final Statements is due.

FINRA advises FINRA-registered firms that failure to remit full payment of their Preliminary Statements to FINRA by December 14, 2020, will be subject to a late fee. In addition, any firm that does not submit payment to FINRA by 6 p.m. ET on December 26, 2020, will cause the firm to become ineligible to do business in the jurisdictions where it is registered, effective January 1, 2021.

In addition to this Notice, firms should review the renewal instructions, the IARD website (if applicable), and any information mailed to ensure continued eligibility to do business in 2021.

SEC

Final Rule

Per Release No. 33-10844, the SEC is adopting amendments to facilitate capital formation and increase opportunities for investors by expanding access to capital for small and medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs across the United States. Specifically, the amendments simplify, harmonize, and improve certain aspects of the exempt offering framework to promote capital formation while preserving or enhancing important investor protections. The amendments also seek to close gaps and reduce complexities in the exempt offering framework that may impede access to investment opportunities for investors and access to capital for businesses and entrepreneurs. The rule is effective 60 days following publication to the federal register.

Per Release No. IC-34084, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) is adopting a new exemptive rule under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Investment Company Act”) designed to address the investor protection purposes and concerns underlying section 18 of the Act and to provide an updated and more comprehensive approach to the regulation of funds’ use of derivatives and the other transactions addressed in 17 CFR 270.18f-4 (“rule 18f-4”). In addition, the Commission is adopting new reporting requirements designed to enhance the Commission’s ability to effectively oversee funds’ use of and compliance with rule 18f-4, and to provide the Commission and the public additional information regarding funds’ use of derivatives. Finally, the Commission is adopting amendments to 17 CFR 270.6c-11 (“rule 6c11”) under the Investment Company Act to allow leveraged/inverse ETFs that satisfy the rule’s conditions to operate without the expense and delay of obtaining an exemptive order. The Commission, accordingly, is rescinding certain exemptive relief that has been granted to these funds and their sponsors. The Rule is effective 60 days following publication to the federal register.

Per Release No. 33-10889, the SEC is adopting amendments to Regulation S-T and the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“EDGAR Filer Manual” or “Filer Manual”) to permit the use of electronic signatures in signature authentication documents required under Regulation S-T in connection with electronic filings on EDGAR that are required to be signed. We are also adopting corresponding revisions to several rules and forms under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”), Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), and Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) to permit the use of electronic signatures in signature authentication documents in connection with certain other filings. The rule is effective upon publication to the federal register.

Per Release No. 34-90442, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is adopting amendments to its Rules of Practice to require persons involved in Commission administrative proceedings to file and serve documents electronically. The rule is effective 30 days following publication to the federal register, except Instruction 8, which is effective July 12, 2021.

Per Release No. 33-10890, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) is  adopting amendments to modernize, simplify, and enhance certain financial disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K. Specifically, the Commission is eliminating the requirement for Selected Financial Data, streamlining the requirement to disclose Supplementary Financial Information, and amending Management’s Discussion & Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (“MD&A”). These amendments are intended to eliminate duplicative disclosures and modernize and enhance MD&A disclosures for the benefit of investors, while simplifying compliance efforts for registrants. The Rule is effective 30 days following publication to the federal register.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in November.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive released in November.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-20-39: On November 6, 2020, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued an Advisory announcing that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) reissued its list of jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies, with updates to two jurisdictions. NFA Member FCMs and IBs should review this Advisory to ensure that their AML programs have the most current information on FATF-identified jurisdictions with AML/CFT deficiencies and revise their AML programs accordingly. A copy of the Advisory is available on FinCEN’s website.

Per Notice I-20-40: Part 3 of NFA’s Compliance Rules sets forth the compliance procedures that control NFA’s disciplinary processes. NFA recently amended these rules to specify that an NFA Hearing Panel has the authority to order a virtual hearing in extraordinary circumstances where an in-person hearing is not feasible, such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. These amendments will become effective on November 15, 2020. More information regarding these amendments can be found in NFA’s September 22, 2020 submission letter to the CFTC. If you have any questions regarding these amendments, please contact Julia Wood, Senior Attorney (jwood@nfa.futures.org or 312-781-7459).

Per Notice I-20-41:  CFTC Regulation 4.13(b) requires a person seeking an exemption from registration under Regulation 4.13 to file electronically a notice of the exemption with NFA through its Exemptions System.

In June 2020, the CFTC amended this regulation to require that this notice include a representation that neither the person nor any of its principals has in its background a statutory disqualification that would require disclosure under section 8a(2) of the Commodity Exchange Act, if such person sought registration.

Beginning today, November 19, 2020, a person seeking relief from CPO registration pursuant to CFTC Regulation 4.13(a)(1), 4.13(a)(2), 4.13(a)(3) or 4.13(a)(5) must complete, in NFA’s Exemptions System, a statutory disqualification attestation including this mandated representation. A person that currently has a 4.13 exemption is not required to complete the statutory disqualification attestation until it completes the annual exemption affirmation process in 2021. Any person not completing this attestation will not qualify for the exemption or renewal of the exemption. More information on the annual affirmation process will be distributed in December 2020.

If you have any questions regarding these filing requirements, please contact Mary McHenry, Director, Compliance (mmchenry@nfa.futures.org or 312-781-1420).

Per Notice I-20-42:  The terms of five of NFA’s current Public Representatives—Douglas E. Harris, Charles P. Nastro, Ronald S. Oppenheimer, Todd E. Petzel, and Michael R. Schaefer—will expire at the Board of Directors’ (Board) regular Annual Meeting on February 18, 2021. NFA is seeking nominations to fill the five Public Representative vacancies. NFA’s Articles of Incorporation (Articles) permit Public Representatives to be nominated by either NFA Members or non-Members.

Over the years, NFA has consistently had Public Representatives with outstanding credentials and their contributions to NFA have been enormous. Public Representatives bring the perspective of non-Members to the Board. A Public Representative candidate must be knowledgeable of the markets and the Members regulated by NFA and have no material relationship with NFA so that he/she can provide an impartial, objective analysis of the issues that come before the Board.

At its regular Annual Meeting, on February 18, 2021, the Board will elect, by majority vote, from among the nominees five Public Representatives to serve on the Board for two-year terms.

Under Article XVIII, a “Public Representative” on NFA’s Board is a public director as that term is defined in Section (b)(2) of Core Principle 16 in Appendix B to Part 38 of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Rules, read in the context as applied to NFA. Therefore, although Core Principle 16 specifically applies to contract markets, the same disqualifying circumstances regarding “material relationships” set forth therein apply to NFA’s Public Representatives and their relationship with NFA. The applicable text of Section (b)(2) of Core Principle 16 in Appendix B to Part 38—Guidance On, and Acceptable Practices In, Compliance With Core Principles is included in this Notice for your information. In the applicable text, please substitute “NFA” for “Contract Market”.

Public representation on NFA’s Board of Directors is an important matter, and we ask that you give serious consideration to submitting a nomination to fill these vacancies. NFA requests that Public Representative nominations be submitted by January 8, 2021 so that NFA’s Executive Committee can review the potential nominees at its meeting on January 21, 2021.

Nominations may be submitted by mail, email, or fax by January 8, 2021 to:

By Mail:
Carol A. Wooding
Secretary and General Counsel
NFA
300 S. Riverside Plaza, Suite 1800
Chicago, Illinois 60606

By Email:
election2021@nfa.futures.org

By Fax:
Attn: Carol A. Wooding
(312) 781-1672

If you have any questions, please contact Carol Wooding at (312) 781-1409 or cwooding@nfa.futures.org.

News Releases

Per the release on November 5th, NFA has ordered Infinity Futures LLC (Infinity Futures), an NFA Member introducing broker located in Chicago, Ill., to pay a $120,000 fine. Infinity Futures is a wholly-owned subsidiary of York Business Associates LLC (York), an NFA Member futures commission merchant located in Deer Park, Ill., and introduces substantially all of its business to York. NFA also ordered Infinity Futures’ associated person (AP) Patrick Zielbauer to pay a $20,000 fine. Finally, NFA ordered Infinity Futures to continue to record all of Zielbauer’s communications for three years.

The Decision, issued by an NFA Hearing Panel, is based on a Complaint issued by NFA’s Business Conduct Committee and a settlement offer submitted by, among others, Infinity Futures, York, Zielbauer, James Paul Mooney and James Cagnina. Both Mooney and Cagnina are APs of Infinity Futures and York and principals of Infinity Futures. Mooney is also a principal of York. The Panel found that, among other things, Infinity Futures, York and Zielbauer failed to uphold high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade. The Panel also found that Infinity and York did business with an entity that should have been registered with the CFTC as a commodity pool operator and an NFA Member but was not. Furthermore, the Panel found that Infinity Futures, York, Mooney and Cagnina failed to diligently supervise Infinity’s and York’s operations and employees.

For more information, read the Complaint and Decision.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. CRC is keeping abreast of the unique challenges posed to the financial industry by the current COVID-19 pandemic conditions and will summarize material updates and guidance herein.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one, particularly under the current circumstances. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

Mitch Avnet, p. (646) 346-2468  

David Amster, p. (917) 568-6470

Sources:

  • FINRA 2019 Exam Findings Report, FINRA 2019 Exam Priorities Letter
  • FINRA 2020 Industry Notices
  • SEC 2019 Exam Priorities Letter, SEC Notices
  • NFA Notices

The post Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (December 2020) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-december-2020/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (November 2020) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-november-2020/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-november-2020/#respond Fri, 06 Nov 2020 13:59:52 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=9823

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (November 2020) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 20-34, the protection of senior investors is a top priority for FINRA. In August 2019, FINRA launched a retrospective review to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of its rules and administrative processes that help protect senior investors from financial exploitation. The review indicated that FINRA’s steps to protect seniors have provided helpful and effective tools in the fight against financial exploitation, but it also suggested some additional tools, guidance, and rule changes.

Based on feedback received during the review, FINRA is proposing amendments to Rule 2165 (Financial Exploitation of Specified Adults) to extend the hold period and to allow temporary holds on securities transactions to further address suspected financial exploitation of senior investors. This Notice seeks comment on the proposed amendments to Rule 2165.

FINRA encourages all interested parties to comment. Comments must be received by December 4, 2020.

Comments must be submitted through one of the following methods:

  • Online using FINRA’s comment form for this Notice;
  • Emailing comments to pubcom@finra.org; or
  • Mailing comments in hard copy to:

Jennifer Piorko Mitchell
Office of the Corporate Secretary
FINRA
1735 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006-1506

Per Notice 20-35, FINRA warns member firms of a widespread, ongoing phishing campaign that involves fraudulent emails purporting to be from FINRA asking member firms to complete a survey (see sample below). The email was sent from the domain “@regulation-finra.org” and was preceded by “info” followed by a number, e.g., info5@regulation-finra.org. FINRA recommends that anyone who clicked on any link or image in the email immediately notify the appropriate individuals in their firm of the incident. The domain of “regulation-finra.org” is not connected to FINRA and firms should delete all emails originating from this domain name. FINRA has requested that the Internet domain registrar suspend services for "regulation-finra.org". FINRA reminds firms to verify the legitimacy of any suspicious email prior to responding to it, opening any attachments, or clicking on any embedded links.

For more information, firms should review the resources provided on FINRA’s Cybersecurity Topic Page, including the Phishing section of our Report on Cybersecurity Practices -2018.

Per Notice 20-36, FINRA requests comment on a concept proposal regarding the application of FINRA rules to security-based swaps (SBS) following the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) completion of its rulemaking regarding SBS dealers and major SBS participants. Current FINRA Rule 0180, which will expire in September 2021, provides a temporary exception from the application of FINRA rules to SBS, with certain limited exceptions. FINRA is considering revising Rule 0180 to replace the general exception from FINRA rules for members engaging in SBS activities with limited, targeted exceptions from certain FINRA rules where FINRA believes application of the rules to SBS activity is infeasible or inappropriate, particularly where members’ activities are subject to parallel SEC requirements. FINRA is also considering proposing certain modifications to its financial responsibility and operational rules to conform to the SEC’s amended net capital rule and take into account members’ SBS activities, as well as a new margin rule specifically applicable to SBS.

Per Notice 20-37, a key element in any firm’s cybersecurity program is a robust authentication process, i.e., the method that confirms that an authorized user seeking access to a firm’s information technology systems is who they say they are.1 This process typically relies on one or more “factors,” such as a password or personal identification number (PIN) code, to provide the authentication. The importance of sound authentication techniques to protect investors’ and firms’ confidential information has increased in light of 1) escalating threats to the most commonly used form of authentication (single factor or password-based authentication) and 2) firms responding to the COVID-19 pandemic with work arrangements that typically require registered representatives to log in to their networks from a remote location. Review the full Information Notice for detailed information about authentication factors, etc.

Per Notice 20-38, FINRA adopted a new rule to limit any associated person of a member firm who is registered with FINRA (each a “registered person”) from being named a beneficiary, executor or trustee, or to have a power of attorney or similar position of trust for or on behalf of a customer.1 New FINRA Rule 3241 (Registered Person Being Named a Customer’s Beneficiary or Holding a Position of Trust for a Customer) protects investors by requiring all member firms to affirmatively address registered persons being named beneficiaries or holding positions of trusts for customers. The rule requires the member firm with which the registered person is associated, upon receiving required written notice from the registered person, to review and approve or disapprove the registered person assuming such status or acting in such capacity.  The rule does not apply where the customer is a member of the registered person’s “immediate family.”2 Rule 3241 becomes effective February 15, 2021.

Per Notice 20-39, the 2021 Renewal Program begins on November 16, 2020, when FINRA makes the Preliminary Statements available to all firms in E-Bill. Preliminary Statements are not mailed to firms.

Firms should note the following key dates in the renewal process:

October 19, 2020         Firms may begin submitting post-dated Form U5 and BR Closing/Withdrawal filings via CRD/IARD.

November 1, 2020       Firms may begin submitting post-dated Form BDW and ADV-W filings via CRD/IARD.

Please Note: Registrations terminated by post-dated filings submitted by 11 p.m., Eastern Time (ET), November 13, 2020, do not appear on the firm’s Preliminary Statement. The only allowed date for post-dated filings is December 31, 2020.

November 16, 2020     Preliminary Statements are available in E-Bill.

December 14, 2020     Full payment of Preliminary Statements is due.

December 26, 2020     Final day to make payment to FINRA before firms, its branches and representatives fail to renew for nonpayment.

January 2, 2021           Final Statements are available in E-Bill.

January 22, 2021         Full payment of Final Statements is due.

FINRA advises FINRA-registered firms that failure to remit full payment of their Preliminary Statements to FINRA by December 14, 2020, will be subject to a late fee. In addition, any firm that does not submit payment to FINRA by 6 p.m. ET on December 26, 2020, will cause the firm to become ineligible to do business in the jurisdictions where it is registered, effective January 1, 2021.

In addition to this Notice, firms should review the renewal instructions, the IARD website (if applicable), and any information mailed to ensure continued eligibility to do business in 2021.

SEC

Final Rule

Per Release No. 33-10871, the SEC is adopting a new rule under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act” or “Act”) to streamline and enhance the regulatory framework applicable to funds that invest in other funds (“fund of funds” arrangements). In connection with the new rule, the Commission is rescinding rule 12d1-2 under the Act and certain exemptive relief that has been granted from sections 12(d)(1)(A), (B), (C), and (G) of the Act permitting certain fund of funds arrangements. Finally, the Commission is adopting related amendments to rule 12d1-1 under the Act and to Form NCEN. The rule is effective 60 days following publication to the federal register.

Per Release No. 33-10876, the Securities and Exchange Commission is adopting amendments to update certain auditor independence requirements. These amendments are intended to more effectively focus the independent analysis on those relationships or services that are more likely to pose threats to an auditor’s objectivity and impartiality. Rule is effective 180 days following publication to the federal register.

Per Release No. 34-90244, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) (collectively, the “Commissions”) are adopting rule amendments to lower the margin requirement for an unhedged security futures position from 20% to 15% and adopting certain conforming revisions to the security futures margin offset table. The rule is effective 30 days following publication to the federal register.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in October.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive released in October.

NFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-20-35: Coronavirus Update, NFA's Interpretive Notice 9019 — Compliance Rule 2-9: Supervision of Branch Offices and Guaranteed IBs and Interpretive Notice 9053 — Forex Transactions require Members with branch offices and/or guaranteed introducing brokers (IB) to conduct an annual on-site inspection of each branch office and guaranteed IB. The Interpretive Notices provide some flexibility on the on-site requirement by permitting Members to use a risk-based approach to identify branch offices or guaranteed IBs for which the Member determines it would be appropriate to conduct an on-site inspection every other year (with the off year's inspection conducted remotely).

Due to COVID-19, NFA understands that it may be difficult for Members to conduct on-site inspections at branch offices and guaranteed IBs this year. Therefore, although Members must conduct the required annual inspection of each branch office and guaranteed IB by December 31, 2020, firms may conduct these inspections remotely. For the next calendar year, Members that conduct a remote inspection this calendar year based on this relief will not be required to conduct an on-site inspection to comply with the Interpretive Notices' every-other-year restriction on remote inspections. Specifically, a Member will be permitted to conduct a remote inspection again next year if its risk assessment1 (which factors in that the Member did not conduct an on-site inspection this year) indicates that it is appropriate to do so.

If you have any questions on this relief, please contact Valerie O'Malley, Director, Futures Compliance (312-781-1290 or vomalley@nfa.futures.org).

Timely information and guidance for Members and the investing public related to COVID-19 continues to be posted to NFA's dedicated COVID-19 webpage as it becomes available.

Per Notice I-20-36, NFA recently amended its Code of Arbitration (Code) and Member Arbitration Rules (Member Rules). The rule changes and their effective dates are summarized below.

Increased filing and hearing fees and restructured claim tiers

The Code and the Member Rules require each party filing an arbitration claim to pay filing and hearing fees. These fees increase as the claim amount increases. NFA made adjustments to the fees and amended the fee structure to reflect increased claim amounts in recent years. Though NFA will continue to subsidize its Customer Arbitration Program, the fee increases will allow NFA to offset more of the costs associated with administering arbitration claims. These fee increases will also allow NFA to increase the honorarium paid to arbitrators in order to continue to attract high quality arbitrators.

The fee increases and the restructured claim tiers are effective for any case filed on or after October 6, 2020.

Additional flexibility for parties that filed claims involving Member respondents that withdraw their membership

NFA amended the Code and Member Rules to make it easier for a party to withdraw or amend its claim or ask for a hearing or summary postponement if the Member respondent withdraws its membership during the course of the proceeding. NFA also amended its Member Rules to make claims against a former Member voluntary, rather than mandatory. These amendments become effective for all cases pending on or after October 6, 2020.

Additional flexibility governing service of process and the time and place of hearings

NFA amended its Code and Member Rules to permit service by e-mail without the need for express consent. NFA also amended the Code and Member Rules to make clear that, in extraordinary circumstances, an Arbitration Panel may order the parties to conduct hearing sessions on a virtual basis when an in-person hearing is not feasible. The changes to NFA's rules regarding service by e-mail and a Panel's ability to order a virtual hearing become effective for all cases pending on or after October 6, 2020.

NFA's FCM, IB and CPO/CTA Advisory Committees fully supported the proposed amendments. In particular, the Advisory Committees expressed overwhelming support for the increase to the arbitration fees and viewed them as reasonable in light of the fact that the filing fees have remained virtually unchanged since each program's inception.

Per Notice I-20-37: Coronavirus Update, In April 2020, the CFTC's Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight (DSIO) issued a no-action letter granting temporary relief to registrants and applicants for registration listing a principal, and for applicants for associate person (AP) registration, from the fingerprinting requirements in CFTC Regulations 3.10(a)(2) (for natural person principals) and 3.12(c)(3) (for APs). NFA issued similar relief from the fingerprinting requirements in NFA Registration Rules 204(a)(2)(A) and 206(a)(1)(A). In July 2020, DSIO and NFA extended this relief until September 30, 2020.

On September 29, 2020, DSIO issued an email alert stating that this no-action relief would not be extended beyond September 30, 2020. Therefore, beginning on October 1, 2020, all applicants for AP registration and all natural persons being listed as a principal of an applicant or registrant must submit the applicant's or natural person principal's fingerprints on an applicant fingerprint card, which are available at facilities offering fingerprinting services.

Additionally, all persons currently relying on DSIO's no-action letter and NFA relief from the fingerprinting requirements and APs that have been granted a temporary license must submit a fingerprint card to NFA by November 2, 2020.

Any person finding it impossible or inordinately difficult to obtain fingerprints should contact NFA's Information Center (1-800-621-3570 or 312-781-1410 or information@nfa.futures.org).

Timely information and guidance for Members and the investing public related to COVID-19 continues to be posted to NFA's dedicated COVID-19 webpage as it becomes available.

News Releases

Per the release on October 20th, NFA has ordered Highland Quantitative Driven Investments LLC (Highland), an NFA Member commodity pool operator located in Colorado, to withdraw from and not reapply for NFA membership.

The Decision, issued by an NFA Hearing Panel, is based on a Complaint issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee and a settlement offer submitted by Highland. The Complaint alleged that Highland engaged in a course of conduct that furthered its interests over the interests of participants in the Highland Quantitative Investment Fund, LP (Fund), a commodity pool operated by Highland. Specifically, Highland permitted the Fund to make improper advances and a prohibited loan to an affiliated non-Member company. The Complaint also alleged that, among other things, Highland failed to diligently supervise the firm's operations.

For more information, read the Complaint and Decision.

Per the release on October 28th, NFA has permanently barred Dafex Global Ltd. (Dafex), a former NFA Member and current CFTC registered commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor located in Malaysia from membership and from acting as a principal of an NFA Member.

The Decision, issued by NFA's Business Conduct Committee (BCC), is based on a Complaint issued by the BCC. The BCC found that Dafex engaged in deceitful conduct to obtain NFA membership and CFTC registration by falsely listing an individual as a principal and by sponsoring this individual as an associated person (AP), despite knowing the individual would not be engaging in any activities that would require AP registration. The BCC also found that Dafex willfully submitted misleading information to NFA.

For more information, read the Complaint and Decision.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. CRC is keeping abreast of the unique challenges posed to the financial industry by the current COVID-19 pandemic conditions and will summarize material updates and guidance herein.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one, particularly under the current circumstances. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

 

For more information, please contact:

 Mitch Avnet, p. (646) 346-2468: mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster, p. (917) 568-6470: damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources:

FINRA 2019 Exam Findings Report, FINRA 2019 Exam Priorities Letter

FINRA 2020 Industry Notices

SEC 2019 Exam Priorities Letter, SEC Notices

NFA Notices

The post Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (November 2020) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-november-2020/feed/ 0
Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (October 2020) https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-october-2020/ https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-october-2020/#respond Tue, 20 Oct 2020 03:29:42 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=9773

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly […]

The post Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (October 2020) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) is issuing its monthly review and summary of FINRA, SEC, and NFA notices and bulletins to assist our clients in keeping abreast of notable regulatory developments and deadlines in an effort to strengthen their compliance and regulatory initiatives.

FINRA

Regulatory Notices

Per Notice 20-32, FINRA has recently observed an increase in fraudulent options trading being facilitated by (1) account takeover schemes (sometimes referred to as account intrusions), through which a bad actor gains unauthorized entry to a customer’s brokerage account; and (2) the use of new account fraud by a bad actor who fraudulently establishes a brokerage account through identity theft.

The protection of customers’ non-public information is a key responsibility and obligation of FINRA member firms. FINRA has published Notices and guidance to assist firms in addressing cybersecurity risks.3 These resources include a checklist of steps a member firm should consider if it learns that an unauthorized person may have gained entry to a customer’s brokerage account,4 as well as other steps firms may take to enhance their security practices, such as implementing multi-factor authentication to supplement password logins.

FINRA also reminds firms to be vigilant regarding customer accounts that are established to profit from options trading facilitated by account takeover schemes and the use of new account fraud.5 The customer accounts profiting from this type of conduct may be in the names of non-U.S. persons, with fund transfers through non-U.S. banks. However, accounts may also be in the names of U.S. individuals, particularly those who had their identities stolen. When potential activity related to the above noted schemes has been identified, member firms should immediately commence reviews to determine whether action is appropriate, such as placing trading and fund restrictions on the relevant profiting accounts.

Account takeover schemes and new account fraud may trigger legal or regulatory obligations for firms housing either the victim or profiting accounts, such as filing a suspicious activity report (SAR) or, potentially, reporting to FINRA and relevant governmental authorities. Member firms should also proactively review their written supervisory procedures in light of the recent increase in the above noted schemes (e.g., to consider whether they address the risk of compromised customer records and information).

Per Notice 20-33, FINRA is proposing formal procedures for bringing actions against non-associated persons who cheat or misbehave during a FINRA qualification examination. Although there are few instances of cheating because persons who are not yet associated with a member firm may take the Securities Industry Essentials (SIE) examination or other FINRA qualification examinations, formal procedures are needed to address misconduct by non-associated persons when it occurs.

The proposed formal procedures—a new expedited proceeding rule—would also strengthen the existing processes for responding to cheating and misbehavior by associated persons during a FINRA qualification examination. FINRA also is proposing related amendments to FINRA’s registration requirements rule and eligibility proceedings rules.

FINRA encourages all interested parties to comment. Comments must be received by November 23, 2020.

Comments must be submitted through one of the following methods:

  • Online using FINRA’s comment form for this Notice;
  • Emailing comments to pubcom@finra.org; or
  • Mailing comments in hard copy to:
    Jennifer Piorko Mitchell
    Office of the Corporate Secretary
    FINRA
    1735 K Street, NW
    Washington, DC 20006-1506

Per Notice 20-34, the protection of senior investors is a top priority for FINRA. In August 2019, FINRA launched a retrospective review to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of its rules and administrative processes that help protect senior investors from financial exploitation. The review indicated that FINRA’s steps to protect seniors have provided helpful and effective tools in the fight against financial exploitation, but it also suggested some additional tools, guidance, and rule changes.

Based on feedback received during the review, FINRA is proposing amendments to Rule 2165 (Financial Exploitation of Specified Adults) to extend the hold period and to allow temporary holds on securities transactions to further address suspected financial exploitation of senior investors. This Notice seeks comment on the proposed amendments to Rule 2165.

FINRA encourages all interested parties to comment. Comments must be received by December 4, 2020.

Comments must be submitted through one of the following methods:

  • Online using FINRA’s comment form for this Notice;
  • Emailing comments to pubcom@finra.org; or
  • Mailing comments in hard copy to:

Jennifer Piorko Mitchell
Office of the Corporate Secretary
FINRA
1735 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006-1506

Per Notice 20-35, FINRA warns member firms of a widespread, ongoing phishing campaign that involves fraudulent emails purporting to be from FINRA asking member firms to complete a survey (see sample below). The email was sent from the domain “@regulation-finra.org” and was preceded by “info” followed by a number, e.g., info5@regulation-finra.org. FINRA recommends that anyone who clicked on any link or image in the email immediately notify the appropriate individuals in their firm of the incident.

The domain of “regulation-finra.org” is not connected to FINRA and firms should delete all emails originating from this domain name.

FINRA has requested that the Internet domain registrar suspend services for "regulation-finra.org".

FINRA reminds firms to verify the legitimacy of any suspicious email prior to responding to it, opening any attachments, or clicking on any embedded links.

For more information, firms should review the resources provided on FINRA’s Cybersecurity Topic Page, including the Phishing section of our Report on Cybersecurity Practices -2018.

SEC

Final Rule

Per Release No. 34-89835, the SEC is adopting rules to update our statistical disclosure requirements for banking registrants. These registrants currently provide many disclosures in response to the items set forth in Industry Guide 3 (“Guide 3”), Statistical Disclosure by Bank Holding Companies, which are not Commission rules. The amendments update and expand the disclosures that registrants are required to provide, codify certain Guide 3 disclosure items, and eliminate other Guide 3 disclosure items that overlap with Commission rules, U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“U.S. GAAP”), or International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). In addition, we are relocating the codified disclosure requirements to a new subpart of Regulation S-K and rescinding Guide 3. DATES: Effective date: These final rules are effective [insert date 30 days after publication in Federal Register], except for the rescission to 17 CFR 229.801(c) and 229.802(c), which will be effective on January 1, 2023.

Per Release No. 34-89891, the Securities and Exchange Commission is adopting new rules which governs the publication of quotations for securities in a quotation medium other than a national securities exchange, i.e., over-the-counter (“OTC”) securities. The amendments are designed to modernize the Rule, promote investor protection, and curb incidents of fraud and manipulation by, among other things: requiring information about issuers to be current and publicly available for broker-dealers to quote their securities in the OTC market; narrowing reliance on certain exceptions from the Rule’s requirements, including the piggyback exception; adding new exceptions for the quotations of securities that may be less susceptible to fraud and manipulation; removing obsolete provisions; adding new definitions; and making technical amendments. The amendments are effective 60 days following publication to the federal register.

Per Release No. 34-89920, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) is adopting revisions to Volume II of the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System (“EDGAR”) Filer Manual (“EDGAR Filer Manual” or “Filer Manual”) and related rules. The EDGAR system was upgraded on September 21, 2020.

Per Release No. 34-89963, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is adopting several amendments to the Commission’s rules implementing its congressionally mandated whistleblower program. Section 21F of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) provides, among other things, that the Commission shall pay—under regulations prescribed by the Commission and subject to certain limitations—to eligible whistleblowers who voluntarily provide the Commission with original information about a violation of the federal securities laws that leads to the successful enforcement of a covered judicial or administrative action, or a related action, an aggregate amount, determined in the Commission’s discretion, that is equal to not less than 10 percent, and not more than 30 percent, of monetary sanctions that have been collected in the covered or related actions. On May 25, 2011, the Commission adopted a set of rules to implement the whistleblower program. After ten years of experience administering the program, the Commission is adopting various amendments that are intended to provide greater transparency, efficiency and clarity to whistleblowers, to ensure whistleblowers are properly incentivized, and to continue to properly award whistleblowers to the maximum extent appropriate and with maximum efficiency. The Commission is also making several technical amendments, and adopting interpretive guidance concerning the term “independent analysis.” The final rules are effective 30 days following publication to the federal register.

Per Release No. 34-89964, We are adopting amendments to certain procedural requirements and the provision relating to resubmitted proposals under the shareholder-proposal rule in order to modernize and enhance the efficiency and integrity of the shareholder-proposal process for the benefit of all shareholders. The amendments to the procedural rules: amend the current ownership requirements to incorporate a tiered approach that provides three options for demonstrating a sufficient ownership stake in a company—through a combination of amount of securities owned and length of time held—to be eligible to submit a proposal; require certain documentation to be provided when a proposal is submitted on behalf of a shareholder proponent; require shareholder-proponents to identify specific dates and times they can meet with the company in person or via teleconference to engage with the company with respect to the proposal; and provide that a person may submit no more than one proposal, directly or indirectly, for the same shareholders’ meeting. The amendments to the resubmission thresholds revise the levels of shareholder support a proposal must receive to be eligible for resubmission at the same company’s future shareholders’ meetings from 3, 6, and 10 percent to 5, 15, and 25 percent, respectively. The final rules are effective 60 days following publication to the federal register.

Proposed Rules

Per Release No. 34-90019, the Securities and Exchange Commission is proposing amendments to Regulation ATS under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) for alternative trading systems (“ATSs”). The Commission is proposing to amend Regulation ATS for ATSs that trade government securities as defined under Section 3(a)(42) of the Exchange Act (“government securities”) or repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements on government securities (“Government Securities ATSs”) to: eliminate the exemption from compliance with Regulation ATS for an ATS that limits its securities activities to government securities or repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements on government securities, and registers as a broker-dealer or is a bank; require the filing of public Form ATS-G, which would require a Government Securities ATS to disclose information about its manner of operations and the ATS-related activities of the registered broker-dealer or government securities broker or government securities dealer that operates the ATS and its affiliates; require, among other things, public posting of certain Form ATS-G filings and to provide a process for the Commission to review Form ATS-G filings and, after notice and opportunity for hearing, declare Form ATS-G filings ineffective; and apply the fair access rule under Rule 301(b)(5) of Regulation ATS to Government Securities ATSs that meet certain volume thresholds in U.S. Treasury Securities or 2 in a debt security issued or guaranteed by a U.S. executive agency, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105, or government-sponsored enterprise, as defined in 2 U.S.C. 622(8) (“Agency Securities”). The Commission is also proposing changes to correct and modernize Regulation ATS, Form ATS, Form ATS-N, and Form ATS-R. In addition, the Commission is proposing to amend Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity to apply it to ATSs that meet certain volume thresholds in U.S. Treasury Securities or Agency Securities. Finally, the Commission is issuing a concept release on the regulatory framework for electronic platforms that trade corporate debt and municipal securities. Comments should be received within 60 days of publication to the federal register.

Interim Final Rules

There were no interim final rules in September.

Interpretive Releases

There were no interpretive released in September.

xNFA

Notices to Members

Per Notice I-20-32: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update, The CFTC recently issued no-action letter 20-26 extending through January 15, 2021, certain no-action relief issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The relief, previously set to expire on September 30, 2020, applies exclusively to certain regulatory obligations of FCMs, RFEDs (i.e., FDMs), IBs and SDs. NFA is also extending through January 15, 2021 similar relief for Members that are in compliance with the terms of the CFTC's no-action relief. Specific relief subject to this extension is detailed in NFA's Notice to Members I-20-13.

Per Notice I-20-34, NFA utilizes an electronic voting process for contested Directors' elections, contested Nominating Committee member elections and Articles' amendments approval votes. If elections are necessary, NFA has engaged a third-party election service provider to administer the electronic voting process. To facilitate the electronic voting process, each Member shall designate an Executive Representative who will have the Member's sole authority to sign nominations made by petition, receive notices of Member meetings and proxy materials, complete proxy cards and provide voting instructions and cast votes on behalf of the Member. Members may designate an Executive Representative through NFA's website. Only firm personnel who are the Security Manager or are authorized to view, update and file information in ORS may complete the Executive Representative Contact form.

If a Member fails to complete this form and designate an Executive Representative, the Member's membership contact listed in ORS will be deemed to be the Executive Representative. If a Member has already designated an Executive Representative, it is not necessary to do so again unless the person designated as the Executive Representative has changed.

Board and Nominating Committee Members' Terms to Expire at 2021 Board of Directors' Regular Annual Meeting

Before October 15th of each year, NFA's Secretary shall notify all Members in the Futures Commission Merchant (FCM), Introducing Broker (IB), Commodity Pool Operator and Commodity Trading Advisor (CPO/CTA) and Swap Dealer, Major Swap Participant and Retail Foreign Exchange Dealer (SD/MSP/RFED) categories of the elected Directors and the members of the Nominating Committee whose terms shall expire at the Board of Directors' regular annual meeting and shall request that the names of eligible persons to fill those positions be submitted to the Nominating Committee.

Provided is a list of the FCM, IB, CPO/CTA and SD/MSP/RFED Board and Nominating Committee members whose terms shall expire at the Board of Directors' regular annual meeting on February 18, 2021. Please use the form provided to submit names of persons eligible to fill the vacancies on the Board of Directors and the Nominating Committee. For your reference, an explanation of the composition of the Board of Directors and the Nominating Committee is provided. The Nominating Committee shall consider names that are submitted, and the membership will be notified of the Committee's nominations. Thereafter, additional nominations may be made by petition pursuant to NFA's Articles. The procedure for filing a nomination by petition will be contained in a subsequent Notice to Members announcing the Nominating Committee's nominations to fill the Board and Nominating Committee vacancies.

FCM and IB Open Board Positions

Two (2) open positions for FCM Representatives of which at least one (1) must be affiliated with an FCM ranked as a top ten FCM based on the total amount of segregated funds and secured amounts as of June 30 preceding the election.

One (1) open position for an Independent IB Representative.

CPO/CTA Open Board Positions

Two (2) open positions for CPO/CTA Representatives of which at least one (1) must rank within the top five (5) percent of CPOs and CTAs reporting any funds under management allocated to futures and swaps on NFA Form PQR and NFA Form PR as of June 30, 2020; and one (1) representative is an at-large position with no conditions placed on this position as far as its ranking.

SD/MSP/RFED Open Board Positions

Two (2) open positions for SD/MSP/RFED Representatives of which one (1) representative must be affiliated with an SD, MSP or RFED that is not a Large Financial Institution as of June 30 preceding the election; and one (1) representative is an at-large position with no conditions placed on this position as far as its ranking.

Nominating Committee Open Positions

In addition to the Board of Director vacancies, there are the following open positions on the Nominating Committee in the 2021 Member election:

  • One (1) open position for an FCM Representative who may be affiliated with either a top ten FCM or a non-top ten FCM based on the total amount of segregated funds and secured amounts held as of June 30 preceding the election;
  • One (1) open position for an IB Representative who must be affiliated with a Guaranteed IB;
  • One (1) open position for a CPO/CTA Representative who must be acting primarily as a CTA; and
  • One (1) open position for an SD/MSP/RFED Representative who must be affiliated with an SD/MSP/RFED that is a Non-Large Financial Institution as of June 30 preceding the election.

How to Submit Recommendations

NFA is a membership organization. NFA Members have a voice in NFA's governance through the exercise of the right to recommend candidates and to nominate and elect individuals to serve on NFA's Nominating Committee and Board of Directors. The Nominating Committee relies heavily on the recommendations of the membership in making its nominating decisions. Please give this matter serious consideration and return your submission(s) to NFA by mail, email, or fax for receipt no later than October 15, 2020 to:

By Mail:
Carol A. Wooding
Secretary and General Counsel
NFA
300 South Riverside Plaza, Suite 1800
Chicago, Illinois 60606

By Email:
election2021@nfa.futures.org

By Fax:
Attn: Carol Wooding
312-781-1672

Per Notice I-20-35: Coronavirus Update, NFA's Interpretive Notice 9019 — Compliance Rule 2-9: Supervision of Branch Offices and Guaranteed IBs and Interpretive Notice 9053 — Forex Transactions require Members with branch offices and/or guaranteed introducing brokers (IB) to conduct an annual on-site inspection of each branch office and guaranteed IB. The Interpretive Notices provide some flexibility on the on-site requirement by permitting Members to use a risk-based approach to identify branch offices or guaranteed IBs for which the Member determines it would be appropriate to conduct an on-site inspection every other year (with the off year's inspection conducted remotely).

Due to COVID-19, NFA understands that it may be difficult for Members to conduct on-site inspections at branch offices and guaranteed IBs this year. Therefore, although Members must conduct the required annual inspection of each branch office and guaranteed IB by December 31, 2020, firms may conduct these inspections remotely. For the next calendar year, Members that conduct a remote inspection this calendar year based on this relief will not be required to conduct an on-site inspection to comply with the Interpretive Notices' every-other-year restriction on remote inspections. Specifically, a Member will be permitted to conduct a remote inspection again next year if its risk assessment1 (which factors in that the Member did not conduct an on-site inspection this year) indicates that it is appropriate to do so.

If you have any questions on this relief, please contact Valerie O'Malley, Director, Futures Compliance (312-781-1290 or vomalley@nfa.futures.org).

Timely information and guidance for Members and the investing public related to COVID-19 continues to be posted to NFA's dedicated COVID-19 webpage as it becomes available.

Per Notice I-20-36, NFA recently amended its Code of Arbitration (Code) and Member Arbitration Rules (Member Rules). The rule changes and their effective dates are summarized below.

Increased filing and hearing fees and restructured claim tiers

The Code and the Member Rules require each party filing an arbitration claim to pay filing and hearing fees. These fees increase as the claim amount increases. NFA made adjustments to the fees and amended the fee structure to reflect increased claim amounts in recent years. Though NFA will continue to subsidize its Customer Arbitration Program, the fee increases will allow NFA to offset more of the costs associated with administering arbitration claims. These fee increases will also allow NFA to increase the honorarium paid to arbitrators in order to continue to attract high quality arbitrators.

The fee increases and the restructured claim tiers are effective for any case filed on or after October 6, 2020.

Additional flexibility for parties that filed claims involving Member respondents that withdraw their membership

NFA amended the Code and Member Rules to make it easier for a party to withdraw or amend its claim or ask for a hearing or summary postponement if the Member respondent withdraws its membership during the course of the proceeding. NFA also amended its Member Rules to make claims against a former Member voluntary, rather than mandatory. These amendments become effective for all cases pending on or after October 6, 2020.

Additional flexibility governing service of process and the time and place of hearings

NFA amended its Code and Member Rules to permit service by e-mail without the need for express consent. NFA also amended the Code and Member Rules to make clear that, in extraordinary circumstances, an Arbitration Panel may order the parties to conduct hearing sessions on a virtual basis when an in-person hearing is not feasible. The changes to NFA's rules regarding service by e-mail and a Panel's ability to order a virtual hearing become effective for all cases pending on or after October 6, 2020.

NFA's FCM, IB and CPO/CTA Advisory Committees fully supported the proposed amendments. In particular, the Advisory Committees expressed overwhelming support for the increase to the arbitration fees and viewed them as reasonable in light of the fact that the filing fees have remained virtually unchanged since each program's inception.

Per Notice I-20-37: Coronavirus Update, In April 2020, the CFTC's Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight (DSIO) issued a no-action letter granting temporary relief to registrants and applicants for registration listing a principal, and for applicants for associate person (AP) registration, from the fingerprinting requirements in CFTC Regulations 3.10(a)(2) (for natural person principals) and 3.12(c)(3) (for APs). NFA issued similar relief from the fingerprinting requirements in NFA Registration Rules 204(a)(2)(A) and 206(a)(1)(A). In July 2020, DSIO and NFA extended this relief until September 30, 2020.

On September 29, 2020, DSIO issued an email alert stating that this no-action relief would not be extended beyond September 30, 2020. Therefore, beginning on October 1, 2020, all applicants for AP registration and all natural persons being listed as a principal of an applicant or registrant must submit the applicant's or natural person principal's fingerprints on an applicant fingerprint card, which are available at facilities offering fingerprinting services.

Additionally, all persons currently relying on DSIO's no-action letter and NFA relief from the fingerprinting requirements and APs that have been granted a temporary license must submit a fingerprint card to NFA by November 2, 2020.

Any person finding it impossible or inordinately difficult to obtain fingerprints should contact NFA's Information Center (1-800-621-3570 or 312-781-1410 or information@nfa.futures.org).

Timely information and guidance for Members and the investing public related to COVID-19 continues to be posted to NFA's dedicated COVID-19 webpage as it becomes available.

News Releases

Per the release on September 11th, NFA has taken an emergency enforcement action against JDN Capital, LLC, an NFA Member commodity trading advisor located in Stuart, Fla., and its sole principal and associated person Joshua David Nicholas.

This action was taken to protect customers, the derivatives industry and other NFA Members due to JDN Capital and Nicholas' failure to cooperate with NFA. Due to their failure to produce requested documents and information, NFA, among other things, is unable to determine what JDN Capital and Nicholas did with loan proceeds received, including whether Nicholas misappropriated the money to fund his personal trading account. NFA is also unable to determine whether JDN Capital and Nicholas entered into other loans and, if so, the loan amounts and what JDN Capital and Nicholas did with the proceeds.

Effective immediately, JDN Capital and Nicholas are suspended from NFA membership and are prohibited from soliciting or accepting any funds from customers or investors for any managed accounts or from lenders, other than financial institutions, without NFA's prior approval. JDN Capital and Nicholas are further prohibited from disbursing or transferring any funds from any accounts that are in the name of JDN Capital or Nicholas or from any other investments operated or controlled by JDN Capital or Nicholas, without NFA's prior approval. JDN Capital and Nicholas are also prohibited from placing any trades except to liquidate positions.

This action will remain in effect until JDN Capital and Nicholas demonstrate to NFA's satisfaction that they are in complete compliance with all NFA requirements.

JDN Capital and Nicholas may request a hearing before NFA's Hearing Committee.

Our Perspective

Regulators continue to demonstrate their commitment to protecting investors by aggressively pursuing bad actors and reviewing and updating regulations to guard investors against constantly evolving threats. CRC is keeping abreast of the unique challenges posed to the financial industry by the current COVID-19 pandemic conditions and will summarize material updates and guidance herein.

The best approach to regulatory compliance is a proactive one, particularly under the current circumstances. Staying ahead of the curve by taking note of statements and guidance released by regulators and using them as a barometer to assess the current regulatory climate can help ensure that a firm is prepared for a regulatory exam. Rather than scrambling to rectify issues or meet deadlines, a thorough, active compliance program that considers and incorporates regulatory developments is in a better position to satisfy regulators and preserve operations so they can best serve their clients.

For more information, please contact:

 Mitch Avnet, p. (646) 346-2468 | mavnet@compliance-risk.com

David Amster, p. (646) 661-6483 | damster@compliance-risk.com

Sources: FINRA 2019 Exam Findings Report, FINRA 2019 Exam Priorities Letter

       FINRA 2020 Industry Notices

       SEC 2019 Exam Priorities Letter, SEC Notices

       NFA Notices

 

 

The post Monthly Regulatory Review and Outlook (October 2020) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/monthly-regulatory-review-and-outlook-october-2020/feed/ 0
News Update: SEC fines Firm $100,000 for Failure to Maintain Text Messages https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-fines-firm-100000-for-failure-to-maintain-text-messages/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-fines-firm-100000-for-failure-to-maintain-text-messages/#respond Wed, 14 Oct 2020 14:32:55 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=9765 final-news-update (1)

Background & Summary The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) entered an order (“Order”) against a broker-dealer for […]

The post News Update: SEC fines Firm $100,000 for Failure to Maintain Text Messages appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
final-news-update (1)

Background & Summary

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) entered an order (“Order”) against a broker-dealer for failing to retain text messages relating to the firm’s business with the firm’s required business records. The firm was subsequently fined $100,000. The firm’s policies reportedly prohibited employees from conducting business via text message or utilizing personal devices for business-related communication. In addition, employees certified their compliance with such policies on an annual basis.

However, according to the Order, when the SEC issued a subpoena to the broker-dealer, it was discovered that the broker-dealer’s employees had not only conducted firm-related business using text messages, but that that staff within the firm’s compliance department and management were aware that text messages were sometimes used for discussing firm business, and had even done so themselves. Additionally, all such text messages were not maintained with the firm’s regulatory records and therefore could not be produced in response to the subpoena.

Our Take

It is our position at CRC that recognizing the evolving nature of cybersecurity, privacy, electronic communications, and record maintenance in the financial services industry is key to regulatory compliance. Regulators have continued to display heightened focus cybersecurity and electronic communication. As such, firms should ensure that electronic communications (use of personal email, messaging via social media platforms, text messaging, etc.) are thoroughly addressed in the Compliance Manual. In addition, firms should consider quarterly certifications of comprehension of and compliance with such policies and support such efforts with independent testing and confirmation. If you have concerns regarding your firm’s electronic communications policies, please contact your Compliance Professional, or contact CRC at the information listed below so that we can connect you with a member of our team.

Contact Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com  or (646)346-2468 for more information.

The post News Update: SEC fines Firm $100,000 for Failure to Maintain Text Messages appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-fines-firm-100000-for-failure-to-maintain-text-messages/feed/ 0
The Silicon Review: “30 Fastest Growing Private Companies to Watch in 2020.” https://compliance-risk.com/the-silicon-review-30-fastest-growing-private-companies-to-watch-in-2020/ https://compliance-risk.com/the-silicon-review-30-fastest-growing-private-companies-to-watch-in-2020/#respond Fri, 22 May 2020 15:15:23 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=9470

The Silicon Review  "Compliance demands in the financial services sector are surging and the operational […]

The post The Silicon Review: “30 Fastest Growing Private Companies to Watch in 2020.” appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

The Silicon Review 

"Compliance demands in the financial services sector are surging and the operational costs associated with hiring and retaining capable in-house assistance is rising in step with those demands. The increasing number and complexity of regulations, constant pressure from shareholders to reduce operating costs, and a continuing shortage of talent are compelling businesses to consider alternative sourcing strategies. Outsourcing compliance functions to a third-party provider or vendor helps organizations address their compliance burdens in a cost-effective manner. CRC is a business-focused team of senior compliance consultants and executives providing top-tier compliance consulting services to clients on an as-needed, project, or part-time basis. The company offers its clients the critical skills and expertise required to establish, maintain, and enhance a balanced and effective compliance operational risk management program. It helps organizations demonstrate a commitment to a robust risk management culture. CRC compliance consultants bring a unique tailored approach to help their clients succeed in today's challenging regulatory and economic environment by enabling and empowering them to manage the "cost of compliance" without sacrificing the necessary infrastructure and control environment.

In a conversation with the CEO, Mitch Avnet

Why was the company set up? Read the full article on The Silicon Review...

The post The Silicon Review: “30 Fastest Growing Private Companies to Watch in 2020.” appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/the-silicon-review-30-fastest-growing-private-companies-to-watch-in-2020/feed/ 0
Steve Brown, former Senior Director within PWC’s Risk and Regulatory Practice, to lead Broker-Dealer Client Services https://compliance-risk.com/steve-brown-former-senior-director-within-pwcs-risk-and-regulatory-practice-to-lead-broker-dealer-client-services/ https://compliance-risk.com/steve-brown-former-senior-director-within-pwcs-risk-and-regulatory-practice-to-lead-broker-dealer-client-services/#respond Thu, 02 Apr 2020 16:03:52 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=9249

Compliance Risk Concepts LLC (“CRC”) today announced that Steve Brown is joining the compliance professional […]

The post Steve Brown, former Senior Director within PWC’s Risk and Regulatory Practice, to lead Broker-Dealer Client Services appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Compliance Risk Concepts LLC (“CRC”) today announced that Steve Brown is joining the compliance professional services organization as Director of Broker-Dealer Client Services.  Steve brings 25-plus years of industry and regulatory compliance experience to advise CRC’s clients.

Over the duration of his career, Steve has been viewed as a leader in investment banking and control room compliance. Steve has been exposed to many regulatory situations through first-hand experience in building and executing over 100 compliance risk projects and 20 bank broker-dealer mergers and acquisitions. A practical, pro-business approach has been the key to Steve’s success throughout his career.

For the past nine years, Steve served as Senior Director within PwC’s Risk and Regulatory practice focused on advising global financial institutions. Previously, Steve was Managing Director and Head of Fixed Income and Capital Markets Compliance at U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc., where he established an institutional compliance risk program. He started his career at Wachovia, where he established and managed the Global Investment Banking Compliance and Control Group responsible for corporate & investment banking regulatory, information barrier and conflicts of interest issues. Subsequently, Steve co-founded an ideation consultancy firm and worked at Goldman, Sachs & Co.

Steve has executed a wide range of projects, including: developing corporate and investment banking supervisory and compliance infrastructures; advising on broker-dealer new business expansions; integrating private wealth management businesses; executing global compliance risk assessments; and assessing global pension plan compliance plans.

"The addition of Steve’s leadership and critical skill-set enables us to continue to scale our business, building upon our competitive edge in delivering high-quality, cost-effective regulatory advice and services in a commercial manner to our clients while addressing the rapidly evolving compliance related expertise needed within the financial services industry ”, said Mitch Avnet, CRC”s Managing Partner and CEO.

Steve is a graduate of Lenoir-Rhyne University with a BA in Business and an emphasis in Accounting.

Compliance Risk Concepts LLC is a business-focused team of senior compliance executives who offer clients top-tier compliance risk management support services on an as-needed, project or part-time basis. CRC provides clients with the critical skills and expertise required to establish, maintain, enhance and credibly demonstrate a commitment to a strong culture of compliance and risk management.

For more information, please visit www.compliance-risk.com or call Mitch Avnet at 646-346-2468.

The post Steve Brown, former Senior Director within PWC’s Risk and Regulatory Practice, to lead Broker-Dealer Client Services appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/steve-brown-former-senior-director-within-pwcs-risk-and-regulatory-practice-to-lead-broker-dealer-client-services/feed/ 0
News Update: SEC Issues Statement Regarding Digital Assets https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-issues-statement-regarding-digital-assets/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-issues-statement-regarding-digital-assets/#respond Thu, 25 Jul 2019 17:23:41 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8797 crcblockchainphoto1

Background & Summary On July 8, 2019, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued […]

The post News Update: SEC Issues Statement Regarding Digital Assets appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
crcblockchainphoto1

Background & Summary

On July 8, 2019, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a joint statement in conjunction with FINRA’s general counsel addressing various elements of digital currency amid request for clarity on whether broker-dealers can hold digital assets under federal securities laws. The regulator reiterated its growing concerns relative to investor protection and clarified the fact that entities seeking to participate in digital currency markets must comply with relevant securities laws. The release placed specific emphasis on compliance with the customer protection rule. While recounting the success and importance of the customer protection rule, the SEC added, "[t]his record of protecting customer assets held in custody by broker-dealers stands in contrast to recent reports of cyber theft, and underscores the need to ensure broker-dealers robust protection of customer assets, including digital asset securities."

With respect to custody and digital securities, the SEC’s statement would seem to indicate that the regulator seeks to regulate such assets as uncertificated securities (i.e. ownership is confirmed via electronic certificate rather than a physical one). As such, broker-dealers would likely need to establish custody through the use of an SEC registered transfer agent, who would also maintain applicable records relating to security ownership. The statement also seems to allude to the fact that custodying digital assets through the use of digital wallets and maintaining private keys that would be controlled by the broker dealer are unlikely to be looked upon favorably, or ultimately approved by regulators. While the tone of the statement seems to be geared towards preparing digital securities for more mainstream access (i.e., gearing it towards retail investors), the bottom line for regulators, as evidenced by this release, is customer protection. As the industry navigates the nuances of digital securities markets, it should do so through the lens of protecting against fraud, theft, or misappropriation of client funds and/or information. 

Our Take

As always, it is our position at CRC that cooperation with regulators is key for the successful operation of financial services organizations. Regulators have continued to display heightened focus on the protection of retail and senior investors. As such, digital currency in particular is a developing area where cooperative, responsible players will hold the ace. Prompt, efficient, and honest communication and responses will satisfy regulators and clients alike, while also and bringing a sense of legitimacy and scrupulousness to digital currency operations. If you would like to speak with one of our Compliance Specialists about custody implications or have any other questions regarding digital currency, please do not hesitate to contact us. 

Contact Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com or (646)346-2468 for more information. 

The post News Update: SEC Issues Statement Regarding Digital Assets appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-sec-issues-statement-regarding-digital-assets/feed/ 0
The Impact of Reg BI with Mitch Avnet: CEO and Managing Partner of Compliance Risk Concepts. https://compliance-risk.com/the-impact-of-reg-bi-with-mitch-avnet-ceo-and-managing-partner-of-compliance-risk-concepts/ https://compliance-risk.com/the-impact-of-reg-bi-with-mitch-avnet-ceo-and-managing-partner-of-compliance-risk-concepts/#respond Tue, 23 Jul 2019 18:22:43 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8789 mitch

On June 5, 2019 the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) voted to enhance the regulatory […]

The post The Impact of Reg BI with Mitch Avnet: CEO and Managing Partner of Compliance Risk Concepts. appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
mitch

On June 5, 2019 the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) voted to enhance the regulatory framework standard of conduct for broker-dealers (or “firms”) and provide an interpretation of the fiduciary duty for investment advisers by issuing Regulation Best Interest (“Reg BI”). Hearsay recently reached out to Mitch Avnet of Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) to discuss the impacts of the new regulation.

Transition period, comparison to DOL Fiduciary Rule and overview of Reg BI

Chris Fernandes: What does the transition period look like for compliance with Reg BI?

Mitch Avnet: The SEC is allowing firms a transition period until the June 30, 2020 compliance date.

Chris: How does this new regulation compare to the long-anticipated Department of Labor (“DOL”) Fiduciary Rule?

Mitch: The Reg BI framework is more expansive than the vacated DOL Fiduciary Rule, as it covers all securities investment recommendations to retail customers rather than just those for retirement accounts.  By setting out specific obligations of broker-dealers and investment advisers, the SEC is seeking to tailor requirements to the different types of products and services each provide in order to preserve customer choice in the industry.

Chris: So, it is more complex. Does it place an increased burden on firms?

Mitch: Reg BI sets out new rules which will increase compliance efforts for firms but provides a more uniform standard and does not include many of the onerous aspects of the DOL rule such as a private right of action.

Chris: Could you give a high-level overview of the framework of the rule?

Mitch: Absolutely. The regulation has five principal areas, and can be broken down as follows:

  • A “best interest” standard comprising four obligations for broker-dealers when providing recommendations to retail customers (Regulation Best Interest or Reg BI);
  • A required client relationship summary disclosure (Form CRS) for both broker-dealers and investment advisers;
  • An interpretation of the federal fiduciary standard for investment advisers that would reaffirm their fiduciary obligations; and
  • An interpretation clarifying that broker-dealers that provide advisory services are not considered to be investment advisors when such services are “solely incidental” to the conduct of their business.
  • Reg BI and Form CRS have a compliance date of June 30, 2020 while the interpretations will become effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

Requirements, disclosures and compliance for broker-dealers, under Reg BI

Chris: Let’s dig a bit deeper into what is required of broker-dealers under the rule.

Mitch: Reg BI consist of four obligations for broker-dealers when providing recommendations to retail customers. However, Reg BI does not expressly define “best interest.” Instead, it states that broker-dealers must act “without placing the financial or other interest of the broker ahead of the interest of the retail customer.” The SEC has made clear that the term does not create a fiduciary obligation and explains that it will determine whether a broker-dealer has acted in their customers’ best interest based on the four obligations: (1) disclosure, (2) care, (3) conflict of interest and (4) compliance.

Chris: Reg BI imposes an obligation to provide a 2-page relationship summary to clients. Can you provide additional details on what firms can expect this to entail?

Mitch: Broker-dealers are required to provide Form CRS, which is in a question and answer format, to clients. Disclosures must contain a summary of fees, costs, conflicts, and standards of conduct along with a link to the SEC’s Investor.gov site.

Chris: When are these disclosures supposed to go out?

Mitch: The timing of the disclosure varies. For broker dealers, firms should be distributing these to clients before a recommendation of an account type, a securities transaction, or an investment strategy involving securities or placing an order for the retail investor. These disclosures should also go out prior to the opening of a brokerage account for the retail investor. For investment advisers, the disclosures should be distributed prior to or at the time of entering into the advisory contract. Dual registrants should use the earliest of the deadlines imposed under requirements for BDs and RIAs.

Chris: Are there any other times throughout the client relationship when firms need to provide additional disclosures under the rule?

Mitch: Yes; firms must provide additional disclosures when they: open a new account that is different from the retail investor’s existing account(s); recommend that the retail investor roll over assets from a retirement account into a new or existing account or investment; or recommend or provide a new brokerage or investment advisory service or investment that does not necessarily involve the opening of a new account and would not be held in an existing account (e.g., securities sold through a “check and application” process).

Chris: What should firms be doing to comply with this part of the rule?

Mitch: CRC recommends firms review their current customer agreements and disclosures to determine what changes will need to be made and involve technology teams to consider potential digital solutions. We also recommend a cross-functional team of business, compliance and operational employees work together to confirm disclosure of all material facts pertinent to a conflict of interest associated with the recommendation that are “full and fair.”

Chris: Let’s talk about the duty of care.

Mitch: Firms will have an obligation to provide reasonable “diligence, care, and skill” to satisfy three obligations: reasonable-basis, customer-specific and quantitative. Additionally, firms must evaluate reasonably available alternatives, however broker-dealers will not have to evidence review of all alternatives. Similar to the DOL fiduciary rule, Reg BI’s care obligation covers recommendations concerning rollovers and account choice (e.g., brokerage or advisory), as well as those to take a retirement plan distribution for purposes of opening a securities trading account.

Chris: What should firms be doing to start on the path to compliance relative to this aspect of the rule?

Mitch: Our team recommends that firms dust off work done during their DOL Fiduciary Rule prep. Because the rule is not prescriptive, there is no “one size fits all” model for compliance.  The compliance obligation requires firms to maintain policies and procedures to ensure compliance with Reg BI. It’s important to note, this obligation provides an opportunity for the SEC and FINRA to bring enforcement actions for compliance failures without the existence of underlying violations of Reg BI. Therefore, firms should carefully develop Reg BI policies and procedures with a view towards how they will demonstrate that they have met the best interest standard – including documenting all written and oral disclosures to clients.

Conflicts of Interest

Chris: What specific conflicts of interest should firms focus on when attempting to comply with that obligation?

Mitch: Reg BI does not explicitly define material conflicts of interest. In contrast to the DOL rule, Reg BI allows firms to sell proprietary products, including initial public offerings, and continue to receive payments from third parties for shelf space – as long as they disclose conflicts of interest. For example, in instances where a registered representative holds a limited license (e.g., only to sell mutual funds), but the firm offers a full suite of products, the representative may need to disclose this to their customers. However, the final rule makes clear that there are certain conflicts of interest that cannot be cured through disclosure, specifically prohibiting certain types of sales contests and quotas within defined parameters (e.g., for specific security types in short time periods).

Chris: Where would you recommend that firms focus their energies relative to this aspect?

Mitch: Our team at CRC recommends that firms review their range of products and services they offer along with their payout grid in order to identify potential conflicts and determine whether they will need to be mitigated, eliminated, or disclosed. The final rule also instructs firms to develop a penalty system for any representatives that do not adequately manage or disclose their conflicts of interest. Firms will need to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to:

  • Identify and at a minimum disclose (in accordance with the Disclosure Obligation) or eliminate all conflicts of interest associated with the recommendation
  • Identify and mitigate conflicts of interest that create an incentive for a broker-dealer’s financial professionals to place either their interests or the broker-dealer’s interest ahead of the retail customer’s interest
  • Identify and disclose any material limitations on offerings (e.g., proprietary or other limited range of products) and any conflicts associated with the limitations, and prevent the limitations and associated conflicts from causing the broker-dealer or its financial professionals to place their interests ahead of the retail customer’s interests
  • Eliminate sales contests, sales quotas, bonuses, and non-cash compensation based on the sale of specific securities or specific types of securities within a limited period of time

SEC expectations and compliance

Chris: Can you map out the SEC’s expectation for compliance procedures relative to the rule?

Mitch: Reg BI requires firms to develop policies and procedures in order to demonstrate that they have met the best interest standard – including documenting all written and oral disclosures to clients. The SEC has made changes to Rules 17a-3 and 17a-4, which require broker-dealers to maintain records of all information collected and provided to retail customers pursuant to Reg BI for six years, including the identity of each natural person who is an associated person of the broker-dealer responsible for the customer accounts. Firms that fail to maintain adequate policies and procedures may face enforcement actions from the SEC and FINRA for compliance failures.

Chris: How should firms seek to comply?

Mitch: CRC advises firms to review and enhance their policies and procedures that address: Product and Pricing; Operations; Technology; and Communications. Additionally, firms should put in place processes to capture and retain disclosures, provide training on the new requirements and ensure that there is a supervisory structure to oversee compliance.

Is Reg BI different for Investment Advisors?

Chris: Are there any specific issues that investment advisers should consider? Are they impacted differently than broker-dealers?

Mitch: While investment advisers have an existing fiduciary obligation, the SEC’s investment adviser interpretation of Reg BI makes these obligations explicit:

  • Provide advice in the best interest of the client
  • A duty of loyalty
  • Best execution for client transactions
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest

Because the final rule did not include enhancements contained in the proposal, investment advisor are not likely to require significant analysis or operational changes as those for broker-dealers, e.g. – licensing and continuing education requirements, provision of account statements to clients and similar financial responsibility requirements.

Exemptions

Chris: How would a broker-dealer qualify for an exemption under the rule?

Mitch: To qualify for an exemption from the Advisers Act (“the Act”), broker-dealers must satisfy 2 conditions: they must not receive any special compensation (i.e., only commissions and not asset-based fees, and must provide only “solely incidental” advice.

Chris: How should firms identify whether advice provided to retail clients is incidental?

Mitch: Determining whether advice provided to retail clients is “solely incidental” will be determined by 2 criteria: level of investment discretion and account monitoring. Unlimited investment discretion is not solely incidental advice and the broker-dealer would be subject to the Act. If investment discretion is limited in time, scope, or some other way the advice provided may be deemed solely incidental. In addition, continuous, previously agreed-upon account monitoring would likely not be considered solely incidental, while periodic account monitoring or voluntary account monitoring likely would be.

The SEC also clarified the solely incidental exception under the Advisers Act: broker-dealers do not have a fiduciary duty to a retail investor unless that broker-dealer is exercising unlimited investment discretion with respect to the account, or the broker-dealer has agreed to continuous monitoring of the account.

State regulations

Chris: What about state regulators? How do they factor into this rule?

Mitch: After the DOL rule was vacated, a number of states began to introduce their own fiduciary or best interest standards. These rules vary across states – some states like Nevada, are contemplating a private right of action and a largely ongoing obligation. Others states like New York would only apply a best interest standard to the sale of life insurance annuities. These differences will make it operationally challenging for firms to adhere to each state’s specific requirements.

Chris: Has the SEC commented on this issue?

Mitch: Currently, the SEC declined to provide any opinion on whether its rules would preempt state standards and left the question to “future judicial proceedings.”

The industry can likely expect litigation on this issue as states continue to move forward with their rulemakings and attempt to retain control over standards in their jurisdictions. Meanwhile, the DOL has stated that it will issue an updated version of its fiduciary rule later this year. While there have not been any explicit assurances, it is likely that the concepts and requirements from the DOL will align with Reg BI.

Client behavior

Chris: Finally, do you have any insight into concerns that firms have regarding broker-dealers’ responsibilities under this rule, particularly with respect to client behavior?

Mitch: It is important to remember that Reg BI does not render a BD or IA responsible for a client’s behavior or choices, provided that all above mentioned criteria are satisfied. Reg BI does not extend beyond a particular recommendation or generally require a broker-dealer to have a continuous duty to a retail customer or impose a duty to monitor. The rule also doesn’t require the broker-dealer to refuse to accept a customer’s order that is contrary to the broker-dealer’s recommendation or apply to self-directed or otherwise unsolicited transactions by a retail customer, whether or not the customer also receives separate recommendations from the broker-dealer.

Chris: Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions and provide insight on some of the key components of Reg BI.

Mitch: My pleasure, as always. The CRC team is readily available to discuss relevant regulatory issues with our clients and colleagues in the industry, and we make it our top priority to keep our thumb on the pulse of the ever-evolving regulatory landscape so that we can provide accurate, up-to-date advice.

The post The Impact of Reg BI with Mitch Avnet: CEO and Managing Partner of Compliance Risk Concepts. appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/the-impact-of-reg-bi-with-mitch-avnet-ceo-and-managing-partner-of-compliance-risk-concepts/feed/ 0
Regulation Best Interest https://compliance-risk.com/regulation-best-interest/ https://compliance-risk.com/regulation-best-interest/#respond Mon, 15 Jul 2019 16:18:35 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8767 cropped-regbifinal-copy-

On June 5, 2019 the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) voted to enhance the regulatory […]

The post Regulation Best Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
cropped-regbifinal-copy-

On June 5, 2019 the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) voted to enhance the regulatory framework standard of conduct for broker-dealers (or “firms”) and provide an interpretation of the fiduciary duty for investment advisers by issuing Regulation Best Interest (“Reg BI”). The SEC is giving firms a transition period until June 30, 2020. 

Reg BI framework is more expansive than the vacated Department of Labor (“DOL”) fiduciary rule as it covers all securities investment recommendations to retail customers rather than just those for retirement accounts.  By setting out specific obligations of broker-dealers and investment advisers, the SEC is seeking to tailor requirements to the different types of products and services each provide in order to preserve customer choice in the industry. Reg BI sets out new rules which will increase compliance efforts for firms but provides a more uniform standard and does not include many of the onerous aspects of the DOL rule such as a private right of action.

The framework includes: 

  • A “best interest” standard comprising four obligations for broker-dealers when providing recommendations to retail customers (Regulation Best Interest or Reg BI); 
  • A required client relationship summary disclosure (Form CRS) for both broker-dealers and investment advisers; 
  • An interpretation of the federal fiduciary standard for investment advisers that would reaffirm their fiduciary obligations; and 
  • An interpretation clarifying that broker-dealers that provide advisory services are not considered to be investment advisors when such services are “solely incidental” to the conduct of their business. 
  • Reg BI and Form CRS have a compliance date of June 30, 2020 while the interpretations will become effective upon publication in the Federal Register.

Reg BI consist of four obligations for broker-dealers when providing recommendations to retail customers. Reg BI does not expressly define “best interest,” instead stating that broker-dealers must act “without placing the financial or other interest of the broker ahead of the interest of the retail customer.” However, the SEC makes clear that the term does not create a fiduciary obligation and explains that it will determine whether a broker-dealer has acted in their customers’ best interest based on the four obligations: (1) disclosure, (2) care, (3) conflict of interest and (4) compliance. 

Disclosure – Reg BI imposes an obligation on to provide a 2-page relationship summary (Form CRS) to clients in a question and answer format. Disclosures must contain a summary of fees, costs, conflicts, and standards of conduct along with alink to the SEC’s Investor.gov site.

The timing of the disclosure varies as following:

  • Broker-dealer: before or at the earliest of: (i) a recommendation of an account type, a securities transaction, or an investment strategy involving securities, (ii) placing an order for the retail investor, or (iii) the opening of a brokerage account for the retail investor
  • Investment adviser: before or at the time of entering into an advisory contract 
  • Dual registrant: at earlier of investment adviser or broker-dealer delivery requirement

In addition, firms must provide additional disclosures when they: 

  • Open a new account that is different from the retail investor’s existing account(s)
  • Recommend that the retail investor roll over assets from a retirement account into a new or existing account or investment
  • Recommend or provide a new brokerage or investment advisory service or investment that does not necessarily involve the opening of a new account and would not be held in an existing account (e.g., securities sold through a “check and application” process)

So what does this mean: CRC recommends firms review their current customer agreements and disclosures to determine what changes will need to be made and involve technology teams to consider potential digital solutions. CRC also recommends a cross-functional team of business, compliance and operational employees work together to confirm disclosure of all material facts pertinent to a conflict of interest associated with the recommendation that are “full and fair”.

Care – Firms will have an obligation to provide reasonable “diligence, care, and skill” to satisfy three obligations: reasonable-basis, customer-specific and quantitative. Additionally, firms must evaluate reasonably available alternatives, however broker-dealers will not have to evidence review of all alternatives. Similar to the DOL fiduciary rule, Reg BI's care obligation covers recommendations concerning rollovers and account choice (e.g., brokerage or advisory), as well as those to take a retirement plan distribution for purposes of opening a securities trading account. 

So what does this mean: We recommend firms dust off work done during their DoL fiduciary rule prep. Because the rule is not prescriptive, there is no “one size fits all” model for compliance.  The compliance obligation requires firms to maintain policies and procedures to ensure compliance with Reg BI. Notably, this obligation provides an opportunity for the SEC and FINRA to bring enforcement actions for compliance failures without the existence of underlying violations of Reg BI. Therefore, firms should carefully develop Reg BI policies and procedures with a view towards how they will demonstrate that they have met the best interest standard - including documenting all written and oral disclosures to clients.

Conflict – Reg BI does not explicitly define material conflicts of interest. In contrast to the DOL rule, Reg BI allows firms to sell proprietary products, including initial public offerings, and continue to receive payments from third parties for shelf space – as long as they disclose conflicts of interest. For example, in instances where a registered representative holds a limited license (e.g., only to sell mutual funds), but the firm offers a full suite of products, the representative may need to disclose this to their customers. However, the final rule makes clear that there are certain conflicts of interest that cannot be cured through disclosure, specifically prohibiting certain types of sales contests and quotas within defined parameters (e.g., for specific security types in short time periods). 

So what does this mean: CRC recommends firms review their range of products and services they offer along with their payout grid in order to identify potential conflicts and determine whether they will need to be mitigated, eliminated or disclosed[1]. The final rule also instructs firms to develop a penalty system for any representatives that do not adequately manage or disclose their conflicts of interest. Firms will need to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to:

  • Identify and at a minimum disclose (in accordance with the Disclosure Obligation) or eliminate all conflicts of interest associated with the recommendation
  • Identify and mitigate conflicts of interest that create an incentive for a broker-dealer’s financial professionals to place either their interests or the broker-dealer’s interest ahead of the retail customer’s interest
  • Identify and disclose any material limitations on offerings (e.g., proprietary or other limited range of products) and any conflicts associated with the limitations, and prevent the limitations and associated conflicts from causing the broker-dealer or its financial professionals to place their interests ahead of the retail customer’s interests
  • Eliminate sales contests, sales quotas, bonuses, and non-cash compensation based on the sale of specific securities or specific types of securities within a limited period of time

Compliance – Reg BI requires firms to develop policies and procedures in order to demonstrate that they have met the best interest standard - including documenting all written and oral disclosures to clients. The SEC has made changes to Rules 17a-3 and 17a-4, which require broker-dealers to maintain records of all information collected and provided to retail customers pursuant to Reg BI for six years, including the identity of each natural person who is an associated person of the broker-dealer responsible for the customer accounts. Firms that fail to maintain adequate policies and procedures may face enforcement actions from the SEC and FINRA for compliance failures.

So what does this mean: CRC advises firms to review and enhance their policies and procedures that address: Product and Pricing; Operations; Technology; and Communications. Additionally, firms should put in place processes to capture and retain disclosures, provide training on the new requirements and ensure that there is a supervisory structure to oversee compliance.

Investment Advisers – While investment advisers have an existing fiduciary obligation, the SEC’s investment adviser interpretation of Reg BI makes these obligations explicit:

  • Provide advice in the best interest of the client
  • A duty of loyalty
  • Best execution for client transactions
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest 

Because the final rule did not include enhancements contained in the proposal, investment advisor are not likely to require significant analysis or operational changes as those for broker-dealers, e.g. - licensing and continuing education requirements, provision of account statements to clients and similar financial responsibility requirements. 

Determining whether broker-dealers’ advice provided to retail clients is “solely incidental” will be determined by 2 criteria:

  1. Level of investment discretion
  2. Unlimited investment discretion is not solely incidental advice and the broker-dealer would be subject to the Act
  3. If investment discretion is limited in time, scope, or some other way the advice provided may be deemed solely incidental
  4. Account monitoring
  5. Continuous, previously agreed-upon account monitoring would likely not be considered solely incidental
  6. Periodic account monitoring or voluntary account monitoring would likely be considered solely incidental

So what does this mean: Investment advisers should be aware that the SEC is continuing to evaluate these enhancements and may add them in the future. The SEC also clarified the solely incidental exception under the Advisers Act: broker-dealers do not have a fiduciary duty to a retail investor unless that broker-dealer is exercising unlimited investment discretion with respect to the account, or the broker-dealer has agreed to continuous monitoring of the account

To qualify for an exemption from the Advisers Act (“the Act”), broker-dealers must satisfy 2 conditions:

  1. Receive no special compensation (i.e., only commissions and not asset-based fees)
  2. Provide only “solely incidental” advice

DoL and States – After the DOL rule was vacated, a number of states began to introduce their own fiduciary or best interest standards. These rules vary across states – some states like Nevada, are contemplating a private right of action and a largely ongoing obligation. Others states like New York would only apply a best interest standard to the sale of life insurance annuities. These differences will make it challenging operationally for firms to adhere to each state’s specific requirements. The SEC declined to provide any opinion on whether its rules would preempt state standards and left the question to “future judicial proceedings.” 

So what does this mean: The industry can likely expect litigation on this issue as states continue to move forward with their rulemakings and attempt to retain control over standards in their jurisdictions. Meanwhile, the DOL has stated that it will issue an updated version of its fiduciary rule later this year. While there have not been any explicit assurances, it is likely that the concepts and requirements from the DOL will align with Reg BI.

Not applicable – Equally as important, Reg BI will not: 

  1. Extend beyond a particular recommendation or generally require a broker-dealer to have a continuous duty to a retail customer or impose a duty to monitor[2];
  2. Require the broker-dealer to refuse to accept a customer’s order that is contrary to the broker-dealer’s recommendation; or 
  3. Apply to self-directed or otherwise unsolicited transactions by a retail customer, whether or not the customer also receives separate recommendations from the broker-dealer.

[1]          Firms can use the FINRA Report on Conflicts of Interest as guidance in managing, mitigating and eliminating conflicts of interest in their businesses.

[2]      It is the SEC’s position that when a broker-dealer agrees with a retail customer to provide account monitoring services: (1) the broker-dealer would be required to disclose the material facts, scope and frequency of those services pursuant to the Disclosure Obligation, and (2) such agreed-upon account monitoring services involve an implicit recommendation to hold (i.e., an implicit recommendation not to buy, sell, or exchange assets pursuant to that securities account review) at the time agreed-upon monitoring occurs, which is a recommendation “of any securities transaction or investment strategy involving securities” covered by Reg BI.

The post Regulation Best Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/regulation-best-interest/feed/ 0
2019 Summit Takeaways: Compliance Trends in Advisor Communications https://compliance-risk.com/2019-summit-takeaways-compliance-trends-in-advisor-communications/ Thu, 23 May 2019 15:11:35 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8658 Hearsay Social Summit Top Takeaways

Mitch Avnet had the privilege of moderating a session on “Compliance Trends in Advisor Communications” at Hearsay Summit this year. The session was well attended by compliance officers from enterprise wealth management and insurance companies whose respective organizations have taken a careful, thoughtful and pragmatic approach to enable advisors to communicate with clients and prospects over multiple channels.

The post 2019 Summit Takeaways: Compliance Trends in Advisor Communications appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Hearsay Social Summit Top Takeaways

Mitch Avnet, CEO and Managing Partner here at Compliance Risk Concepts, had the privilege of moderating a session on “Compliance Trends in Advisor Communications” at Hearsay Summit this year. The session was well attended by compliance officers from enterprise wealth management and insurance companies whose respective organizations have taken a careful, thoughtful and pragmatic approach to enable advisors to communicate with clients and prospects over multiple channels.

Mitch’s goal for the session was to create a collaborative environment that offered the following:

  • A setting conducive to open sharing of thought leadership, idea generation and best practices across financial services firms specific to advisor communications capabilities.
  • Cross-fertilization of ideas and problem-solving for common and uncommon problems associated with electronic communications across multiple mediums.
  • Professional development that translates into actionable tasks that can be shared and implemented across each participant’s respective organization.
  • Education for participants on the “hot-issues” / roadblocks that may impede organizational readiness to comply with electronic communications requirements specific to advisor communications.

There is no Competitive Edge in Compliance

Throughout the session, one common theme continually emerged – “There is no competitive edge in compliance.” As compliance officers, we all benefit from sharing ideas and thought leadership with one another. As a result, we are able to create cohesive and consistent approaches to common problems shared across our respective organizations. Creating best practices together, for our industry as a whole, instills confidence on the part of our regulators. As we all know, regulators like standards; when firms approach compliance for the technology solutions we use to fulfill our compliance responsibilities in a common manner, we’re all better off.

The Use of Social Media – Is it Finally Socially Acceptable?

I was truly impressed with the proactive steps many of the participant organizations are taking with respect to enabling social media for advisors. This included a close collaboration with marketing departments and the creation of workflows that enabled efficient processes specific to creation and/or curation of marketing materials approved for advisor dissemination over social media. Many organizations were beyond “pilot” social media rollouts and had either fully implemented an enterprise approach and strategy for social media, or were well on their way.

From a pure compliance perspective, participants indicated their workloads had only increased incrementally due to the use of technology (in this case, Hearsay) to aid in the creation of the appropriate workflows and approval processes. As we all know, this can be a huge gating issue when organizations are contemplating the net effect of enabling new and different approaches to advisor communications. This is extremely encouraging since it’s coming straight from the compliance officers/people in the trenches actually using this technology on a day-to-day basis, not the vendor trying to sell their solution.

For more takeaways, read the full Hearsay Social article Hearsay Social article Compliance Trends in Advisor Communications – Summit 2019 Takeaways

The post 2019 Summit Takeaways: Compliance Trends in Advisor Communications appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Download Our Monthly Bulletin https://compliance-risk.com/download-our-monthly-bulletin/ https://compliance-risk.com/download-our-monthly-bulletin/#respond Thu, 16 May 2019 17:25:03 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8639 Please complete the form below to download your copy of the CRC Monthly Bulletin.

The post Download Our Monthly Bulletin appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Please complete the form below to download your copy of the CRC Monthly Bulletin.

Sending

The post Download Our Monthly Bulletin appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/download-our-monthly-bulletin/feed/ 0
Thank You For Your Interest https://compliance-risk.com/thank-you-for-your-interest/ https://compliance-risk.com/thank-you-for-your-interest/#respond Thu, 16 May 2019 17:24:34 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8647 Thank you for contacting Compliance Risk Concepts. Download you Monthly report here.

The post Thank You For Your Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Thank you for contacting Compliance Risk Concepts.

Download you Monthly report here.

The post Thank You For Your Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/thank-you-for-your-interest/feed/ 0
The Compliance Boom In Banking | The Economist https://compliance-risk.com/the-compliance-boom-in-banking-the-economist/ https://compliance-risk.com/the-compliance-boom-in-banking-the-economist/#respond Fri, 10 May 2019 15:29:55 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8624 COMPLIANCE ROCK STAR

(The Economist | May 2019) Excerpt from the article Rise of the No Men The […]

The post The Compliance Boom In Banking | The Economist appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
COMPLIANCE ROCK STAR

(The Economist | May 2019) Excerpt from the article Rise of the No Men The past decade has brought a compliance boom in banking. A recent episode of “Billions”, a television drama about Wall Street, captured the rainmakers’ frustration: so fed up is “Dollar” Bill Stern with having his wings clipped by Ari Spyros that the veteran trader rams the side of the compliance chief’s Porsche when he pulls out of the car park of their hedge fund, Axe Capital.

“Some financial firms, particularly small ones, are outsourcing compliance functions or specific projects. Compliance Risk Concepts, an American firm that takes on such work, has seen demand for its services grow by over 30% a year, says Mitch Avnet, its managing partner.”

But pity not finance’s in-house policemen, for they have had a golden decade since the crisis. While swathes of banking have labored under cutbacks and stiff capital requirements, their headcount and clout have grown. Banks fined for aiding corruption, money-laundering and sanctions-busting have beefed up their compliance, risk, legal and internal-audit teams. Compliance officers will never be the rock stars of finance, but they have moved from drums to rhythm guitar. And though some banks hint at having reached “Peak Compliance”, staffing and investment are likely to remain well above pre-crisis levels.

Click here to read the full article>>>(subscription required)

The post The Compliance Boom In Banking | The Economist appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/the-compliance-boom-in-banking-the-economist/feed/ 0
DOJ Signals Compliance Fixation with Recent Opioid Charges https://compliance-risk.com/doj-signals-compliance-fixation-with-recent-opioid-charges/ Wed, 01 May 2019 20:39:40 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8601 compliance pharma

Mitch Avnet shared his thoughts on pharmaceutical compliance and the opioid crisis in the following Law360 […]

The post DOJ Signals Compliance Fixation with Recent Opioid Charges appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
compliance pharma

Mitch Avnet shared his thoughts on pharmaceutical compliance and the opioid crisis in the following Law360 article titled With Opioid Charges, DOJ Signals Compliance Fixation by Alison Noon. Mitch reasoned,

“If a company has reservations about a dual-function compliance officer, it can help to follow the money and decide whether their other compensation could undermine their objectivity. Is this individual being incentivized to turn the other way?”

Law360 (April 30, 2019, 7:38 PM EDT) ­­A logistics specialist who stumbled into pharmaceutical compliance is facing at least 10 years in prison for keeping quiet while his company doled out millions of doses of opioids to alleged pill mills, a stern warning from the U.S. Department of Justice to compliance officers in the crosshairs of the opioid epidemic.

Charging documents indicate that the compliance role was handed to businessman William Pietruszewski at Rochester Drug Co­operative Inc. with little direction and no training. For years, he wore both the logistics and compliance hats.

Compliance professionals should take note, said Mitch Avnet, founder and managing partner of Compliance Risk Concepts. Taking the role lightly can land you in a world of hurt. “It’s incumbent upon the individual to understand what they’re getting into,” Avnet said. “Like any career choice, you need to understand the risks.” Attorneys told Law360 the case held several other lessons for compliance professionals.

Click here to read the full article >> (Law360 subscription required)

The post DOJ Signals Compliance Fixation with Recent Opioid Charges appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Join CRC For Our FINRA Happy Hour Event https://compliance-risk.com/join-crc-finra-happy-hour/ Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:07:18 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8590 You are Cordially Invited to FINRA Happy Hour EventAt CRC, we like to keep it […]

The post Join CRC For Our FINRA Happy Hour Event appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

You are Cordially Invited to FINRA Happy Hour Event
At CRC, we like to keep it breezy,
so please come join us at this great
SpeakEasy!

May 16th from 5:00-7:00 p.m.
Denson in D.C.

600 F St NW, Washington, DC 20004
www.densondc.com

WILL YOU BE JOINING US?

Use the form below to RSVP to our Anniversary Celebration event.

Sending

If you are new to the CRC list please check your spam folder to verify your registration.

The post Join CRC For Our FINRA Happy Hour Event appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
2019 FINRA Annual Conference https://compliance-risk.com/2019-finra-annual-conference/ Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:45:56 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8583 2019 Annual FINRA Conference

CRC is delighted to sponsor the upcoming 2019 FINRA Annual Conference on May 15-17 in […]

The post 2019 FINRA Annual Conference appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
2019 Annual FINRA Conference

CRC is delighted to sponsor the upcoming 2019 FINRA Annual Conference on May 15-17 in Washington, D.C. Please stop by our booth to say hello and check out the newest addition to the Compliance Crusader family!

FINRA's premier event—the Annual Conference provides the opportunity for practitioners, peers and regulators to exchange ideas on today's most timely compliance and regulatory topics. The conference offers industry professionals a variety of sessions related to current trends in technology, cybersecurity, risk management and much more.

Stay up to date and share your comments using #FinraAC

The post 2019 FINRA Annual Conference appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
SEC Asks for Public Comments on How Characteristics of Digital Assets Impact the Custody Rule https://compliance-risk.com/sec-asks-for-public-comments-on-how-characteristics-of-digital-assets-impact-the-custody-rule/ https://compliance-risk.com/sec-asks-for-public-comments-on-how-characteristics-of-digital-assets-impact-the-custody-rule/#respond Tue, 23 Apr 2019 21:28:20 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8575 bitcoin

President and Chief Executive Officer of the Investment Adviser Association, Paul Cellupica, has posted a […]

The post SEC Asks for Public Comments on How Characteristics of Digital Assets Impact the Custody Rule appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
bitcoin

President and Chief Executive Officer of the Investment Adviser Association, Paul Cellupica, has posted a letter to President & Chief Executive Officer of the Investment Adviser Association, Karen Barr, on behalf of the division’s staff, asking investment advisers for public comments and input on the Custody Rule as it applies to the emerging landscape of digital assets.

Issues have been raised about the regulatory status of the trading practices involving digital assets. Cellupica inquired about the Custody Rule as it applies to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, and the role it serves with the growth of digital assets. The SEC is asking for input amid the possibility they could be reconsidering existing custody rules in specific cases of digital asset trading and settlement.

The current Custody Rule (Rule 206(4)-2) protects investors who delegate custody of their funds or securities to investment advisers or firms under the Advisers Act. The custodial authority given to professional investment advisers provides an ”increased risk of misappropriation or misuse of [investors’] assets” when it comes to going digital, as Cellupica wrote in the letter.

One of the specific points the SEC wants to clear up is how the Custody Rule applies to digital assets - specifically the issue of “non-DVP arrangements,” or delivery versus payment. The types of digital assets that trade on a non-DVP basis and what role investment advisers will play in non-DVP digital asset trading are a few examples of questions raised in the letter. The SEC’s goal in reaching out for public input is to reinforce compliance for investment advisers in trading digital assets, which is relatively new to the investment adviser industry.

All in all, the SEC wants to lay groundwork for how characteristics particular to digital assets will impact compliance with the Custody Rule going forward.

Call us today to schedule a complimentary CryptoConsult to speak with a qualified member of our team who can help determine your unique risk areas and assess where we can provide necessary support to your digital currency program. Whether you are an adviser looking to expand your investment strategy to include digital assets, or you are looking to participate in ICOs or build out a platform for trading cryptocurrency as a broker-dealer, it is wise to consider partnering with an established compliance team who can help you navigate imminent regulation and provide assistance from initial registration to regulatory examination.

 

The post SEC Asks for Public Comments on How Characteristics of Digital Assets Impact the Custody Rule appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/sec-asks-for-public-comments-on-how-characteristics-of-digital-assets-impact-the-custody-rule/feed/ 0
Implementing Your Compliance Technology Roadmap https://compliance-risk.com/implementing-your-compliance-technology-roadmap/ https://compliance-risk.com/implementing-your-compliance-technology-roadmap/#respond Wed, 20 Mar 2019 19:38:03 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8556 Hearsay

This is the fifth, and final in our series on Building a Business Case for Compliance […]

The post Implementing Your Compliance Technology Roadmap appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Hearsay

This is the fifth, and final in our series on Building a Business Case for Compliance Technology for Hearsay Systems. In this article, Mitch Avnet shares his thoughts on the final phase of implementation in your compliance strategy, and the important role a project manager or PM will play in the process.

Reaching the implementation stage of your compliance technology plan is a major accomplishment. It means you’ve successfully completed a gap analysis, drawn an implementation road map, decided on vendors and received the go-ahead from executive leadership. Congratulations! But don’t rest on your laurels just yet – the ultimate success of your project depends on some key factors during the final phase of implementation.

Good project management is critical

To ensure you can execute according to plan, you’ll need a strong project manager or PM team, depending on the size of your organization and complexity of your implementation. Some organizations have the bandwidth to manage a major project internally, others turn management over to an outside consultancy who works with the internal implementation team.

Click here to read the full article >>

The post Implementing Your Compliance Technology Roadmap appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/implementing-your-compliance-technology-roadmap/feed/ 0
Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook https://compliance-risk.com/annual-broker-dealer-regulatory-review-and-2019-outlook/ Tue, 12 Mar 2019 23:12:53 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8522 Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook

With 2018 behind us and 2019 underway, we find ourselves in a position to look back across the regulatory landscape on what transpired over the course of 2018 in an effort to anticipate what this year may bring for Broker-Dealers.

The post Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook

With 2018 behind us and 2019 underway, we find ourselves in a position to look back across the regulatory landscape on what transpired over the course of 2018 in an effort to anticipate what this year may bring for Broker-Dealers.

Fast Facts Video

For those who are pressed for time, we’ve narrowed down the bare necessities into this 3 minute Fast Facts video. Press play and enjoy!

 

In the Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook, Kaitlyn Gibbs recaps the key takeaways from 2018 and what's expected to be at the center of regulatory development in 2019.

Download the Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook

To download your complimentary copy of the Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook, use the form below:

Sending


Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Technology: The Quest for the Ideal Solution https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-technology-the-quest-for-the-ideal-solution/ https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-technology-the-quest-for-the-ideal-solution/#respond Fri, 01 Mar 2019 18:39:02 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8398 Modern Compliance Part 4

This is the fourth of our series on Building a Business Case for Compliance Technology for Hearsay Systems. […]

The post Compliance Technology: The Quest for the Ideal Solution appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Modern Compliance Part 4

This is the fourth of our series on Building a Business Case for Compliance Technology for Hearsay Systems. In this article, Mitch Avnet shares the process of building a business case within your firm to support investment in compliance technology, arguing the case that technology vendor due diligence will ensure an efficient and productive future with confidence.

Today’s digital landscape is not as straightforward as it was just five years ago, even in the compliance space. It seems every day more vendors enter the scene with new apps and systems.

This can be good for the industry as the commoditization of digital products should lead to lower costs. However, having so many choices can also further complicate what is already a complex process. If you’re a compliance officer searching for the right solution for your own firm, there’s no easy answer.

Click here to read the full article >>

The post Compliance Technology: The Quest for the Ideal Solution appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-technology-the-quest-for-the-ideal-solution/feed/ 0
Investment Advisers 2018 Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook https://compliance-risk.com/investment-advisers-2018-regulatory-review-and-2019-outlook/ Wed, 13 Feb 2019 23:01:59 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8360 ia-2019-outlook

With 2018 in rear-view mirror and 2019 underway, we find ourselves in a position to look back across the regulatory landscape on what transpired over the course of last year in an effort to anticipate what this New Year may bring for Investment Advisers.

The post Investment Advisers 2018 Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
ia-2019-outlook

With 2018 in the rear-view mirror and 2019 underway, we find ourselves in a position to look back across the regulatory landscape on what transpired over the course of last year in an effort to anticipate what this New Year may bring for Investment Advisers.

For those who are pressed for time, we've narrowed down the bare necessities into this 2 minute Fast Facts video, press play and enjoy!

Download The Investment Advisers 2018 Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook

To receive the full copy of Kaitlyn Gibbs' Investment Advisers 2018 Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook, use the form below:

Sending


Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Investment Advisers 2018 Regulatory Review and 2019 Outlook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitch Avnet Discusses the Evolution of Communication with DDW https://compliance-risk.com/mitch-avnet-discusses-the-evolution-of-communication-with-ddw/ Thu, 07 Feb 2019 06:48:57 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8348 Due Diligence Works, Inc.

Due Diligence Works, Inc. (DDW) sat down with Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Director of […]

The post Mitch Avnet Discusses the Evolution of Communication with DDW appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Due Diligence Works, Inc.

Due Diligence Works, Inc. (DDW) sat down with Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Director of Compliance Risk Concepts, to discuss the evolution of communication, particularly as it relates to texting and social media, and the growth opportunity it presents for Financial Services firms and their Financial Consultants. They discussed the business potential and how best to manage the risks that come with leveraging evolving forms of electronic communication. The following is an excerpt from the interview titled Texting and Social Media with Mitch Avnet. Click here to read the full interview.

DDW: Regular, ongoing communication between Advisors and their clients is key to building and maintaining strong relationships. As styles and methods of communications evolve, it’s natural for both clients and advisors to want to use all of the channels available to them, including ever-evolving electronic and social media options. These options have the potential to better engage clients and make business faster and easier, all of which lead to deeper relationships and potential revenue. Along with the benefits, however, come challenges for firms as they attempt to evolve programs to capture and monitor all lines of communication.

DDW: Of all forms of communication used today, “texting” has become the go-to source for many of us. What trends are you seeing in Advisor/Client communications related to the use of text communications?

Mitch Avnet: The number of firms allowing texting as a method of communication are on the rise. This is due to the fact that (a)clients expect this level of communication and accessibility in the digital age, and (b) archiving and monitoring/management solutions that are out there are continuously evolving. It’s the way people communicate today, and it makes sense that both clients and advisors want to exchange in the same way they communicate in the rest of their relationships. Today’s clients generally want to leverage technologies available to them to make the investment and asset management process faster and more engaging.

ABOUT DUE DILIGENCE WORKS, INC.

Due Diligence Works, Inc. supports RIAs and Broker-Dealers to provide ongoing Due Diligence of investments and insurance products, Product Shelf Management, helping firms review the entire universe of products (not just platform); ensuring firms have the best products on their shelf and can prove it. All in a variable cost and conflict fee model that can bring down cost, improve quality, and stand the test of regulatory scrutiny.

The post Mitch Avnet Discusses the Evolution of Communication with DDW appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
James K. Ryan, Former SVP of Sales at Reg Ed to Spearhead Business Development Efforts at Compliance Risk Concepts LLC https://compliance-risk.com/james-k-ryan-former-svp-of-sales-at-reg-ed-to-spearhead-business-development-efforts-at-compliance-risk-concepts-llc/ https://compliance-risk.com/james-k-ryan-former-svp-of-sales-at-reg-ed-to-spearhead-business-development-efforts-at-compliance-risk-concepts-llc/#respond Tue, 05 Feb 2019 12:40:24 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8342 James K Ryan

NEW YORK, NY /PRESS RELEASE/ - Building on its leadership position in the compliance professional […]

The post James K. Ryan, Former SVP of Sales at Reg Ed to Spearhead Business Development Efforts at Compliance Risk Concepts LLC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
James K Ryan

NEW YORK, NY /PRESS RELEASE/ - Building on its leadership position in the compliance professional services sector, Compliance Risk Concepts LLC (CRC) today announced the hire of James (Jim) K. Ryan as Director of Business Development. At CRC, Jim will continue to drive growth and expansion in CRC's core business verticals, which include broker-dealer, investment banking, investment adviser, futures and commodities, financial and operational, research supervisory analyst, digital asset/crypto and technology compliance related services. Additionally, with Jim's leadership, CRC expects to make a big push into the insurance compliance arena in 2019.

"I have known Jim for more than a decade. From the time of our first interaction, I was impressed with Jim's industry knowledge and overall approach toward his business development efforts", said Mitch Avnet, CRC's Managing Partner, and CEO. "Jim builds long term, meaningful strategic relationships. He is truly invested in the right outcomes for his clients, embodying CRC's core values and strategic goals and objectives. We are fortunate to have Jim join our team and looking forward to his long term success at CRC."

During Jim's 15 year tenure at RegEd, he handled sales of the organization's vast portfolio of technology solutions for compliance, training, and licensing management to broker-dealers, investment advisers, and insurance companies. Through his direct contribution, Jim was responsible for approximately $17 million worth of growth for RegEd, establishing lifelong clients in the process. Looking back on his accomplishments, Jim credits his achievements in advocating for the client, building sincere relationships with those he serves, and creating a culture of shared success with his colleagues.

When asked about his decision to join CRC, Jim said "I've known Mitch for many years. We have not only developed and maintained a strong business relationship – but also formed a long-term friendship. I am thrilled to join the leadership team and look forward to my role and contribution in building upon the growth and success of CRC has celebrated since 2013. I cannot wait to work alongside Mitch and the rest of the hard-working compliance professionals in the organization."

James K. Ryan can be reached at jryan@compliance-risk.com or direct dial: (646) 813 7874.

#####

The post James K. Ryan, Former SVP of Sales at Reg Ed to Spearhead Business Development Efforts at Compliance Risk Concepts LLC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/james-k-ryan-former-svp-of-sales-at-reg-ed-to-spearhead-business-development-efforts-at-compliance-risk-concepts-llc/feed/ 0
Choosing Compliance Technology: Options and Considerations https://compliance-risk.com/choosing-compliance-technology-options-and-considerations/ Thu, 31 Jan 2019 16:36:18 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8335 SaaS solutions offer a number of advantages from an implementation standpoint.

This is the third of our series on Building a Business Case for Compliance Technology for Hearsay Systems. […]

The post Choosing Compliance Technology: Options and Considerations appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
SaaS solutions offer a number of advantages from an implementation standpoint.

This is the third of our series on Building a Business Case for Compliance Technology for Hearsay Systems. In this article, Mitch Avnet shares the process of building a business case within your firm to support investment in compliance technology. Implementing compliance technology doesn't have to happen all at once, and it doesn't have to happen inhouse. Cloud-based Service as a Solution (SaaS) products can pave the way for more successful implementation.

Integrating compliance technology into your organization is never a one-and-done proposition. If you’ve conducted due diligence and identified the gaps in your firm’s workflows and systems – as discussed in last month’s blog – chances are you’ve found more than one and in more than one area. Interaction and interdependency between departments typically means any solution you decide to implement will have an impact on other areas of your organization.

Click here to read the full article >>

The post Choosing Compliance Technology: Options and Considerations appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
The Case for Compliance Technology: Where’s the Problem? https://compliance-risk.com/the-case-for-compliance-technology-wheres-the-problem/ Fri, 21 Dec 2018 15:06:32 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8280 tech gaps

This is the second of our series on Building a Business Case for Compliance Technology […]

The post The Case for Compliance Technology: Where’s the Problem? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
tech gaps

This is the second of our series on Building a Business Case for Compliance Technology for Hearsay Systems. In this article, Mitch Avnet shares his solution to one of the most prevalent fundamental challenges firms face today, an over-reliance on manual, bifurcated and disparate processes. This over-reliance limits their ability to get a comprehensive, accurate view of their compliance risk in a timely manner. It seems that the fast pace of technology development and regulatory changes have led to loose ends in virtually every firm’s operation.

Trying to prove the case for investing in new technology for compliance’s sake is often an uphill battle. Unless your firm has experienced a catastrophic regulatory issue or emerged from an audit with a mandate to bring your processes into compliance, you’re likely to be met with a large dose of hesitancy.

After all, historically the compliance function has been seen as a cost center and not a very exciting one, at that. Most firms want to invest in revenue-generating projects rather than in a maintenance function that – for all its inefficiencies – seems to be working fine.

Click here to read the full article >>

The post The Case for Compliance Technology: Where’s the Problem? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
The Business Case for Technology in Compliance https://compliance-risk.com/the-business-case-for-technology-in-compliance/ https://compliance-risk.com/the-business-case-for-technology-in-compliance/#respond Thu, 29 Nov 2018 21:44:45 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8263 compliance in tech

This is the first of our monthly blogs for Hearsay Systems.  Over the next few […]

The post The Business Case for Technology in Compliance appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
compliance in tech

This is the first of our monthly blogs for Hearsay Systems.  Over the next few months, in conjunction with Hearsay, our goal is to arm the financial services industry with information and examples to help risk and compliance professionals build a successful business case to enable texting capabilities within their respective organizations.

Right this moment, there are hundreds of millennials of growing means with smartphones in hand, looking up articles on investing, life insurance and other “adulting” matters, and weighing whether to test drive a robo-advisor.

What they are not likely to do at this moment is to call you – first, because we know from research they have an aversion to phone calls; and second, because they’ve never seen or heard from you on social media.

Click here to read the full article >>

The post The Business Case for Technology in Compliance appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/the-business-case-for-technology-in-compliance/feed/ 0
Adviser and Broker-Dealer Annual Regulatory Deadlines https://compliance-risk.com/adviser-and-broker-dealer-annual-regulatory-deadlines/ Wed, 07 Nov 2018 19:13:49 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8217 Adviser and Broker-Dealer Annual Regulatory Deadlines

Annual Compliance Services Offerings The end of 2018 is approaching quickly. CRC would like to […]

The post Adviser and Broker-Dealer Annual Regulatory Deadlines appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Adviser and Broker-Dealer Annual Regulatory Deadlines

Annual Compliance Services Offerings

The end of 2018 is approaching quickly. CRC would like to remind you that for brokers and advisers with a December
fiscal year-end, annual amendments have filing deadlines 60 to 90 days following December 31st. To facilitate
streamlined regulatory reporting and filing, CRC offers a suite of services, as outlined below.

Adviser Offerings:

Form ADV Filings
Assistance with Drafting, Reviewing, and Filing Form ADV Parts 1, 2A, and 2B (deadline March 31, 2019)
Reviewing and Assessing State Registrations and Notice Filings and Supplemental Financial Statement Requirements, as
Necessary
Other Regulatory Filings
Annual updates to Forms 13F (due February 14, 2019), 13G (due February 14, 2019), and 13H (due February 14, 2019)
Administration of CRD/IARD Account
Annual Review & Compliance Training
Annual 206(4)-7 Review Support, Execution, and Report Delivery
Annual Compliance Training (Under rule 206)
Other Services
Risk Assessment – regulatory best practice, not a requirement
Penetration Testing – CRC can liaise with a third-party vendor to facilitate a comprehensive evaluation of the firm’s network
security. Regulatory best practice, not a requirement
Annual Updates to Code of Ethics and Compliance Manual, as Necessary (must be completed annually, no specific
deadline)
Policy and Procedure Review & Updates (Cybersecurity, Business Continuity Plan, Privacy Policy etc.) (must be reviewed
and updated as regulation changes or new regulatory guidance is made available, no specific deadline, best practice to
review annually)

Broker-Dealer Offerings:

AML Review – ensure that the firm has completed an annual AML review as required under FINRA Rule 3110
Annual 3120 Review – ensure that the firm has completed a comprehensive review of the compliance program, as
required by FINRA Rule 3120
Completion of 3130 certification
Administration of CRD/IARD Account – CRC is available to manage firm’s CRD/IARD account to complete annual
amendments, filings, and payments.
Annual Compliance Training – ensure that you have held Compliance Training for firm personnel for FY 2018, as required
under FINRA Rule 3110.

Ongoing Support

As always, we are available to service all of your ongoing Compliance. At CRC, we believe that an effective Compliance
program is a proactive one, which is why we are continually keeping abreast of changes that occur throughout the year.
The regulatory landscape is constantly evolving, and we are here to help enhance your program so that you can stay on
top of it all.

Use the form below to sign up for a complimentary consultation:

Sending

The post Adviser and Broker-Dealer Annual Regulatory Deadlines appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
[Webinar] Designing a Proactive Regulatory Approach To Advisor Texting https://compliance-risk.com/webinar-designing-a-proactive-regulatory-approach-to-advisor-texting/ https://compliance-risk.com/webinar-designing-a-proactive-regulatory-approach-to-advisor-texting/#respond Tue, 30 Oct 2018 18:16:00 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8184 webinar

A proactive approach is best when it comes to advisor-client texting. Join us to learn […]

The post [Webinar] Designing a Proactive Regulatory Approach To Advisor Texting appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
webinar

A proactive approach is best when it comes to advisor-client texting. Join us to learn why!

Join our webinar on November 7th at 1pm EDT when Mitch Avnet of Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC" ) goes online with Phil Burch of Hearsay Systems to discuss how technology can help compliance and supervision teams proactively mitigate risk for their firms and allow advisors to provide best-in-class service to their clients.

By attending this webinar, you can expect to learn:

  • Why advisors typically text for business
  •  

  • How being proactive is the best approach to new regulations
  •  

  • The correct design of an effective regulatory approach to business text messaging

 
 

The post [Webinar] Designing a Proactive Regulatory Approach To Advisor Texting appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/webinar-designing-a-proactive-regulatory-approach-to-advisor-texting/feed/ 0
Join CRC as We Give Thanks to our Clients & Friends https://compliance-risk.com/join-crc-as-we-give-thanks-to-our-clients-friends/ Wed, 10 Oct 2018 18:35:47 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8171 Come celebrate Compliance Risk Concepts'6 year anniversary at Gallery Henoch with an evening of food, […]

The post Join CRC as We Give Thanks to our Clients & Friends appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Come celebrate Compliance Risk Concepts'6 year anniversary at Gallery Henoch with an evening of food, drinks and art.
Featuring New City Paintings, Oil Paintings of NYC & Brooklyn by Award-Winning Artist Kim Cogan.

When: November 14th, 5:30pm - 8:30pm
Where: Gallery Henoch, 555 West 25th Street, New York, NY

WILL YOU BE JOINING US?

Use the form below to RSVP to our Anniversary Celebration event.

Sending

The post Join CRC as We Give Thanks to our Clients & Friends appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium for Broker-Dealers Recap https://compliance-risk.com/monitoring-and-surveillance-symposium-for-broker-dealers-recap/ Sun, 30 Sep 2018 22:09:47 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=8139 symposium

To help navigate the wide array of compliance and risk management issues impacting the financial […]

The post Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium for Broker-Dealers Recap appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
symposium

To help navigate the wide array of compliance and risk management issues impacting the financial services sector today, broker-dealer compliance officers came together for a mastermind exchange of ideas and knowledge surrounding monitoring and surveillance challenges they face within the securities industry. Hosted by Abel Noser and Compliance Risk Concepts, The Kitano New York offered the perfect setting for this dynamic, informative and collaborative event. The following slideshow highlights the event.

Among the speakers, Mitch Avnet, Founder & Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts opened the discussion with "There is No Competitive Advantage in Compliance". Ted Morgan, CEO of Abel Noser Holdings, highlighted the landscape of monitoring and surveillance solutions currently available to broker-dealers.

  • Participants in the event spent the afternoon in deep thought and discussion. Real world scenarios were highlighted throughout the session.
  • Regulatory focus on the adequacy of firms’ surveillance programs were contemplated during the event.
  • Best practices and pain-points were shared by all.
  • Unique perspectives were provided by all with an eye toward increasing consistency in processes within broker-dealer firms.
  • Process reconciliation versus the need for new technology solutions was also a focal point of our discussion.
  • The distinction between front-office versus compliance responsibilities was also debated.

Thank you all for participating in this highly productive day!

INTERESTED IN FUTURE EVENTS?

Want to be the first to know about upcoming events, provide your contact information in the form below and we will gladly keep you in the loop.

Sending

The post Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium for Broker-Dealers Recap appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium For Broker-Dealers https://compliance-risk.com/monitoring-and-surveillance-symposium-for-broker-dealers/ Wed, 15 Aug 2018 13:52:50 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=7978 Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium For Broker-Dealers

Join Abel Noser and Compliance Risk Concepts September 5th for the Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium […]

The post Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium For Broker-Dealers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium For Broker-Dealers

Join Abel Noser and Compliance Risk Concepts September 5th for the Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium for Broker-Dealers. This afternoon symposium is intended to be a fully interactive session that brings together Senior Level Compliance and Risk Management Executives to engage in the exchange and sharing of ideas, knowledge and various concepts surrounding monitoring and surveillance activities.

Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Partner of Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) will act as the facilitator for the event. At the conclusion, participants should be able to:

  • Understand and “level-set” organizational readiness at their respective institutions
  • Understand the impact of inadequate monitoring and surveillance routines and systems have on Compliance, Technology, Risk Management, and Audit Resources
  • Size budgetary impact that monitoring and surveillance requirements will have on organizations at implementation and ongoing support / maintenance
  • Understand “common” and “unique” challenges that exist across peer group organizations
  • Understand the pros / cons of: “home-grown” solutions, outsourced solutions or a hybrid approach toward monitoring and surveillance activities

DATE:

Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2018
Time: Time: 3:00 pm - 6:00 pm ET

LOCATION:

Location: The Kitano New York, 66 Park Avenue, East 38th St, New York, NY 10016

AGENDA

3:00-3:15 PARTICIPANTS ARRIVE / WELCOME COMMENTS
-----------------------------------------------------
3:15-4:00 REGULATORY FOCUS ON COMPLIANCE OVERSIGHT OF TRADING ACTIVITIES
-----------------------------------------------------
4:15-4:45 COST OF COMPLIANCE
----------------------------------------------------
4:45-5:00 RECAP OF MEETING AND ACTION ITEMS
---------------------------------------------------
5:00-6:00 NETWORKING EVENT

 

The post Monitoring and Surveillance Symposium For Broker-Dealers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
News Update: Coinbase Hires Jeff Horowitz to Lead Compliance Initiative as CCO https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-coinbase-hires-jeff-horowitz-to-lead-compliance-initiative-as-cco/ https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-coinbase-hires-jeff-horowitz-to-lead-compliance-initiative-as-cco/#respond Thu, 09 Aug 2018 16:37:13 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=7974 coinbase-news

Coinbase, who recently acquired broker-dealer Keystone Capital Corp in June 2018, announced the addition of […]

The post News Update: Coinbase Hires Jeff Horowitz to Lead Compliance Initiative as CCO appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
coinbase-news

Coinbase, who recently acquired broker-dealer Keystone Capital Corp in June 2018, announced the addition of Jeff Horowitz as the Cryptocurrency exchange’s new Chief Compliance Officer. Prior to joining Coinbase, Horowitz served as the Global Head of Compliance at Pershing, and previously held positions managing AML and compliance programs at Citigroup and Goldman Sachs.

"As Coinbase — along with the cryptocurrency space as a whole — grows and matures, continued regulatory compliance across all the varying jurisdictions globally will be critical," Coinbase President and Chief Operating Officer Asiff Hirji wrote in a blog post Tuesday. "Adding Jeff to our team is one more important step along this journey."

Following the acquisition of Keystone, which included Venovate Marketplace, LLC, Coinbase is registered as an Alternative Trading System (ATS) with the SEC, which allows them to trade securities in a regulatory compliant manner. This is a path that US-based crypto exchanges and offering platforms will need to take if they plan to sell or trade blockchain-based securities in the future.

Coinbase’s strategy and recent actions towards building out a program to comply with anticipated regulation support CRC’s steadfast position that the key to operating successfully in the digital currency market is continually moving towards legitimizing the asset class, not only from the prospective of regulators, but institutional and wary retail investors as well.  Scrupulous attention to regulatory developments and visible effort to serve the best interest of clients and safeguard assets and personal information will distinguish a crypto exchange from it’s regulation-shirking counterparts in the industry. CRC continues to maintain that this approach will satisfy regulators and investors alike, and will allow the digital currency market to flourish within the bounds of regulation and client service.

CRC boasts a team of experts equipped to support your firm throughout the entire New Member Application (NMA) and ATS registration processes, from coordinating the initial steps to submitting the finalized application. For more information, or to speak with a Compliance Specialist about your digital currency needs, please contact Mitch Avnet at (646)346-2468 or mavnet@compliance-risk.com.  

The post News Update: Coinbase Hires Jeff Horowitz to Lead Compliance Initiative as CCO appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-coinbase-hires-jeff-horowitz-to-lead-compliance-initiative-as-cco/feed/ 0
Compliance Risk Concepts Launches New Website, Commemorating 5-Year Anniversary https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-risk-concepts-launches-new-website-commemorating-5-year-anniversary/ Thu, 09 Aug 2018 15:46:42 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=7968 new crc website launch

Compliance Risk Concepts, LLC, a business-focused team of seasoned compliance professionals providing top tier compliance […]

The post Compliance Risk Concepts Launches New Website, Commemorating 5-Year Anniversary appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
new crc website launch

Compliance Risk Concepts, LLC, a business-focused team of seasoned compliance professionals providing top tier compliance risk management services, has launched its new website in honor of its 5-year anniversary.

Mitch Avnet, Managing Partner and Founder of CRC, says, "The launch of our new website has been a significant undertaking to further ensure our clients and followers have a user-centric experience, enabling easy access to our talented team, quality services and timely regulatory and compliance information. We are thrilled with the look and feel of the new site and view this as another significant step in the evolution of our organization."

The improved website builds upon the foundation of CRC's previous website, furnishing a modern layout that improves and optimizes the overall user experience. The website includes aerial video footage of the New York City skyline and team photos in CRC's new state-of-the-art office space at 40 Exchange Place, Suite 402 New York.

Dave Amster, the Principal and Head of Fund and Dealer Advisory, says, "Our new website is the culmination of many hours of hard work to ensure that clients and prospective clients enjoy a user experience that presents meaningful information and content without unnecessary noise. This is just one more step in our steady focus on continually improving our client service." The launch of the new website in conjunction with the recent company move is a tremendous step forward in terms of brand cohesion and CRC's commitment to provide best-in-class professional services to the financial services industry.

Read the full press release

The post Compliance Risk Concepts Launches New Website, Commemorating 5-Year Anniversary appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
News Update: FINRA Notice 18-20 https://compliance-risk.com/news-update-finra-notice-18-20/ Wed, 11 Jul 2018 14:17:14 +0000 http://test.compliance-risk.com/?p=7729 finra-notice-18-20

Background and Summary On July 6, 2018, FINRA published Notice 18-20 regarding member firm involvement […]

The post News Update: FINRA Notice 18-20 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
finra-notice-18-20

Background and Summary
On July 6, 2018, FINRA published Notice 18-20 regarding member firm involvement in digital currency. This notice addressed the fact that the market for digital assets, including cryptocurrencies and virtual coins, has grown significantly in recent months, particularly amongst retail investors. The regulator reiterated its growing concerns specific to investor protection, including incidences of fraud and other securities law violations involving digital assets and the platforms on which they trade.

As such, FINRA has indicated an interest in remaining well-informed of the extent to which member firms are involved in this space. Firms that engage or begin to engage in such activities are reminded to consider all applicable federal and state laws, rules and regulations, including FINRA and SEC rules and regulations.

To better understand the scope of such activities, FINRA Regulatory Coordinators recently conducted a survey regarding firms’ involvement in activities related to digital assets. In addition, the 2018 RCA Survey contained questions regarding digital assets. FINRA announced in this Notice that it is supplementing these efforts by requesting that each firm promptly provide notification to its Regulatory Coordinator if it or its associated persons (including activities under Rules 3270 and 3280) or affiliates, currently engages (or intends to engage) in activities related to digital assets, including digital assets that are non-securities. The types of activities of interest to FINRA if undertaken (or planned) by a member, its associated persons or affiliates, include, but are not limited to:

  • purchases, sales or executions of transactions in digital assets;
  • purchases, sales or executions of transactions in a pooled fund investing in digital assets;
  • creation of, management of, or provision of advisory services for, a pooled fund related to digital assets;
  • purchases, sales or executions of transactions in derivatives (e.g., futures, options) tied to digital assets;
  • participation in an initial or secondary offering of digital assets (e.g., ICO, pre-ICO);
  • creation or management of a platform for the secondary trading of digital assets;
  • custody or similar arrangement of digital assets;
  • acceptance of cryptocurrencies (e.g., bitcoin) from customers;
  • mining of cryptocurrencies;
  • recommend, solicit or accept orders in cryptocurrencies and other virtual coins and tokens;
  • display indications of interest or quotations in cryptocurrencies and other virtual coins and tokens;
  • provide or facilitate clearance and settlement services for cryptocurrencies and other virtual coins and tokens; or
  • recording cryptocurrencies and other virtual coins and tokens using distributed ledger technology or any other use of blockchain technology.

Our Take
As always, it is our position at CRC that cooperation with regulators is key for the successful operation of financial services organizations. Regulators have continued to display heightened focus on the protection of retail and senior investors. As such, digital currency in particular is a developing area where cooperative, responsible players will hold the ace. Prompt, efficient, and honest communication and responses will satisfy regulators and clients alike, while also bringing a sense of legitimacy and scrupulousness to digital currency operations.

If you need assistance drafting a response to this request, or have any other questions regarding digital currency, please do not hesitate to contact Mitch Avnet at mavnet@compliance-risk.com.

The post News Update: FINRA Notice 18-20 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitigate the Risk: Best Practices for Employee, Client and Third Party Due Diligence in the Financial Services Industry https://compliance-risk.com/mitigate-the-risk-best-practices-for-employee-client-and-third-party-due-diligence-in-the-financial-services-industry/ Tue, 10 Jul 2018 12:25:50 +0000 http://test.compliance-risk.com/?p=7724 best-practices-for-employee-client-and-third-party

Hiring the right talent, maintaining accountability for those you hire, and managing through the complex […]

The post Mitigate the Risk: Best Practices for Employee, Client and Third Party Due Diligence in the Financial Services Industry appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
best-practices-for-employee-client-and-third-party

Hiring the right talent, maintaining accountability for those you hire, and managing through the complex regulatory landscape has never been more important – and more challenging- for financial institutions. Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) partnered with Sterling Talent Solutions, a leader in global background screening, to publish the white paper, “Employee, Client and Third Party Due Diligence: The Cost of Ineffective Monitory Procedures.” We share the importance for the financial services industry to have the correct ongoing due diligence procedures in place for new hires, clients, third-party partnerships, and vendor relationships. Operating with stale knowledge makes you vulnerable to increased operational and reputational risk, as well as potentially exposing client and firm resources and information to fraud and misappropriation.
The Financial Services Sector is Highly Regulated
Due Diligence is a fiber that is woven throughout the entire regulatory landscape, impacting various areas, including, but not limited to, cybersecurity, information security, custody, and books and records. Many of the agencies that govern the financial services sector, such as Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), require stringent due diligence procedures.

 

Employee and Registered Representative Due Diligence Best Practices
When onboarding new hires and registered representatives, firms should obtain and verify information such as an individual’s education and work history, industry qualifications and certifications, criminal background checks and fingerprinting, credit checks, disciplinary information and outside business activities, among other things.

Businesses who operate in the financial sector should use a reputable FCRA compliant background screening vendor or follow up and confirm all screening information that they receive from new hires and reps to ensure its accuracy. Firms should implement ongoing screening processes and disclosure monitoring that cover a nuanced array of areas outside business activities, political contributions donor lists and ongoing credit checks among other things. Firms need to be sure that they are capturing the whole picture when it comes to reps and employees by screening professional and financial information as well as continuing criminal background checks.

Three factors that financial businesses should consider when performing due diligence for employees are:

  • Data Collection: Businesses should develop a comprehensive process that will result in a detailed risk profile per individual.
  • Monitoring: Companies should have ongoing monitoring tools which utilize comprehensive data points which can screen for factors that traditional monitoring might miss, such as criminal activity, liens and judgments.
  • Verification: Organizations should have procedures in place to verify the information that is provided during data collection and monitoring process. Information should be reviewed from a variety of sources.

Client Due Diligence
Due diligence should be performed across the board. Reviewing clients is important to minimize risk. Under the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network’s (FinCEN’s) new Client Due Diligence rule, which went into effect on 5/11/2018, financial institutions should have Anti-Money Laundering (AML) processes already in place. Such procedures, as with Counterparty and Firm Representative Due Diligence, protect the organization’s reputation, limit exposure to litigation, fines or enforcement actions, and mitigate the risk of exposing client information and funds to fraud.
Regulators currently expect that financial institutions obtain customer information at account inception, compose a customer risk profile, and use this profile during ongoing monitoring to identify potential red flags. The rule focuses on five principles:

  • Identification and Verification
  • Ownership and Control
  • Exemptions
  • Certification Form
  • Updating UBO Information for Existing Customers

Third Party and Vendor Due Diligence
Standardization is key when counterparty due diligence is concerned. Companies should strive to implement repeatable procedures for due diligence that include drafting standard vendor and third party due to diligence questionnaires, anti-money laundering checks, employee training, a multi-level approval process that leverages Compliance Department and adherence appropriate record-keeping practices. Financial institutions should use not the same but similar review practices, questionnaires, and recordkeeping practices for all applicable vendors and intermediaries to mitigate the risk of missing material information from even seemingly innocuous vendors, counterparties or relationships.

It’s no longer the case that vendors can be approved and be permanently classified as low-risk or “approved.” Vendors and counterparties must be engaged and performing, and constantly reviewed by the firm to confirm that they still meet initial criteria and that Due Diligence Questionnaires (DDQs) have been updated to account for any new concerns or regulatory implications.

Reputational and Operational Risks of Inadequate Due Diligence
While counterparty relationships are critical for the growth of an organization, they also expose it to various risks, including bribery, corruption, organized crime, money laundering or fraud. Non-compliance with anti-bribery and corruption and KYC/AML regulations, inadequate, or inappropriate due diligence processes can expose businesses to enforcement actions and fines, negative press and reputational damage, criminal penalties, sanctions against firms and covered individuals, and time wasted dealing with investigations and remediation. Continual monitoring, risk assessment and review of information are imperative to protect a business’s assets and personally to identify information.

Download Due Diligence White Paper

Submit the form below to receive your complimentary copy of the Employee, Client and Third Party Due Diligence: The Cost of Ineffective Monitory Procedures white paper and learn practical steps and best practices to mitigate the risk for employee, client, third party and vendor due diligence rules in the financial services industry.

Sending


Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

About Sterling Talent Solutions
Sterling Talent Solutions helps the world’s top banks, brokerage houses, private equity firms, insurance companies and other financial services firms efficiently screen and hire top talent while maintaining stringent compliance standards.

The post Mitigate the Risk: Best Practices for Employee, Client and Third Party Due Diligence in the Financial Services Industry appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
IFP Selects CRC For New Broker-Dealer Filing https://compliance-risk.com/ifp-selects-crc-for-new-broker-dealer-filing/ Fri, 22 Jun 2018 12:22:44 +0000 http://test.compliance-risk.com/?p=7721 ifp-selects-crc

TAMPA, Fla., 06/18/2018 -Independent Financial Partners (IFP) has chosen Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) to implement […]

The post IFP Selects CRC For New Broker-Dealer Filing appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
ifp-selects-crc

TAMPA, Fla., 06/18/2018 -Independent Financial Partners (IFP) has chosen Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) to implement its broker-dealer filing. The Tampa-based RIA announced on April 6 its separation from LPL Financial in favor of creating its own broker-dealer (BD).

Establishing a BD requires the filing of a New Membership Application (NMA) with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), which entails a significant investment of time and resources, as well as a deep understanding of the regulatory requirements impacting broker-dealers. IFP set out to find a compliance services organization that could assist in the filing of the application. After conducting its due diligence, IFP decided to move forward with the expert guidance of CRC. IFP anticipates attaining FINRA approval in late 2018 or early 2019.

CRC Founder Mitch Avnet formed the New York-based firm more than five years ago.

“We believe CRC has the deep knowledge and experience required to deftly navigate the New Membership Application process with FINRA,” says Bill Hamm, CEO of IFP. “Partnering with CRC should demonstrate to the industry, and more importantly our advisors, that we are devoting the appropriate resources to help ensure that our broker-dealer will be solidly established while striving for 100 percent compliance from the outset. It is critical to us that our compliance program is primed and fully-operational as soon as the BD application is approved to facilitate a smooth transition for our advisors.”

CRC is a comprehensive compliance partner, offering full outsourced and co-sourced compliance execution services focused on the broker-dealer vertical. CRC’s diverse and robust team of compliance professionals have been engaged to provide critical guidance and services to support the important transition to becoming a broker-dealer. Upon receiving approval from FINRA, CRC will provide ongoing compliance support to IFP for a period of time, further ensuring seamless integration for IFP’s advisors and clients.

Avnet and the team at CRC are excited to work with a technology-focused firm like IFP.

According to Avnet, “I’ve gotten to know Bill and IFP over the past several months and I can say they are truly looking forward to creating a broker-dealer of the future. We will partner with IFP to build a compliant infrastructure that is powered by advanced technology. I am beyond thrilled that they chose CRC to embark on this exciting journey.”

About IFP

Family-owned and privately-held since it was founded in 2000 by CEO William Hamm Jr. on the principals of independence, flexibility and collaboration, Independent Financial Partners (IFP) is a comprehensive financial advisor support firm with home/corporate offices in Tampa, Florida, and Phoenix, Arizona. It is dedicated to delivering personalized service to a growing network of more than 520 independent advisors nationwide, allowing them to better focus on the needs of their clients.

An SEC Registered Investment Adviser (RIA) and an Office of Supervisory Jurisdiction (OSJ), IFP works directly with its advisors to provide them technological, compliance, marketing, business development, and operational support. As of Dec. 31, 2017, IFP’s advisors have more than $40 billion in assets under advisement. The firm has annually earned the trusted CEFEX certification for support services for adhering to the industry’s best practices since 2014. For more information, visit www.ifpartners.com. Follow the firm on Twitter at @IF_Partners.

The post IFP Selects CRC For New Broker-Dealer Filing appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Sterling FinServ Summit: Mitch Avnet Joins Fireside Chat with Former FINRA Chief of Enforcement, J. Bradley Bennett https://compliance-risk.com/sterling-finserv-summit-mitch-avnet-joins-fireside-chat-with-former-finra-chief-of-enforcement-j-bradley-bennett/ Tue, 29 May 2018 12:08:12 +0000 http://test.compliance-risk.com/?p=7714 sterling-june-13

Sterling Talent Solutions and Compliance Risk Concepts invite you to join us on Wednesday, June […]

The post Sterling FinServ Summit: Mitch Avnet Joins Fireside Chat with Former FINRA Chief of Enforcement, J. Bradley Bennett appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
sterling-june-13

Sterling Talent Solutions and Compliance Risk Concepts invite you to join us on Wednesday, June 13th for the Sterling Financial Services Summit: Human Capital and Compliance - Bridging the Gap.

This afternoon thought leadership session will include Financial Services Executive from Human Resources, Talent Acquisition and Compliance.

Date: Wednesday, June 13, 2018
Time: Time: 12:30 pm - 6:00 pm ET
Location: Grand Hyatt New York, Regency Room

Mitch Avnet, Compliance Risk Concepts founder and managing partner, joins "Know your employee – ongoing rep and disclosure monitoring" Fireside Chat with Former FINRA Chief of Enforcement, J. Bradley Bennett, now a Partner in the White Collar practice at Baker Botts.

Please feel free to share with colleagues who may benefit from this event, and don’t hesitate to reach out with any questions. We hope you will be able to join us!

The post Sterling FinServ Summit: Mitch Avnet Joins Fireside Chat with Former FINRA Chief of Enforcement, J. Bradley Bennett appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Research This! Complex Future for Research Analysts https://compliance-risk.com/research-this-complex-future-for-research-analysts/ Mon, 09 Apr 2018 12:49:38 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=6942 research-this-with-crc

The world of research sure has changed over the last few decades. When the author […]

The post Research This! Complex Future for Research Analysts appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
research-this-with-crc

The world of research sure has changed over the last few decades. When the author Jeanine Oburchay, CRC Director of Research Advisory Practice, first started in the field in 1987, equity research analysts worked primarily for investment banks and broker-dealers. Landing a gig at a bulge bracket firm meant that as long as you delivered good product, created buy-side relationships, and made sure your bankers were well-served, your paycheck was pretty secure for the foreseeable future. But a lot has changed since then.

As we watch the latest changes to the world of research, this is a great time for analysts or analysts-to-be to be considering their next (or even first) move. In Research This! Complex Future for Research Analysts, Jeanine looks inside the evolving world of research including MIFID II, the state of research firm, investment bank and broker-dealer research in the post-Eliot Spitzer/Global Analyst Research Settlement age, transitioning from big firm to independence, Independent third-party research, Third party co-branding research and new opportunities for analysts that didn’t even exist just a generation ago.

Download Research This! Complex Future for Research Analysts

Research the industry like you would an industry you’re covering. Use the form below to sign up to receive your complimentary copy of Research This! Complex Future for Research Analysts.

Sending

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Research This! Complex Future for Research Analysts appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory Focus: Cryptocurrency https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-focus-cryptocurrency/ Thu, 29 Mar 2018 12:43:42 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=6939 regulatory-focus-cryptocurrency

According to the 2018 Exam Priorities Report released in February, OCIE plans to monitor the […]

The post Regulatory Focus: Cryptocurrency appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
regulatory-focus-cryptocurrency

According to the 2018 Exam Priorities Report released in February, OCIE plans to monitor the sale of products in the cryptocurrency and initial coin offering markets and examine for regulatory compliance in instances where products are determined to be securities.

It is expected that the SEC, and likely FINRA, are aiming to treat cryptocurrencies as securities in the near future, which would mean that appropriate registration of all parties involved in managing, trading, holding, or transferring them is the key to avoiding regulatory trouble and enforcement actions. Investors of varying levels of sophistication, entering the crypto space will likely place more trust – and therefore funds- in a company that is conscious of regulatory implications and relevant securities laws.

A clear picture is emerging of what it means to be a trustworthy, legitimate business operating in this space, principally: liquidity of investments, visible efforts to protect client assets and data, and transparent and accessible communication with clients. Regulators want to see that you are putting the needs of your clients ahead of your own; investors want to know that you are not just another digital currency scam. In a developing and volatile cryptocurrency market full of unknowns, it is better to be safe than sorry.

Download Regulatory Focus: Cryptocurrency

Showing good faith with regulators by ensuring compliance with securities laws and adopting appropriate policies and procedures surrounding cryptocurrencies holds the potential to pay off in the end – with regulators and investors alike.

In Regulatory Focus: Cryptocurrency, Kaitlyn Gibbs walks through the key areas of consideration for financial institutions looking to enter or already operating in the cryptocurrency market to help facilitate compliance with regulatory guidance and avoid regulatory issues, including: determining whether a coin offering should be considered a security, The Howey Test, safeguarding client assets and data, best practice and adequate disclosure of risks.

Submit the form below to receive your complimentary copy of Regulatory Focus: Cryptocurrency.

Sending

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Regulatory Focus: Cryptocurrency appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Understanding FinCEN’s Customer Due Diligence (CDD) Final Rule https://compliance-risk.com/understanding-fincens-customer-due-diligence-cdd-final-rule/ Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:40:12 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=6936 fincen-customer-due-diligence

Compliance Risk Concepts presents Fast Facts: Customer Due Diligence, A Quick Guide To FinCEN’s New […]

The post Understanding FinCEN’s Customer Due Diligence (CDD) Final Rule appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
fincen-customer-due-diligence

Compliance Risk Concepts presents Fast Facts: Customer Due Diligence, A Quick Guide To FinCEN’s New Requirements. It offers a snack-size snapshot of key points from our more detailed regulatory release Understanding FinCEN’s Customer Due Diligence (CDD) Final Rule, that outlines FinCEN’s new Customer Due Diligence (CDD) Final Rule, in advance of its effective date on May 11, 2018.

New Fast Facts Video Series

To help Compliance professionals stay ahead of the curve in a regulatory environment that is constantly evolving, our dedicated compliance team is persistently researching regulatory updates and getting material out there to help give our clients a leg up. While these resources are useful, we understand that industry professionals have their plates full designing and running compliance programs and performing a wide breadth of day to day functions.

To that end, we are making an effort to pair our detailed regulatory releases and analysis with palatable, to the point digital shorts, like the one above, to relay material industry information to our clients. These videos, typically running one to two minutes, serve as a regulatory highlight reel and give an overview of pending regulatory updates, guidance from governing bodies, and hot issues without taking up too much valuable time.

Download Understanding FinCEN’s CDD Final Rule

The CDD Final Rule is a move toward increased financial transparency- a growing trend for regulatory bodies in 2018. While financial institutions have until May 11, 2018 to ensure compliance with the Final Rule, as a best practice, they should also consider implementing a process to review and update this information on a regular basis.

In Understanding FinCEN’s Customer Due Diligence (CDD) Final Rule, Kaitlyn Gibbs outlines the four central principles of the CDD Final Rule and offers insight on the five things Financial Institutions should remember when updating AML procedures.

Submit the form below to receive your complimentary copy of Understanding FinCEN’s Customer Due Diligence (CDD) Final Rule.

Sending

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Understanding FinCEN’s Customer Due Diligence (CDD) Final Rule appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Annual Investment Adviser Regulatory Review and Outlook https://compliance-risk.com/2955-revision-v1/ Wed, 24 Jan 2018 01:57:22 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/2955-revision-v1/ Beautiful day in Washington D.C., as Mitch Avnet had an opportunity to connect with former […]

The post Annual Investment Adviser Regulatory Review and Outlook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Beautiful day in Washington D.C., as Mitch Avnet had an opportunity to connect with former chairperson of SEC, Mary Schapiro.

Mary-Schipro

As Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Mary L. Schapiro helped strengthen and revitalize the agency; oversaw a more rigorous enforcement program; and, shaped new rules by which Wall Street must play.

Chairman Schapiro’s priorities at the SEC included reinvigorating a financial regulatory system that must protect investors and vigorously enforce the rules; and working to deepen the SEC’s commitment to transparency, accountability, and disclosure while always keeping the needs and concerns of investors front and center. During her tenure, the agency’s dedicated work force brought a record number of Enforcement actions, swiftly reacted to the May 6, 2010 Flash Crash, and achieved significant regulatory reform to protect investors.

The post Annual Investment Adviser Regulatory Review and Outlook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and Outlook https://compliance-risk.com/annual-broker-dealer-regulatory-review-and-outlook/ Thu, 11 Jan 2018 11:10:41 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=6930 annual-broker-dealer-kg

Now that 2017 has ended and 2018 is emerging on the regulatory horizon, we find […]

The post Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and Outlook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
annual-broker-dealer-kg

Now that 2017 has ended and 2018 is emerging on the regulatory horizon, we find ourselves in a position to look back on what has transpired over the course of the past year in an effort to anticipate what the New Year may bring for Broker-Dealers.

In the following Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and Outlook (2017), Kaitlyn Gibbs offers her perspective on what the highlights were in 2017, as well as what will be at the center of regulatory development in 2018.

Download Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and Outlook

To download your complimentary copy of the Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and Outlook (2017), use the form below:

Sending


Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Annual Broker-Dealer Regulatory Review and Outlook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Broker-Dealers: Let’s Talk Turkey – Don’t Get “Carved” Up By Year End Requirements https://compliance-risk.com/broker-dealers-lets-talk-turkey-dont-get-carved-year-end-requirements/ Tue, 14 Nov 2017 22:06:01 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=6041 talk-turkey

As we approach the Thanksgiving Holiday, the end of 2017 will be here before we […]

The post Broker-Dealers: Let’s Talk Turkey – Don’t Get “Carved” Up By Year End Requirements appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
talk-turkey

As we approach the Thanksgiving Holiday, the end of 2017 will be here before we know it! As former Chief Compliance Officers, CRC completely understands year-end pressures for FINRA registered broker-dealers and the need/importance of executing and completing mandatory annual Compliance requirements.

Over the last several years, we’ve helped many Broker-Dealers complete each of the discrete tasks identified below. Additionally, we have helped many broker-dealers through their cycle exams in 2017 and have a very clear understanding of FINRA’s hot-button items, which continue to include Cyber-Security, Outside Business Activities, and Business Resiliency.

Increasingly, more and more firms are turning to external third parties to conduct year-end reviews. It eliminates the appearance and perception of potential conflicts of interest – as firm’s remove the individuals that are responsible for the execution of the programs throughout the year from the actual testing being done – creating a truly independent review of the state of play within an organization.

Based on the above, CRC provides our clients with a cost-effective approach to execute any / all of the requirements below. We remove the “pricing barrier” – by providing “modular” approaches that enable our clients to truly benefit from our significant knowledge base and expertise.

• FINRA 3120 / 3130 Annual Testing of Supervisory Controls / CEO Certification

Annually, FINRA member broker-dealers are required to test and verify the adequacy of their supervisory program, and the CEOs are required to certify their awareness of the program’s state.

As part of the annual review, firms should identify and discuss the impact of “hot topic” industry issues on their respective organizations. For instance, Outside Business Activity/Private Securities Transactions is an area that firms’ should consider assessing as part of their 2017 Annual Testing Program.

In 2017, we continue to see FINRA focus on firms’ obligations concerning their registered representatives’ outside business activities and private securities transactions. Firms must evaluate and test internal procedures to review registered persons’ written notifications of proposed outside business activities, including firms’ consideration of whether the proposed outside business activities may compromise a registered person’s responsibilities to the firm’s clients or be viewed as part of the firm’s business. FINRA is also focused on firms’ procedures for handling associated persons’ notifications of proposed private securities transactions and firms’ ongoing supervision over associated persons’ approved private securities transactions for compensation.

The annual review may offer a practical way for firms’ to assess this discrete risk – as part of their overall assessment of the state of compliance and supervision within their respective organizations.

• SEC Rule 17a-5 – Annual Compliance Report

SEC Rule 17a-5 requires broker-dealers that did not claim exemption from Rule 15c3-3 throughout the most recent fiscal year to prepare and file an annual report on compliance, and internal control over compliance, with certain financial responsibility rules (“FRRs”), specifically the Net Capital Rule (Rule 15c3-1), Customer Protection Rule (Rule 15c3-3), Quarterly Security Count Rule (Rule 17a-13), and Account Statement Rules.

The compliance report must include statements as to whether:

  1. The broker-dealer has established and maintained internal control over compliance
  2. The internal control over compliance of the broker-dealer was effective during the most recent fiscal year
  3. The internal control over compliance of the broker-dealer was effective as of the end of the most recent fiscal year
  4. The broker-dealer was in compliance with Rule 15c3-1 and paragraph (e) of Rule 15c3-3 as of the end of the most recent fiscal year
  5. The information the broker-dealer used to state whether it was in compliance with Rule 15c3-1 and paragraph (e) of Rule 15c3-3 was derived from the books and records of the broker-dealer

Impacted Broker-Dealers will also be required to engage their independent registered public accountant to examine the broker-dealer’s statements (2) through (5), above, in its compliance report.
Following PCAOB standards, the independent registered public accountant would issue a report based on that examination.

• Independent Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) Test / Review:

Every broker-dealer is required to perform an annual review of their Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Program (“AMLCP”). This review must be undertaken by a qualified individual that has a strong working knowledge of the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”).

The review can be performed by an outside consultant or someone employed by the firm. However, it cannot be performed by the Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officer (“AMLCO”) or someone that reports to the AMLCO.

As an FYI – FINRA allows firms that do not have any customers/customer accounts to perform this review once every two years.

• Written Supervisory Procedures (“WSPs”) Review

As part of its responsibilities under FINRA Rule 3012, a Firm must ensure that all business areas and new regulatory requirements are sufficiently addressed in its annual review of WSPs.

• Continuing Education

All FINRA member firms must complete their Firm and Regulatory Element Continuing Education obligations by year-end.

• Branch Office Reviews

FINRA member firms must perform inspections of all offices of supervisory jurisdiction (“OSJs”) and branch offices that supervise one or more non-branch locations on an annual basis. Each branch office that does not supervise non-branch locations must be inspected at least once every three years.

• Annual Compliance Meeting

All FINRA member firms are required to complete an annual compliance meeting (“ACM”). Although all registered representatives and principals are required to be present, an interactive internet-based “ACM on Demand” approach is acceptable in most circumstances.

• Registrations and Renewals

Broker-Dealers have until December 18th, 2017 to pay their Preliminary Renewal Account. Failure to pay by the deadline may endanger a firm’s ability to do business in jurisdictions in which it has previously done business. Although there are a number of ways to pay, firms need to ensure that there are sufficient funds in their CRD Daily Account.

HOW CAN CRC HELP?

An independent review conducted by longstanding industry professionals, reconciling your current “state of compliance” is the most effective way to ascertain your program’s status and ensure your firm continues to meet its ongoing regulatory requirements. A great deal of regulatory intelligence is required to demonstrate an organization’s understanding of its regulatory obligations (both existing and newly enacted).

At CRC, we strive to do more than perform a “check the box” review – we strive to partner. Our team of former Chief Compliance Officers (“CCOs”) and Regulators not only provide key insights into what is required of your firm but assist your firm by executing seamlessly, helping to build a stronger program- one that your management team and regulators can have confidence in.

Please contact us for help on any of the items identified above / or for a full review/assessment of your broker-dealer’s compliance and supervisory system.
Let CRC help you turn your risk into reward.

The post Broker-Dealers: Let’s Talk Turkey – Don’t Get “Carved” Up By Year End Requirements appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Phocion Helps Open Door To GIPS® Verification Services At CRC https://compliance-risk.com/phocion-helps-open-door-gips-verification-services-crc/ Wed, 25 Oct 2017 18:18:20 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=6027 gip-verification2

Through our strategic agreement with Phocion Investment Services (Phocion), Compliance Risk Concepts ‎(CRC) is proud […]

The post Phocion Helps Open Door To GIPS® Verification Services At CRC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
gip-verification2

Through our strategic agreement with Phocion Investment Services (Phocion), Compliance Risk Concepts ‎(CRC) is proud to offer GIPS® Verification Services to existing and prospective clients.

The intention of GIPS® Verification is to provide existing and prospective clients with additional credibility that the investment firm adheres to industry best performance practices. GIPS® is formulated and maintained under the guise of the CFA Institute. Its collection of requirements when properly implemented ensures that operations and published returns are highly comparable among adherents. According to GIPS®, investment firms are allowed to self-verify. Greater confidence can be achieved when performed by an independent, third party that fully understands the niche discipline of performance. Firms that follow GIPS® benefit from the following:

  • Symbolism adds integrity to the firm (Being GIPS Compliant is attractive to potential clients/investors)
  • Improve knowledge of performance measurement team
  • Enhanced quality of performance marketing in presentations
  • Added rigor to internal performance processes
  • Ensures fair and full disclosure of investment performance‎
  • Being GIPS Compliant is attractive to potential clients/investors

Phocion Founder, Ioannis Segounis, stated: "Investment firms that claim adherence to GIPS® standards must be verified on an annual basis. Greater confidence can be achieved when performed by an independent, third-party that fully understands the niche discipline of performance. When properly implemented GIPS® requirements ensure that operations and published returns are highly comparable among adopters."

Clients wishing to obtain more information about Phocion's GIPS® Verification services should contact CRC at +1-(917) 281-2325.

 

About Phocion Investment Services

Phocion Investment Services provides the expertise, independence, and sophisticated tools that enable our clients to meet their performance, compliance and due diligence objectives. Our objective is to bring clarity to the complexities of the investment industry and to assist stakeholders in their investment decision processes. With our team's proven track record and the firm's core pillars of honesty, accountability, and excellence in service, we are the industry's trusted partner in the investment process. www.phocioninvestments.com

The post Phocion Helps Open Door To GIPS® Verification Services At CRC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Documenting Effective Onboarding Due Diligence [webinar] https://compliance-risk.com/documenting-effective-onboarding-due-diligence-webinar-2/ Wed, 25 Oct 2017 17:02:18 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=6012 documenting-effective-onboarding-due-diligence

As noted in the 2017 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter, FINRA will review firms’ supervisory […]

The post Documenting Effective Onboarding Due Diligence [webinar] appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
documenting-effective-onboarding-due-diligence

As noted in the 2017 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter, FINRA will review firms’ supervisory procedures for hiring or retaining statutorily disqualified and recidivist brokers. FINRA will examine firms’ due diligence on these individuals, which will include determining whether, as part of the verification process, a firm or third-party service provider conducts a national search of reasonably available public records to verify the accuracy and completeness of the information contained in an applicant’s Form U4. FINRA will also continue to monitor for timely submission of disclosures required on Forms U4 and U5.

Efficient onboarding of new registered representatives is critical for broker-dealers. Yet many firms continue to rely on paper-based manual processes and redundant data entry, requiring constant intervention in the process and negatively impacting rep satisfaction. Join RegED and Compliance Risk Concepts, for an hour-long webinar offering insights into the ways that technology can enable firms to eliminate inefficiencies in the onboarding process.

Date: Thursday, November 2, 2017
Time: 3:00 - 4:00 PM EDT

Presented by:

Ann Robinson, Senior VP, Business Development RegED, Inc.
Mitch Avnet, Managing Partner Compliance Risk Concepts

The post Documenting Effective Onboarding Due Diligence [webinar] appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Lowering Your Cost Of Compliance [video] https://compliance-risk.com/lowering-cost-compliance/ Mon, 02 Oct 2017 10:37:55 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5982

With regulatory aggressiveness at historically high levels. Financial institutions must rethink how they thread the […]

The post Lowering Your Cost Of Compliance [video] appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>


With regulatory aggressiveness at historically high levels. Financial institutions must rethink how they thread the compliance needle and reshape the endless regulatory noise into coherent action that promotes dynamic and impactful risk management processes. At Compliance Risk Concepts, we know that your business doesn’t benefit from compliance advice that’s academic or theoretical. Unlike traditional compliance consultants, CRC’s principal advisors all have deep front-office capital markets roots that consistently guide the solutions they prescribe.

The markets are risky enough, let CRC manage your regulatory risk. Contact us for more information on how CRC can help lower your cost of compliance.

The post Lowering Your Cost Of Compliance [video] appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
ADV Regulatory Changes For Investment Advisers https://compliance-risk.com/adv-regulatory-changes-investment-advisers/ Mon, 25 Sep 2017 18:09:04 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5967 financial-regulations

On October 1, 2017, regulatory changes go into effect for investment advisers. The amended Form […]

The post ADV Regulatory Changes For Investment Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
financial-regulations

On October 1, 2017, regulatory changes go into effect for investment advisers. The amended Form ADV will require investment advisers to expand the information they report on Form ADV about separately managed accounts and other important aspects of their advisory business. The SEC also adopted a number of other amendments to the Form ADV and certain rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 that include permitting consolidated investment adviser registrations for certain private fund advisers that operate a single advisory business through multiple entities, amending the Advisers Act books and records rule to require investment advisers to maintain additional information supporting performance claims, and making certain other clarifying and technical amendments to the Form ADV and Advisers Act rules.

Investment advisers are not required to revise and file their Form ADV on that date solely to reflect the changes. Instead, an investment adviser will be required to use the new Form, and provide all of the newly requested information, in any initial filing or amendment of its Form on or after October 1, 2017. As a practical matter, investment advisers will generally not use the new Form until filing their next annual updating amendments (January 1, 2018 and April 2, 2018 (March 31, 2018 is a Saturday) or until they are filing an other-than-annual amendment due to material changes.

Compliance Risk Concepts suggest that investment advisers review the new requirements in detail to ensure that if an earlier amendment must be made, the required information can be gathered in a timely manner.

Highlights of the Form changes and material changes that would require filing an other-than-annual amendment are outlined below. In addition, a PDF version of the new Form ADV can be downloaded by clicking here. This highlights in yellow, section by section and question by question the changes that were made to the ADV. Those changes are indicated in the color red.

Form-ADV---Changes-effective-

CLICK TO VIEW & DOWNLOAD

As always, Compliance Risk Concepts is available to answer any questions regarding these changes or assist your firm with the completion of the amended Form.

Highlights of the amendments to Form ADV include the following: 

  • Umbrella Registration for Private Fund Managers: The revised Form includes instructions and a new schedule (Schedule R) for the reporting of relying advisers.
  • Separately Managed Accounts: The revised Form requires disclosure regarding separately managed accounts.  Separately managed accounts are those advisory accounts over which an investment adviser has continuous and regular supervisory authority (and therefore that count towards “regulatory assets under management”) that are not pooled investment vehicles.
  • Other: The revised Form also now requires new or additional information regarding (among others):
    • the breakdown of “regulatory assets under management” among categories of clients;
    • accounts on social media platforms (including, but not limited to, Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn);
    • branch offices;
    • parallel managed accounts; and
    • outsourced chief compliance officers.

Books and Records Rule Amendments (Look out for an additional memo regarding this rule change)

The amendments to the books and records rule will now require registered investment advisers to maintain the following:

  • the records listed in SEC Rule 204-2(a)(16) supporting performance claims in communications that the investment adviser circulates or distributes, directly or indirectly, to any person (as opposed to the current rule, which only applies to communications which are distributed to ten or more persons); and
  • originals of all written communications received and copies of written communications sent by an investment adviser relating to the performance or rate of return of any or all managed accounts or securities recommendations.

The amendments to the books and records rule will apply to any communication circulated or distributed on or after October 1, 2017.

Material Changes:

If you are registered with the SEC or a state securities authority, you must amend your Form ADV, including corresponding sections of Schedules A, B, C, and D, by filing additional amendments (other-than-annual amendments) promptly if:

  • information you provided in response to Items 1, 3, 9 (except 9.A.(2), 9.B.(2), 9.E., and 9.F.), or 11 of Part 1A or Items 1, 2.A. through 2.F., or 2.I. of Part 1B becomes inaccurate in any way;
  • information you provided in response to Items 4, 8, or 10 of Part 1A or Item 2.G. of Part 1B becomes materially inaccurate; or
  • information you provided in your brochure becomes materially inaccurate (see note below for exceptions)

Notes:

Part 1: If you are submitting an other-than-annual amendment, you are not required to update your responses to Items 2, 5, 6, 7, 9.A.(2), 9.B.(2), 9.E., 9.F., or 12 of Part 1A or Items 2.H. or 2.J. of Part 1B even if your responses to those items have become inaccurate.

Part 2: You must amend your brochure supplements (see Form ADV, Part 2B) promptly if any information in them becomes materially inaccurate. If you are submitting an other-than-annual amendment to your brochure, you are not required to update your summary of material changes as required by Item 2. You are not required to update your brochure between annual amendments solely because the amount of client assets you manage has changed or because your fee schedule has changed. However, if you are updating your brochure for a separate reason in between annual amendments, and the amount of client assets you manage listed in response to Item 4.E or your fee schedule listed in response to Item 5.A has become materially inaccurate, you should update that item(s) as part of the interim amendment.

• If you are an SEC-registered adviser, you are required to file your brochure amendments electronically through IARD. You are not required to file amendments to your brochure supplements with the SEC, but you must maintain a copy of them in your files.

• If you are a state-registered adviser, you are required to file your brochure amendments and brochure supplement amendments with the appropriate state securities authorities through IARD.

The post ADV Regulatory Changes For Investment Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Risk Concepts and NexTier Consulting Solutions Team Up To Serve Investment Management Community https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-risk-concepts-nextier-consulting-solutions-team-serve-investment-management-community/ Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:00:43 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5948 consulting-solutions-team-up-to-serve

NEW YORK (NEW YORK) | CHICAGO (ILLINOIS) Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC"), a top-tier compliance consulting […]

The post Compliance Risk Concepts and NexTier Consulting Solutions Team Up To Serve Investment Management Community appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
consulting-solutions-team-up-to-serve

NEW YORK (NEW YORK) | CHICAGO (ILLINOIS) Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC"), a top-tier compliance consulting services firm, and NexTier Consulting Solutions (“NexTier”), a leading risk management consulting services firm are pleased to announce that they have formalized a strategic partnership to serve the investment management community.

 

Compliance Risk Concepts and NexTier Consulting Solutions

The partnership benefits CRC’s investment management clients by expanding its support model to include a broad suite of strategic and tactical support services to bolster the growth of these firms while reducing business risk. As part of this relationship CRC, will have access to a broad group of seasoned investment management practitioners with a wide array of direct and practical investment management industry experience. For NexTier, the partnership replaces its current compliance offering with a robust and complete compliance solution to address the needs of its investment management clients.

In acknowledging the new joint venture, CRC’s Chief Executive Officer and Managing Partner, Mitch Avnet, stated, “We are extremely enthusiastic about our relationship with NexTier. The NexTier leadership has done a fantastic job building out a platform to serve the strategic and tactical needs of the investment management community. We believe that our alliance with NexTier will enable both organizations to disrupt our target market verticals while providing the asset management community with cost-effective, best-in-class support options and alternatives.”

In addition, NexTier’s Chief Executive Officer, Lawrence C. Manson, Jr., stated that “Our partnership with CRC significantly elevates our profile in compliance vertical which will allow our firm to expand our mission-critical, end-to-end solution offering for investment management organizations. Our mission is to elevate the operating practices of investment management organizations by providing best-in-class services.”

CRC and NexTier look forward to discussing the details of their partnership on a webcast that will be scheduled on Tuesday, October 24, 2017. More details will follow.

About NexTier Consulting Solutions

NexTier Consulting Solutions is a consulting firm focused on helping investment firms compete more effectively in the institutional investment marketplace by providing strategic and tactical support services designed to create and support growth strategies. The company was founded in 2012 and is headquartered in Chicago with an office in New York and senior consultants located in Atlanta, Denver, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Contact (Headquarters):
NexTier Consulting Solutions | 515 North State Street, Suite 2640 | Chicago, Illinois | 60654 T. 312-948-9178 | www.nextiercompanies.com

About Compliance Risk Concepts

Compliance Risk Concepts is a business-focused, team of senior compliance consultants and executives providing top tier compliance consulting services to clients on an as-needed, project or part-time basis. We provide our clients with the critical skills and expertise required to establish, maintain and enhance a balanced and effective compliance operational risk management program. We help organizations demonstrate a commitment to a strong risk management culture.

Contact (Headquarters):
Compliance Risk Concepts | 40 Exchange Place, Suite 402 New York, New York 10005 | www.compliance-risk.com

The post Compliance Risk Concepts and NexTier Consulting Solutions Team Up To Serve Investment Management Community appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Webinar: How The CRC / Phocion Partnership Benefits YOU https://compliance-risk.com/webinar-crc-phocion-partnership-benefits/ Wed, 30 Aug 2017 22:33:58 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5931

Discussing Benefits of Strategic Alliance Between Compliance Risk Concepts and Phocion Investment Services Join CRC […]

The post Webinar: How The CRC / Phocion Partnership Benefits YOU appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Discussing Benefits of Strategic Alliance Between Compliance Risk Concepts and Phocion Investment Services

Join CRC and Phocion for a more in-depth discussion on how their new partnership will benefit their clients in both the US and Canada.

Date: September 12, 2017
Time: 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm EST.

REGISTER HERE

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.


Compliance Risk Concepts and Phocion Investment Services Formalize Strategic Alliance

NEW YORK (NEW YORK) | MONTREAL (CANADA) Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC"), a top tier compliance consulting services firm, and Phocion Investment Services ("Phocion"), a leading service provider in performance, due diligence and compliance, are pleased to announce that they have formalized a strategic partnership.

The partnership benefits CRC's clients by expanding their offering to include a broad suite of performance measurement services. The agreement also gives CRC its initial foray into the Canadian marketplace positioning it to better serve its clients' cross-border needs. For Phocion, the partnership expands its United States prospect list;, particularly for the fast-growing performance measurement offerings... Read more

The post Webinar: How The CRC / Phocion Partnership Benefits YOU appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Risk Concepts and Phocion Investment Services Formalize Strategic Alliance https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-risk-concepts-phocion-investment-services-formalize-strategic-alliance/ Tue, 15 Aug 2017 01:00:05 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5914 and-phocion-investment-services-formalize-strategic-alliance

NEW YORK (NEW YORK) | MONTREAL (CANADA) Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC"), a top tier compliance […]

The post Compliance Risk Concepts and Phocion Investment Services Formalize Strategic Alliance appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
and-phocion-investment-services-formalize-strategic-alliance

NEW YORK (NEW YORK) | MONTREAL (CANADA) Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC"), a top tier compliance consulting services firm, and Phocion Investment Services ("Phocion"), a leading service provider in performance, due diligence and compliance, are pleased to announce that they have formalized a strategic partnership.

The partnership benefits CRC's clients by expanding their offering to include a broad suite of performance measurement services. The agreement also gives CRC its initial foray into the Canadian marketplace positioning it to better serve its clients' cross-border needs. For Phocion, the partnership expands its United States prospect list, particularly for the fast-growing performance measurement offerings.

In acknowledging the new joint venture CRC's CEO and Managing Director Mitch Avnet stated, "We are extremely proud and excited about our relationship with Phocion. The Phocion leadership team has done a tremendous job as it relates to their performance measurement and due diligence capabilities. We believe our alliance with Phocion will further enable both organizations to continue to disrupt our target market verticals, providing the asset management community with cost effective, best-in-class support options and alternatives".

Phocion's Founder and Managing Director Ioannis Segounis went on to say that "today marks an important day in Phocion's seven-year history. Our partnership with CRC significantly elevates our profile in the United States - by far the largest market for our services. Phocion's mission is to elevate the operating practices of all investment industry participants by providing best-of-breed services in the areas of performance measurement, due diligence, and compliance. The agreement with CRC enables our firm to take a giant leap towards realizing this goal."

CRC and Phocion look forward to discussing the details of their partnership on a webcast that will be scheduled on Tuesday. September 12th, 2017. More details will follow.

About Phocion Investment Services

Phocion Investment Services provides the expertise, independence, and sophisticated tools that enable our clients to meet their performance, compliance and due diligence objectives. Our objective is to bring clarity to the complexities of the investment industry and to assist stakeholders in their investment decision processes. With our team's proven track record and the firm's core pillars of honesty, accountability, and excellence in service, we are the industry's trusted partner in the investment process.

Contact (Headquarters):
Phocion Investment Services | 1010 Sherbrooke Street West, Suite 1800 | Montreal, Quebec | H3A 2R7 Canada T. 514-564-9955 | www.phocioninvestments.com

About Compliance Risk Concepts

Compliance Risk Concepts is a business-focused, team of senior compliance consultants and executives providing top tier compliance consulting services to clients on an as-needed, project or part-time basis. We provide our clients with the critical skills and expertise required to establish, maintain and enhance a balanced and effective compliance operational risk management program. We help organizations demonstrate a commitment to a strong risk management culture.

Contact (Headquarters):
Compliance Risk Concepts | 40 Exchange Place, Suite 402 New York, New York 10005 | www.compliance-risk.com

The post Compliance Risk Concepts and Phocion Investment Services Formalize Strategic Alliance appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Turning Up The Heat on Social Media Regulation https://compliance-risk.com/turning-heat-social-media-regulation/ Wed, 02 Aug 2017 15:35:06 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5885 mobile-sm-fb

When I was a freshman at DeSales University my younger, teenaged sister called me one […]

The post Turning Up The Heat on Social Media Regulation appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
mobile-sm-fb

When I was a freshman at DeSales University my younger, teenaged sister called me one night to tell me, in a very excited tone, “Guess what! There is this thing called the World Wide Web, it’s so cool! You can talk to people from all over the world!”. I know, I’m dating myself but what the heck. Fast-forward some 20 odd years later (I keep dating myself) and that excited younger sister has had a multitude of social media websites to choose from to communicate with people from all over the world and in more attractive interface: Facebook. Pinterest. Instagram. LinkedIn. Twitter. YouTube. Etc., etc.

How has the internet affected your personal life? What about your professional life? Do you remember the first time you created a Twitter account and tweeted all sorts of things about your firm and how amazing it was and all the wonderful services your firm provided? How about the first time your compliance officer approached you about your twitter account? Do you think compliance regulations have gone too far in policing professional social media? Let’s get a conversation going in the comments section.

Inevitably, I am confident we can all agree that the role social media has played in our personal and professional lives has been astounding. Over the years compliance staff have had to endure this significant change in the workplace and have worked to determine how best or even if they should monitor social media interactions of their firm’s employees. Regulators have seen this impact and now provide insight into how firms should curb and supervise social media use.

FINRA has been releasing notices relating to social media for a few years and most recently this past April. The notices are in Q&A format and give us a better understanding of FINRA rules and expectations regarding the rapidly changing digital communication landscape. I have included links to each of the three FINRA notices for your reading pleasure:

Regulatory Notice 17-18. April 2017
Regulatory Notice 11-39. August 2011
Regulatory Notice 10-06. January 2010

The FINRA notice released in April contained twelve Q&As which I have summarized and compiled in a friendly block format below. I also added my own two cents because what is a consulting article without your favorite consultant’s feedback? Cheeky, I know. I hope you find the way I have summarized and organized the data suitable for your business needs. Feel free to leave your comments and questions.

CRC table v2

Thank you for reading! If you would like a Word copy emailed to you for easier reference please feel free to reach out to me directly at lcolpas@compliance-risk.com.


ABOUT LILIAN COLPASLilian Colpas
Lilian Colpas is an accomplished compliance professional with over 12 years of global compliance experience. Lilian provides consulting services to SEC and state-registered investment advisers and conducts AML independent reviews for broker/dealers. Previously, Lilian held roles as a compliance officer for Davidson Kempner, Harding Loevner and AIG Global Investments (now PineBridge).


1 “Ongoing” means: (a) the link is continuously available to investors who visit the firm’s site; (b) investors have access to the linked site whether or not it contains favorable material about the firm; and (c) the linked site could be updated or changed by the independent third-party and investors would nonetheless be able to use the link.
2 Native Advertising is defined a content that bears a similarity to the news, feature articles, product reviews, entertainment and other material that surrounds it online.
3 See: FTC’s Enforcement Policy Statement on Deceptively Formatted Advertisements, December 22, 2015
4 Rule 2210(d)(6), states that: (A) If any testimonial in a communication concerns a technical aspect of investing, the person making the testimonial must have the knowledge and experience to form a valid opinion. (B) Retail communications or correspondence providing any testimonial concerning the investment advice or investment performance of a member or its products must prominently disclose the following: (i) The fact that the testimonial may not be representative of the experience of other customers. (ii) The fact that the testimonial is no guarantee of future performance or success. (iii) If more than $100 in value is paid for the testimonial, the fact that it is a paid testimonial.

The post Turning Up The Heat on Social Media Regulation appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Best Practices for Managing Conflicts of Interest [Webinar] https://compliance-risk.com/best-practices-managing-conflicts-interest-webinar/ Wed, 26 Jul 2017 00:59:18 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5874

  If your firm is struggling with the management and analysis of conflicts of interest, […]

The post Best Practices for Managing Conflicts of Interest [Webinar] appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

 

If your firm is struggling with the management and analysis of conflicts of interest, learn from a leading industry expert about how to begin to tackle the challenge.

Join Protegent, Compliance Risk Concepts, and your peers for an hour-long webinar, sharing experiences and lessons learned in helping firms transform from manual-based conflicts reviews, to automated and efficient technology-driven processes.

Date: August 2, 2017
Time: 2:00 pm EST.

REGISTER HERE

During the webinar, you’ll learn:

  • How conflicts arise
  • How firms address conflicts today
  • The regulatory landscape – recent real-world lessons
  • Best practices for meeting the challenge
    Register today and learn how to address the challenge of managing conflicts of interest.

The post Best Practices for Managing Conflicts of Interest [Webinar] appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Summer Fun and Q3 Federal Filings For Investment Advisers https://compliance-risk.com/summer-fun-q3-federal-filings/ Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:39:23 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5839

As the second quarter of 2017 draws to a close we’ve put graduations behind us […]

The post Summer Fun and Q3 Federal Filings For Investment Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

As the second quarter of 2017 draws to a close we’ve put graduations behind us and for some of us, we eagerly await the start of summer camp, others plan day trips to the beach (raise your hand if you are going to the Jersey shore), invite friends for the inevitable BBQs that, for some, may result in burnt veggies and burgers… don’t tell my husband I said that.

Amidst the start of our summer fun let’s not forget our federal filing obligations due in the third quarter (sorry to quash your summer dreams). The sooner you start gathering the data required for these filings the easier it will be for you when the filings are due.

Download Summer Fun and Q3 Federal Filing Requirements Guide

For guidelines on the 2017 Q3 federal filing requirements download Lilian Colpas' Summer Fun and Q3 Federal Filings for Investment Advisers:

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


Lilian Colpas

ABOUT LILIAN COLPAS
Lilian Colpas is an accomplished compliance professional with over 12 years of global compliance experience. Lilian provides consulting services to SEC and state-registered investment advisers and conducts AML independent reviews for broker/dealers. Previously, Lilian held roles as a compliance officer for Davidson Kempner, Harding Loevner and AIG Global Investments (now PineBridge).

The post Summer Fun and Q3 Federal Filings For Investment Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
WTF? Why are You Such a Fiduciary? https://compliance-risk.com/wtf-why-are-you-such-a-fiduciary/ Fri, 09 Jun 2017 16:45:20 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5782 brown-fiduciary

BULLETIN: The Department of Labor (DOL) Fiduciary Rule Spotlight On Talent: Scott Brown, Senior Consultant at Compliance […]

The post WTF? Why are You Such a Fiduciary? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
brown-fiduciary

BULLETIN: The Department of Labor (DOL) Fiduciary Rule

Spotlight On Talent: Scott Brown, Senior Consultant at Compliance Risk Concepts
The Department of Labor (DOL) Fiduciary Rule, was originally scheduled to be phased in over the period encompassing April 10, 2017 – January 1, 2018, but is now to be phased in starting June 9, 2017 including a transition period for the applicability of certain exemptions to the rule extending through Jan. 1, 2018.

In his compliance bulletin WTF? Why are You Such A Fiduciary?, Scott Brown discusses who is defined as a fiduciary, the sort of investments the rule impacts and best practices during the transition period (June 9, 2017 to January 1, 2018).
brown-fiduciary

Download WTF? Why are You Such a Fiduciary?

To stay on top of the Department of Labor (DOL) Fiduciary Rule, enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Scott Brown's WTF? Why are You Such a Fiduciary?.

Sending

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds


ABOUT SCOTT BROWNscott-brown

Prior to joining Compliance Risk Concepts, Mr. Brown was employed as a Principal Examiner at FINRA from 2005 to 2016. Mr. Brown’s responsibilities at FINRA included sales practice and financial examinations of member firms. Sales practice examinations entailed detailed reviews of member firms’ systems of supervision and control, reviews of policies governing marketing and sales of financial products and services (equities, mutual funds, corporate and municipal debt), and detailed reviews of broker-dealers’ anti-money laundering compliance programs. Financial Examinations involved verification of the accuracy of General Ledgers, Trial Balances, Income Statements, Balance Sheets, Net Capital Computations and FOCUS Filings for a diverse universe of broker-dealers.

The post WTF? Why are You Such a Fiduciary? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Webinar: Establishing A Regulatory-Proof Broker/Dealer Compliance Program https://compliance-risk.com/crc-webinar-establishing-regulatory-proof-brokerdealer-compliance-program/ Wed, 31 May 2017 17:22:02 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5748 a-regulatory-proof-broker

Thank you to all who attended the June 20th webinar, Establishing A Regulatory-Proof Broker/Dealer Compliance […]

The post Webinar: Establishing A Regulatory-Proof Broker/Dealer Compliance Program appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
a-regulatory-proof-broker


Thank you to all who attended the June 20th webinar, Establishing A Regulatory-Proof Broker/Dealer Compliance Program in which Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Partner at Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) and Kristi Kuhn, Senior Solutions Consultant at ProcessUnity discussed the necessary components of establishing and maintaining the necessary infrastructure to support and scale a best-in-class broker-dealer system of supervision.

Attendees learned about PaCE – Policy and Controls Environment, a brand new offering from Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”) that has been specifically created by a team of former industry leading CCOs to address the needs of firms that have been historically underserved and priced out of much needed technology solutions. Participants in this webinar learned about the following PaCE features:

  • Policies and Procedures Management
  • Forms and Certifications Management
  • Incident Management and Escalation Workflows
  • Integrated Compliance Calendar
  • Professional Services and Ongoing Support

Request Webinar Recording or Slides

To request a copy of the Establishing A Regulatory-Proof Broker/Dealer Compliance Program webinar recording or download the slides, please enter your information below:

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


Presenters:

mitch-avnetMitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts
Mitch Avnet is the founder and Managing Partner of CRC LLC. Mitch is responsible for business development, relationship management and overseeing the execution of all client driven / business focused Compliance and Ethics Risk Management strategic engagements.

 

 

 

Kristi KuhnKristi Kuhn, Senior Solutions Consultant, ProcessUnity
Kristi Kuhn is a Senior Solutions Consultant at ProcessUnity. Kristi has more than 12 years experience delivering governance, risk and compliance solutions to organizations of all sizes.

 

 

Moderated by:

Lilian ColpasLilian Colpas, Senior Compliance Officer, Compliance Risk Concepts
Lilian Colpas is an accomplished compliance professional with over 12 years of global compliance experience. Lilian provides consulting services to SEC and state-registered investment advisers and conducts AML independent reviews for broker/dealers. Previously, Lilian held roles as a compliance officer for Davidson Kempner, Harding Loevner and AIG Global Investments (now PineBridge).

The post Webinar: Establishing A Regulatory-Proof Broker/Dealer Compliance Program appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Webinar - Risk, Mitigation and Insurance Issues for Investment Advisers https://compliance-risk.com/webinar-risk-mitigation-insurance-issues-investment-advisers/ Tue, 18 Apr 2017 16:56:05 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5730 IAA2017WebinarBanner2

  Mitch Avnet to present at upcoming IAA 2017 webinar series, Risk, Mitigation and Insurance […]

The post Webinar - Risk, Mitigation and Insurance Issues for Investment Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
IAA2017WebinarBanner2

 

Mitch Avnet to present at upcoming IAA 2017 webinar series, Risk, Mitigation and Insurance Issues for Investment Advisers.

Investment advisers face constant challenges to stay current and comply with new and changing regulations in an evolving market place. This webinar will help advisers to better understand these regulations and how they may reduce or mitigate certain risks with insurance.

Date: May 4, 2017
Time: 2:00 pm - 3:15 pm EST.

REGISTER HERE

Registration for the live webinar closes on Wednesday, May 3, at noon ET. IAA Members and IAA Associate Members: The live webinar and a link to the recording are complimentary. (Registrations made on or before May 3 at noon ET are automatically registered for both the live webinar and the recording.)

Presenters:

  • Mitch Avnet, founder and Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts, LLC
  • Lilian A. Morvay, JD, Underwriting & Risk Management Consultant––Professional Liability
  • Amir Tadjedin, Partner, Markun Zusman Freniere and Compton, LLP
  • Paul D. Glenn, Special Counsel, Investment Adviser Association, Moderator

 

The post Webinar - Risk, Mitigation and Insurance Issues for Investment Advisers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Part 3 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? https://compliance-risk.com/part-3-3-2017-secs-priorities/ Mon, 13 Mar 2017 13:19:44 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5621 what-are-the-secs-priorities

Assessing Market-Wide Risks Spotlight On Talent: Portia Amato, Compliance Officer  This is the third installment […]

The post Part 3 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
what-are-the-secs-priorities

Assessing Market-Wide Risks

Spotlight On Talent: Portia Amato, Compliance Officer 

This is the third installment of our 3-part series, It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities?, in which we discuss the 2017 examination priorities of the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

This year the SEC priorities are organized around three thematic areas: 1) Examining matters of importance to retail investors; 2) Focusing on risks specific to elderly and retiring investors and 3) Assessing market-wide risks.

part3-ty-download

In this third and final article, we take a look at the SEC’s third focus initiative, “Assessing Market-Wide Risks”.

Download Part 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities?

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Part 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? Assessing Market-Wide Risks.

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


Portia AmatoABOUT PORTIA AMATO
Portia Amato is a seasoned Compliance Officer, having over 18 years of investment management experience. Over the course of her career, Portia has specialized in compliance, operations and client services for investment advisors and top tier investment banks. Portia also successfully helped to launched two wrap-fee programs for New York Life Investment Management and US Trust

The post Part 3 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Pro-Tip: Lowering Your Research Costs https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-pro-tip-lowering-research-costs/ Tue, 28 Feb 2017 14:51:43 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5612 lower-research-costs

Looking for an easy way to lower the operating costs of your Research Department? Consider […]

The post Compliance Pro-Tip: Lowering Your Research Costs appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
lower-research-costs

Looking for an easy way to lower the operating costs of your Research Department? Consider outsourcing your Supervisory Analyst function. Chances are, you can save quite a bit. And with CRC, you won’t sacrifice an ounce of speed or quality.

Full-time SAs often encounter significant periods of downtime. That downtime, of course, is downright expensive. Aside from direct compensation, a full-time employee will likely command a benefits package, occupy company real estate and require attention from other company support areas like HR and IT. Fortunately, there’s a more reasonable alternative – retaining an on-call SA through CRC.

jeanine-oberachyWhen considering a Compliance Advisory firm like CRC, experience is key. CRC’s Supervisory Analyst practice is led by Ms. Jeanine Oburchay who is fully qualified by license (Series 7, 24 and 87) and has the know-how to immediately make a positive impact on both your product quality and your bottom line. As a veteran of more than 17 years on Wall Street, primarily as a sell-side research analyst covering equities and convertibles, Jeanine is well-versed in all aspects of a Research Department’s mission and operational flow. Jeanine had also served as a registered SA with Wachovia Securities where she was responsible for reviewing and approving research reports for a department that published daily morning calls, weekly research publications, new initiations of coverage and timely market responses. Jeanine earned her BS in Finance and her MA in Public Communications from Fordham University and her MBA from Pace University.

All too often, SAs tend to stick to a single function – reviewing and approving research reports. CRC’s SA services, though, can also:

  • assist your firm’s compliance with documenting and retaining records of analyst public appearances;
  • chaperone interactions between your analysts and your firm’s investment banking or trading personnel;
  • oversee issuer pre-publication fact-checking exercises; and
  • manage periodic analyst certification requirements (e.g., quarterly Reg AC).

Budgeting for a research department of any size can be a costly prospect. Retaining an outsourced SA will free up resources to redirect toward more productive pursuits such as hiring additional publishing analysts or growing the size of your compensation pool. Or, of course, you can simply save the extra cash and take credit for a budget triumph.

CRC’s SA services can help you cut costs, increase efficiencies and improve your research product. For a more detailed description of CRC’s full array of services and of its professional staff contact, David Amster, Principal and Head of CRC’s Fund and Dealer Advisory practice at 917-568-6470.

The post Compliance Pro-Tip: Lowering Your Research Costs appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Part 2 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? https://compliance-risk.com/part-2-2017-secs-priorities-3-part-series/ Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:11:03 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5583

Risks Specific To Senior Investors and Retirement Investments Spotlight On Talent: Portia Amato, Compliance Officer  […]

The post Part 2 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Risks Specific To Senior Investors and Retirement Investments

Spotlight On Talent: Portia Amato, Compliance Officer 

Now that we have examined the SECs’ focus on Retail Investors (Part 1: It’s 2017, What Are the SEC’s Priorities?), it is time to turn our attention to the OCIE’s 2nd focus area: Risks specific to Senior Investors and Retirement Investments as well as a few other initiatives on the 2017 Priority List.

Download Part 2: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities?

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Portia Amato's Part 2: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? Risks Specific To Senior Investors and Retirement Investments.

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


Portia AmatoABOUT PORTIA AMATO
Portia Amato is a seasoned Compliance Officer, having over 18 years of investment management experience. Over the course of her career, Portia has specialized in compliance, operations and client services for investment advisors and top tier investment banks. Portia also successfully helped to launched two wrap-fee programs for New York Life Investment Management and US Trust

The post Part 2 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Part 1 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-bulletin-2017-secs-priorities/ Fri, 27 Jan 2017 20:45:54 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5551 2017-sec-600-2

Examining matters of importance to retail investors Spotlight On Talent: Portia Amato, Compliance Officer  By […]

The post Part 1 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
2017-sec-600-2

Examining matters of importance to retail investors

Spotlight On Talent: Portia Amato, Compliance Officer 

By now, every CCO and their team have asked themselves this question, and if you have not already, this is the time to do so, especially if you have not been the lucky host to a SEC Audit in some time.

The Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has released their list of priorities for the year and it is covering a lot of ground. They did break it down into three focus areas:

1) Examining matters of importance to retail investors
2) Focusing on risks specific to elderly and retiring investors
3) Assessing market-wide risks

Compliance Bulletin: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities?
In this first part of a three-part series, Portia Amato reviews the first focus area, Examining Matters of Importance to Retail Investors, including the subtopics and how Registered Investment Advisors (RIA’s) and Broker Dealers (BD’s) alike can tackle these matters should the SEC pay a visit.

Download Compliance Bulletin: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities?

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Portia Amato's Compliance Bulletin: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities?

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


Portia AmatoABOUT PORTIA AMATO
Portia Amato is a seasoned Compliance Officer, having over 18 years of investment management experience. Over the course of her career, Portia has specialized in compliance, operations and client services for investment advisors and top tier investment banks. Portia also successfully helped to launched two wrap-fee programs for New York Life Investment Management and US Trust

The post Part 1 of 3: It's 2017, What Are The SEC’s Priorities? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Bulletin: FINRA 2017 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter https://compliance-risk.com/bulletin-finra-2017-regulatory-examination-priorities-letter/ Tue, 17 Jan 2017 20:56:12 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5516

Sometimes, Being Two-Faced is a Good Thing… Spotlight On Talent: David Amster, Principal and Head […]

The post Bulletin: FINRA 2017 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Sometimes, Being Two-Faced is a Good Thing…

Spotlight On Talent: David Amster, Principal and Head of Fund and Dealer Advisory

On January 1, 153 B.C., Rome was the site of the first recorded new year’s celebration during which Romans paid tribute to Janus – January’s namesake and the Roman god of beginnings and endings. Janus had two faces, one looking forward and one looking back. Taking a cue from Janus and in keeping with its own New Year’s tradition, FINRA looks both back on the past and forward toward the future with its annual Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter. As always, it’s a particularly useful tool that offers a straightforward glimpse into the collective mindset of FINRA’s senior leadership. CRC strongly advises its clients (and all other member firms, for that matter) to heed FINRA’s counsel and to apply critical thought to those areas of the letter that are relevant to their firm’s business lines and operations.

Download Compliance Bulletin

David Amster offers key takeaways from FINRA’s annual dispatch. Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Sometimes, Being Two-Faced is a Good Thing… FINRA 2017 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter:

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Bulletin: FINRA 2017 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Anti-Bribery Regulation and Enforcement: Are Things About to Change? https://compliance-risk.com/anti-bribery-regulation-enforcement-things-change/ Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:41:48 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5478

Spotlight On Talent: Dan Dorsky, Principal and Head of Anti-Corruption and Ethics These are fascinating […]

The post Anti-Bribery Regulation and Enforcement: Are Things About to Change? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Spotlight On Talent: Dan Dorsky, Principal and Head of Anti-Corruption and Ethics

These are fascinating times for U.S. and global enforcement of anti-bribery laws. More resources are being dedicated, more countries are participating, and the resulting outcomes have been extraordinary fines and penalties, along with enhanced risk of individual criminal prosecutions. Concurrently, the recent U.S. election may signal an inflection point; Mr. Trump has in the past spoken critically of the FCPA and he is now in a position to potentially act on those sentiments.

 

So where does that leave us? Will hindsight prove 2016 to be the high water mark for anti-bribery enforcement, or can we expect continuing and increased enforcement?

Let’s begin with a very abbreviated look at the current state. 2016 witnessed truly mammoth enforcement actions: VimpelCom suffered a $795 million penalty (split between Dutch and U.S. authorities), Teva Pharmaceuticals $519 million, Och Ziff $412 million, J.P. Morgan $264 million, and it has been reported that Telia Company may pay up to $1.4 billion. Perhaps of even greater significance, the biggest fine in history was recently announced; Odebrecht and its unit Braskem will pay a combined $3.5 billion (or perhaps a billion dollars more, depending on their ability to pay without going bankrupt). Notably, only $160 million of that amount will go to the U.S. The rest will be paid to enforcement authorities in Brazil and Switzerland. In a continuing trend, non-U.S. attention to anti-bribery laws is markedly increasing in several additional countries, such as France and Israel (Israel and Britain also made some notable arrests of corporate executives).

In this bulletin, Dan Dorsky shares his analysis of the potential impact of the Trump administration on these trends.

Download Compliance Bulletin

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Dan Dorsky's' Compliance Bulletin: Anti-Bribery Regulation and Enforcement: Are Things About to Change?

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


dan-dorskyABOUT DAN DORSKY
Mr. Dorsky is a former Assistant United States Attorney in both the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, and a former Chief Compliance Officer for an S&P 500 company.

The post Anti-Bribery Regulation and Enforcement: Are Things About to Change? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Out With The Old...In With The New https://compliance-risk.com/out-with-the-old-in-with-the-new/ Thu, 05 Jan 2017 21:38:43 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5459 out-with-old

COMPLIANCE BULLETIN: OUT WITH THE OLD...IN WITH THE NEW Spotlight On Talent: Lilian Colpas, Senior […]

The post Out With The Old...In With The New appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
out-with-old

COMPLIANCE BULLETIN: OUT WITH THE OLD...IN WITH THE NEW
Spotlight On Talent: Lilian Colpas, Senior Compliance Consultant

Why is January 1 different from all other days of the year? After all, nothing fundamentally really changes. Nevertheless, most of us see January 1 as a new beginning in which we resolve to renew ourselves and discard undesirable traits. As you return to work from the long holiday weekend what will you resolve for 2017?

As an adviser, the annual compliance review requirement imposed by Rule 206(4)7, or the “compliance rule”, should be a fundamental part of your New Year’s resolution. The goal of 206(4)7 is to ensure your policies and procedures are adequate for your business model, therefore, you should assess each policy ever year to identify what is working and what is not working.

In this bulletin, Lilian Colpas discusses the importance of the annual compliance review and the SEC’s recommended topics that advisers should be addressing as part of their compliance program.

Download Compliance Bulletin

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Lilian Colpas' Compliance Bulletin: Out With The Old...In With The New.

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


Lilian ColpasABOUT LILIAN COLPAS
Lilian Colpas is an accomplished compliance professional with over 12 years of global compliance experience, most recently as compliance officer for Harding Loevner in Bridgewater, NJ. Previously, Lilian held roles as a compliance officer for Davidson Kempner Capital Management and AIG Global Investments (now PineBridge Investments). Lilian also worked as a paralegal for Sidley Austin Brown and Wood and AIG.

The post Out With The Old...In With The New appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Information Governance Financial Regulatory Compliance Roundtable https://compliance-risk.com/information-governance-financial-regulatory-compliance-roundtable/ Thu, 15 Dec 2016 01:12:14 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5362 hpe-roundtable

Join the Hewlett Packard Enterprise solution team and Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) at the HPE […]

The post Information Governance Financial Regulatory Compliance Roundtable appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
hpe-roundtable

Join the Hewlett Packard Enterprise solution team and Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) at the HPE Information Governance Financial Regulatory Compliance Roundtable.

Date: Wednesday, January 25, 2017
Time: 12:00 pm - 3:30 pm ET (full lunch served with happy hour after)
Location: The Lambs Club, 132 W. 44th St., NY NY 10036

REGISTER-NOW

 

This informal meeting will look at how HPE solutions are transforming enterprise content management practices to help our customers achieve their information security, privacy and governance objectives. In this age of mobility, cloud, digital transformation and global transparency, balancing productivity with information security and compliance is increasingly tricky – but it doesn’t have to be. Today, there is a new paradigm of regulatory expectations, creating increasingly daunting compliance and operational risk management challenges. Many of these challenges relate to the data that is reported to ensure organizations continue to meet the ever expanding list of ongoing regulatory and compliance requirements. Our discussion will focus on common challenges and issues impacting Compliance Departments, such as:

  • Regulatory Scrutiny, Fines and Sanctions
  • Handling Massive Volumes of Data
  • Managing Across Bifurcated and Disparate Systems and Platforms
  • Operating in Manual Environments
  • Moving Forward: Understanding Your Internal Processes and Effecting Change

You will learn how HPE customers meet their Information Governance legal and regulatory responsibilities leveraging automated analytics and classification.

Guest Speaker: Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts
HPE Speaker: Rich Lauwers, Information Governance and Management Subject Matter Expert, Hewlett Packard Enterprise

The post Information Governance Financial Regulatory Compliance Roundtable appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
You’ve Established The Tone At The Top – Do You Know The Mood In The Middle? https://compliance-risk.com/youve-established-tone-top-know-mood-middle/ Mon, 28 Nov 2016 16:57:46 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5301

COMPLIANCE BULLETIN: SEC WHISTLEBLOWER REGULATIONS Spotlight On Talent: Lilian Colpas, Senior Compliance Consultant The most […]

The post You’ve Established The Tone At The Top – Do You Know The Mood In The Middle? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

COMPLIANCE BULLETIN: SEC WHISTLEBLOWER REGULATIONS
Spotlight On Talent: Lilian Colpas, Senior Compliance Consultant

The most recent SEC announcement by OCIE correlates to the point that whistleblowers have an incentive to earn millions of dollars from your ineffective compliance program. The SEC has monetary incentives to draw out these employees and expose the trials and tribulations of your firm. If your firm is not in compliance with the SEC’s whistleblower regulations, Rule 21F-17, you could face enforcement action.

Lilian Colpas, examines the current rhetoric surrounding SEC’s whistleblower regulations and the SEC’s expectation of registered advisers and their compliance with the whistleblower rule.

Download Compliance Bulletin

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Lilian Colpas' Compliance Bulletin: You’ve Established The Tone At The Top –  Do You Know The Mood In The Middle?.

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


Lilian ColpasABOUT LILIAN COLPAS
Lilian Colpas is an accomplished compliance professional with over 12 years of global compliance experience, most recently as compliance officer for Harding Loevner in Bridgewater, NJ. Previously, Lilian held roles as a compliance officer for Davidson Kempner Capital Management and AIG Global Investments (now PineBridge Investments). Lilian also worked as a paralegal for Sidley Austin Brown and Wood and AIG.

The post You’ve Established The Tone At The Top – Do You Know The Mood In The Middle? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Broker Dealers, Don’t Be A Turkey. Complete Your Year-End Requirements! https://compliance-risk.com/broker-dealers-dont-turkey-complete-year-end-requirements/ Fri, 18 Nov 2016 17:20:35 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5237 dont-be-a-turkey

With the end of 2016 just days away, 2017 will be here before you know […]

The post Broker Dealers, Don’t Be A Turkey. Complete Your Year-End Requirements! appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
dont-be-a-turkey

With the end of 2016 just days away, 2017 will be here before you know it! As former Chief Compliance Officers, CRC completely understands year-end pressures for FINRA registered broker-dealers and the need / importance of executing and completing mandatory annual Compliance requirements.

Over the last several years, we’ve assisted many Broker-Dealers in completing each of the discrete tasks identified below.   Additionally, we have helped many broker-dealers through their cycle exams in 2016 and have a very clear understanding of FINRA’s hot button items, which continue to include cyber-security, Retention of Books and Records and Business Resiliency.

Increasingly, more and more firms are turning to external third parties to conduct year-end reviews.   It eliminates the appearance and perception of potential conflicts of interest – as firm’s remove the individuals that are responsible for the execution of the programs throughout the year from the actual testing being done – creating a true independent review of the state of play within an organization.

Based on the above, CRC provides our clients with a cost-effective approach to execute any / all of the requirements below.   We remove the “pricing barrier” – by providing “modular” approaches that enable our clients to truly benefit from our significant knowledge base and expertise.

• FINRA 3120 / 3130 Annual Testing of Supervisory Controls / CEO Certification

Annually, FINRA member broker-dealers are required to test and verify the adequacy of their supervisory program, and the CEOs are required to certify their awareness of the program’s state.

As part of the annual review, firms should identify and discuss the impact of “hot topic” industry issues on their respective organizations.   For instance, WORM Storage / Books and Records is an area that firms’ should consider assessing as part of their 2016 Annual Testing Program.

In 2016, we continued to see FINRA assess electronic storage of Books and Records within Broker-Dealers.   While many of us have grown accustomed to having our electronic communications stored in WORM Format (Write Once, Read Many) – there are several types of records within a broker-dealer that FINRA will assess to understand the mechanism in which these records are being stored and whether or not there is adequate business resiliency in place if / when these records should need to be accessed.

Based on the above, firms’ should proactively consider the best way to assess / measure their internal record retention requirements and ensure they have appropriate documentation and controls in place to evidence oversight and compliance with SEC Rule 17a-4. (Records to be Maintained by a Broker-Dealer).

The annual review may offer a practical way for firms’ to assess this discrete risk – as part of their overall assessment of the state of compliance and supervision within their respective organizations.

• SEC Rule 17a-5 – Annual Compliance Report

SEC Rule 17a-5 requires broker-dealers that did not claim exemption from Rule 15c3-3 throughout the most recent fiscal year to prepare and file an annual report on compliance, and internal control over compliance, with certain financial responsibility rules (“FRRs”), specifically the Net Capital Rule (Rule 15c3-1), Customer Protection Rule (Rule 15c3-3), Quarterly Security Count Rule (Rule 17a-13), and Account Statement Rules.

The compliance report must include statements as to whether:

  1. The broker-dealer has established and maintained internal control over compliance
  2. The internal control over compliance of the broker-dealer was effective during the most recent fiscal year
  3. The internal control over compliance of the broker-dealer was effective as of the end of the most recent fiscal year
  4. The broker-dealer was in compliance with Rule 15c3-1 and paragraph (e) of Rule 15c3-3 as of the end of the most recent fiscal year
  5. The information the broker-dealer used to state whether it was in compliance with Rule 15c3-1 and paragraph (e) of Rule 15c3-3 was derived from the books and records of the broker-dealer

Impacted Broker-Dealers will also be required to engage their independent registered public accountant to examine the broker-dealer’s statements (2) through (5), above, in its compliance report.

Following PCAOB standards, the independent registered public accountant would issue a report based on that examination.

• Independent Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) Test / Review:

Every broker-dealer is required to perform an annual review of their Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Program (“AMLCP”). This review must be undertaken by a qualified individual that has a strong working knowledge of the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”).

The review can be performed by an outside consultant or someone employed by the firm. However, it cannot be performed by the Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officer (“AMLCO”) or someone that reports to the AMLCO.
As an FYI – FINRA allows firms that do not have any customers / customer accounts to perform this review once every two years.

• Written Supervisory Procedures (“WSPs”) Review

As part of its responsibilities under FINRA Rule 3012, a Firm must ensure that all business areas and new regulatory requirements are sufficiently addressed in its annual review of WSPs.

• Continuing Education

All FINRA member firms must complete their Firm and Regulatory Element Continuing Education obligations by year-end.

• Branch Office Reviews

FINRA member firms must perform inspections of all offices of supervisory jurisdiction (“OSJs”) and branch offices that supervise one or more non-branch locations on an annual basis. Each branch office that does not supervise non-branch locations must be inspected at least once every three years.

• Annual Compliance Meeting

All FINRA member firms are required to complete an annual compliance meeting (“ACM”). Although all registered representatives and principals are required to be present, an interactive internet based “ACM on Demand” approach is acceptable in most circumstances.

• Registrations and Renewals

Broker Dealers have until December 16th, 2016 to pay their Preliminary Renewal Account. Failure to pay by the deadline may endanger a firm’s ability to do business in jurisdictions in which it has previously done business. Although there are a number of ways to pay, firms need to ensure that there are sufficient funds in their CRD Daily Account.

HOW CAN CRC HELP?

An independent review conducted by longstanding industry professionals, reconciling your current “state of compliance” is the most effective way to ascertain your program’s status and ensure your firm continues to meet its ongoing regulatory requirements. A great deal of regulatory intelligence is required to demonstrate an organization’s understanding of its regulatory obligations (both existing and newly enacted).

At CRC, we strive to do more than perform a “check the box” review – we strive to partner. Our team of former Chief Compliance Officers (“CCOs”) and Regulators not only provide key insights into what is required of your firm, but assist your firm by executing seamlessly, helping to build a stronger program- one that your management team and regulators can have confidence in.

Please contact us for help on any of the items identified above / or for a full review / assessment of your broker-dealer’s compliance and supervisory system.
Let CRC help you turn your risk into reward.

The post Broker Dealers, Don’t Be A Turkey. Complete Your Year-End Requirements! appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Risk Concepts NYC Headquarters Is Moving https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-risk-concepts-nyc-headquarters-moving/ Tue, 08 Nov 2016 16:05:58 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5222 moving-boxes-address

  It is with great enthusiasm that Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) is proud to announce […]

The post Compliance Risk Concepts NYC Headquarters Is Moving appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
moving-boxes-address

 

It is with great enthusiasm that Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) is proud to announce that we are moving our NYC headquarters. The continued loyalty from our clients has fueled our remarkable growth, making a new location the next exciting step.

On November 15th, CRC will occupy the 11th Floor of 441 Lexington Avenue. Our state-of-the-art space will provide us the infrastructure to continue to scale our operations, including top of line video conferencing capabilities and world-class client meeting / conference rooms.

We’ve been lucky enough to work with the best clients a business could hope for. Many thanks for your loyal support through the years, and cheers to continuing these valued relationships in the future.

The post Compliance Risk Concepts NYC Headquarters Is Moving appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Bulletin: Hedge Fund Rocked By Bribery Investigation By Dan Dorsky https://compliance-risk.com/hedge-fund-rocked-bribery-investigation/ Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:44:03 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5176 dan-dorsky-open-bulletin

by Dan Dorsky, Principal, Anti-Corruption and Ethics Practice. An enforcement action jarring the financial services […]

The post Bulletin: Hedge Fund Rocked By Bribery Investigation By Dan Dorsky appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
dan-dorsky-open-bulletin

by Dan Dorsky, Principal, Anti-Corruption and Ethics Practice.

An enforcement action jarring the financial services sector has been resolved. Och-Ziff Capital Management Group LLC agreed to pay a combined penalty of $412 million towards its settlement with the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”) related to the agencies’ Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) investigation into bribery activity in Africa. It is a criminal violation of the FCPA to provide anything of value to a non-U.S. government official in exchange for a business advantage. According to Och-Ziff’s August Form 10-Q, this resolution “could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition or results of operations.”

The settlement, announced on September 29, 2016, represents the culmination of a long-simmering investigation launched in 2011. At that time, the SEC began issuing subpoenas into the conduct of multiple financial services businesses concerning their dealings with sovereign wealth funds. In other words, the government appears to have been concerned that banks, investment firms, private equity and/or hedge funds may have provided benefits to employees of these sovereign wealth funds in exchange for business.

Dan Dorsky, examines the SEC's order in the matter of Och-Ziff Capital Management Group LLC and discusses what this settlement means to the hedge fund giant and the industry.

Download Hedge Fund Rocked By Bribery Investigation

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of Dan Dorsky's Bulletin: Hedge Fund Rocked By Bribery Investigation

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds


ABOUT DAN DORSKY

dan-dorsky-bwMr. Dorsky’s background combines public service in the Department of Justice and work in the corporate sector as well as service in private practice and in the nonprofit sector. He has represented companies in dealings with the DOJ and the Securities and Exchange Commission in arriving at favorable resolutions.

Mr. Dorsky served as Senior Compliance Counsel at Tyco where, as part of the post-Dennis Kozlowski clean-up effort over a five-year period, he developed and implemented global compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The company’s highly successful resolution with the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission resulted in a Non-Prosecution agreement and no monitor. After the merger of Tyco’s Flow Control Division with Pentair, Mr. Dorsky most recently served as Pentair’s Vice President and Chief Compliance Officer, where he brought its Flow Control division to a successful resolution of its three-year period of self-reporting to the DOJ under Tyco’s FCPA settlement.

At Tyco, he led and oversaw global investigations, and helped conceive and drive the implementation of state-of-the-art compliance initiatives, such as Tyco’s groundbreaking Third Party Management Program. Click here to learn more about Mr. Dorsky.

The post Bulletin: Hedge Fund Rocked By Bribery Investigation By Dan Dorsky appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Dan Dorsky To Lead Anti-Corruption And Ethics Practice At Compliance Risk Concepts https://compliance-risk.com/dan-dorsky-lead-anti-corruption-ethics-practice-compliance-risk-concepts/ Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:42:00 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5157 dan-dorsky-bw

NEW YORK, Oct. 25, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- Expanding its scope of compliance specialties to Anti-Corruption […]

The post Dan Dorsky To Lead Anti-Corruption And Ethics Practice At Compliance Risk Concepts appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
dan-dorsky-bw

NEW YORK, Oct. 25, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- Expanding its scope of compliance specialties to Anti-Corruption and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act resolution, Compliance Risk Concepts LLC (CRC) today announced the hire of Daniel Dorsky as Principal of its Anti-Corruption and Ethics Practice. "CRC is excited to expand its services to advise clients on best practices and solutions for the Anti-Corruption and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, with the notable addition of Dan Dorsky," said Mitch Avnet, CEO and Managing Partner of Compliance Risk Concepts. Mr. Avnet continues, "His broad experience combines corporate compliance dealing with complex issues and service as a prosecutor. With an in-the-trenches perspective from both sides, Dan will prove invaluable in guiding clients during all stages -- before the emergence of compliance violations, during a regulatory agency audit, and throughout the resolution of any issues." Mr. Dorsky served as Senior Compliance Counsel at Tyco where, as part of the post-Dennis Kozlowski clean-up effort over a five-year period, he developed and implemented global compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The company's highly successful resolution with the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission resulted in a Non-Prosecution agreement and no monitor. After the merger of Tyco's Flow Control Division with Pentair, Mr. Dorsky most recently served as Pentair's Vice President and Chief Compliance Officer, where he brought its Flow Control division to a successful resolution of its three-year period of self-reporting to the DOJ under Tyco's FCPA settlement. Prior to serving at Tyco and then Pentair, Mr. Dorsky was Compliance Counsel at HBO. Before that, he served as an Assistant United States Attorney at the Department of Justice, for both the Southern District of New York and the Eastern District of New York. At DOJ, he focused on complex criminal investigations and prosecutions of white collar crime and tax fraud, among other areas. Mr. Dorsky made material contributions to the effort to dismantle organized crime in New York, including twice prosecuting the legendary boss of the Genovese Crime Family, Vincent "the Chin" Gigante. He was recognized with two US Department of Justice Director's Awards for Superior Performance. Mr. Dorsky began his legal career as an associate in private practice, later served in a federal clerkship with the Honorable Carol Bagley Amon of the Eastern District of New York, and worked with the American Civil Liberties Union. According to Daniel Dorsky, "CRC offers a unique opportunity to launch a new practice and build Anti-Corruption compliance solutions that tap my corporate and prosecutorial experiences. The complex issues of fraud and compliance affect companies in all industries, from manufacturing to financial services. I look forward to addressing this challenge with my CRC colleagues." In addition, Mr. Dorsky will be an advisor to CRC affiliate, JW Michaels, a leading national executive search firm. Jason Wachtel, Managing Partner of JW Michaels, said, "We are pleased to provide our clients and candidates with direct access to Dan as well as having his valued expertise shared at select client round tables and within white papers. Dan's insights into the exploding world of corruption within compliance are preeminent." According to Wachtel, Mr. Dorsky's involvement with many complicated investigations as a prosecutor will be invaluable background for JW Michaels' vast network of CCOs and clients. Mr. Dorsky graduated from Haverford College in 1985 and received his law degree from New York University School of Law in 1988. He can be reached at ddorsky@compliance-risk.com.


Download Dan Dorsky's Bulletin

Click below to receive a complimentary copy of Dan Dorsky's Bulletin: Hedge Fund Rocked By Bribery Investigation:

dan-dorsky-open-bulletin

The post Dan Dorsky To Lead Anti-Corruption And Ethics Practice At Compliance Risk Concepts appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Who You Callin' A Fiduciary??? https://compliance-risk.com/who-you-callin-a-fiduciary/ Mon, 10 Oct 2016 21:54:08 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5114

COMPLIANCE BULLETIN: DOL FIDUCIARY RULE Spotlight On Talent: David Amster, Principal and Head of Fund […]

The post Who You Callin' A Fiduciary??? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

COMPLIANCE BULLETIN: DOL FIDUCIARY RULE Spotlight On Talent: David Amster, Principal and Head of Fund and Dealer Advisory The United States Department of Labor (“DOL”) recently finalized rules that require financial institutions that offer retirement advice to address conflicts of interest (“COIs”) that arise as a result of offering such advice (the “Fiduciary Rule”). The effective date is April 10, 2017. As one would expect with any new rule of this magnitude, there are potential minefields everywhere. David Amster, examines these minefields and discusses what you need to know about the DOL Fiduciary Rule to stay ahead of the game.

Download Who You Callin' A Fiduciary???

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of David Amster's Who You Callin' A Fiduciary???.

Sending

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds


crc-headshot-amsterABOUT DAVID AMSTER David Amster, Principal and Head of Fund and Dealer Advisory, is responsible for CRC’s business development, client relationship management and for supervising the execution of strategic engagements. David joined CRC in September 2016 from CRT Capital Group LLC, where he served for more than 15 years as Managing Director and Chief Compliance Officer.

The post Who You Callin' A Fiduciary??? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
David J. Amster hired as Principal and Head of its Fund and Dealer Advisory practice https://compliance-risk.com/david-j-amster-hired-principal-head-fund-dealer-advisory-practice/ Mon, 10 Oct 2016 09:00:50 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5101 crc-headshot-amster

  Building on its team of compliance advisory professionals, Compliance Risk Concepts, LLC (CRC) has […]

The post David J. Amster hired as Principal and Head of its Fund and Dealer Advisory practice appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
crc-headshot-amster

 

Building on its team of compliance advisory professionals, Compliance Risk Concepts, LLC (CRC) has hired of David J. Amster as Principal and Head of its Fund and Dealer Advisory practice.

“David’s professionalism and breadth of buy-side and sell-side product knowledge gives him 360-degree awareness of the issues financial services firms confront daily in the marketplace, and will permit him to immediately establish rapport and trust with clients,” said Mitch Avnet, CRC’s CEO and Managing Partner. “He solidifies CRC’s competitive edge in delivering high-quality, cost-effective regulatory advice and solutions to its Investment Advisor and Broker-Dealer clients.”

As leader of CRC’s Fund and Dealer Advisory practice, Mr. Amster will develop new client relationships and also advise on operational matters.

For more than 15 years, Mr. Amster served as a Managing Director and the Chief Compliance Officer of CRT Capital Group LLC’s US broker-dealer unit, CRT’s FCA-registered UK-based dealer affiliate, CRT Capital (UK) Ltd., and CRT’s domestic registered investment advisory affiliate, Harbor Drive Asset Management. During his tenure, CRT Capital Group expanded from a convertible arbitrage and research business to ultimately trade high yield debt, distressed debt, equities, securitized products, treasuries, foreign exchange products and to offer investment banking services.

Earlier in his career, Mr. Amster served as an Associate Director with UBS Investment Bank, LLC’s Fixed Income Capital Markets Compliance Group, where he had senior support responsibilities for the firm’s Primary Dealership, Rates and Repo Desks and as a Securities Examiner in FINRA’s New York District Office. While at FINRA, Mr. Amster led comprehensive on-site examinations of the books, records and operational policies and procedures of bulge bracket New York Stock Exchange member dealers. Mr. Amster began his Wall Street career with Salomon Brothers, Inc. as a Syndicate Coordinator for its Private Investment Department.

Mr. Amster said, “Drawing upon my experience in the capital markets as a participant, supervisor and regulator, I’m eager to identify potential and existing regulatory challenges and to develop corresponding client solutions. My approach comfortably balances sensible regulatory risk mitigation with the practicality demands of front office personnel. CRC is an organization whose compliance professionals offer approaches that are both commercially focused and will stand the test of regulatory scrutiny.”

Mr. Amster graduated from Binghamton University with a BA in Economics and received his MBA in Finance from Fordham University’s Gabelli School of Business.


Download Who You Callin' A Fiduciary???

Click below to receive a complimentary copy of David Amster's Who You Callin' A Fiduciary???.

Who You Callin’ A Fiduciary???

The post David J. Amster hired as Principal and Head of its Fund and Dealer Advisory practice appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
E&O: Are You In The Know? https://compliance-risk.com/errors-omission-in-the-know/ Sat, 17 Sep 2016 23:31:02 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=3622 timetoknow

Several times over the past decade FINRA has indicated they may be considering making it […]

The post E&O: Are You In The Know? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
timetoknow

Several times over the past decade FINRA has indicated they may be considering making it a requirement for broker-dealers to maintain errors and omission insurance (E&O) to cover the payment of arbitration awards to investors. A 2013 article in the Wall Street Journal indicated that FINRA was “frustrated” over nonpayment of arbitration awards to investors whose retirement savings were eviscerated by financial advisor malpractice. FINRA has reported that $51 million of arbitration awards granted in 2011 were not paid – this was 11% of all awards against broker-dealers, which was up from 4% in 2010.FINRA has not yet enacted that requirement. However, it is a very good idea for all participants in the financial services industry to maintain some sort of insurance coverage to protect from arbitration awards and court litigation related to the professional services.

At CRC, we have seen instances of investor awards against broker-dealers and registered representatives that ruined both. A simple mistake could spell disaster for even the most careful practitioner and his/her employer. There are numerous reasons to purchase E&O insurance. But, to put it bluntly, the primary reason is that everyone makes mistakes. Even the most experienced representatives, and the best supervision and operations departments, mistakes will be made. No one is perfect.

In one recent case, a representative made a mistake in calculating the taxes associated with a 1031 real estate exchange for a 30-unit apartment complex. His former client has initiated litigation against him alleging over $1 million in damages. Just the attorneys’ fees alone will cost him several hundreds of thousands of dollars. The representative had been with his broker-dealer for over 20 years, did not have a single mark on his U4/U5, had never had a grievance lodged against him. Nonetheless, it appears he made a mistake in calculating the tax liability for his client. However, the bigger mistake he made, which he shares with his broker-dealer, is that they did not have E&O insurance coverage.

With all that said, understanding E&O insurance is difficult. How much overage do you need? What exclusions and endorsements are appropriate? What does the “Covering Clause” of the insurance policy actually mean? Does my E&O policy cover all of the products available on the Broker-Dealer’s platform? Will you policy cover losses other than damage awards, such as attorneys’ fees, litigation/arbitration expenses, subpoena costs, regulatory investigation expenses? Just asking these questions is the right start in finding and purchasing E&O insurance.

Want To Know More?

Give us a call (646)346-2468 to review your current E&O insurance policy status or use the form below to learn more about an E&O Tune-up:

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post E&O: Are You In The Know? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
What You Need To Know About Material Non-Public Information (MNPI) https://compliance-risk.com/mnpi-lilian-colpas/ Mon, 22 Aug 2016 13:50:00 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=5008

Whether you are a small-town doctor or a powerful hedge fund manager - the SEC […]

The post What You Need To Know About Material Non-Public Information (MNPI) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Whether you are a small-town doctor or a powerful hedge fund manager - the SEC doesn’t discriminate! If you are abusing your fiduciary duty and use material, non-public information to trade securities - you will be caught and you will be charged with insider trading.

Combat insider trading within your firm by learning the right questions to ask and developing the right internal controls and processes to mitigate this risk.

Download What You Need To Know About MNPI

Enter your information below to download your complimentary copy of What You Need To Know About Material Non-Public Information (MNPI) by Lilian Colpas.

Sending


Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post What You Need To Know About Material Non-Public Information (MNPI) appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Beware of the Consulting “Rope-a-Dope” https://compliance-risk.com/beware-of-the-consulting-rope-a-dope/ Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:10:21 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4963 beware-of-the-consulting

It’s hard to believe that almost four (4) years ago, my partners and I developed […]

The post Beware of the Consulting “Rope-a-Dope” appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
beware-of-the-consulting

It’s hard to believe that almost four (4) years ago, my partners and I developed the strategy and business plan that would ultimately lead to the launch of Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”), a compliance professional services organization, headquartered in New York City.

In the spirit of candor and full transparency, I didn’t wake up one morning with an epiphany, deciding I wanted to become an entrepreneur. Quite truthfully, I had been noodling on the idea of launching what eventually became CRC, five (5) years prior to it coming to fruition. This idea came from a very organic and natural place. As a former Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”), I had been a “buyer” of professional services for a good portion of my 20 year “in-house” career. During this time, I watched closely - quickly learning what was truly wrong with the delivery model being offered by most consulting firms, whether they were Tier 1, Tier 2 or lower down the food chain.

So, what was wrong? In my personal experience, the problem began with the transparency of the delivery model employed by professional services firms. I don’t believe my findings were unique – and I would bet most people reading this article who have been “buyers” of professional services would concur their experiences were similar to mine. The lack of transparency I am referencing is embedded in the “sales model” of these organizations. When I was seeking an external provider to assist in a project, I often found that the impressive senior partner with the most relevant experience would be the individual pitching me on their firm’s capabilities and expertise specific to my need. The conversation would occur over a nice lunch or dinner - and I would walk away with my ego feeling stroked with a full stomach. Once I found the firm I believed would be the “best fit” for my project, the fun began…

Shortly after the project launched, I noticed something was amiss. The senior partner that I bonded with, (you know - the one that sold me on his / her firm’s capabilities and bought me a great meal) quickly disappeared into thin air and was replaced by a team of individuals with 2-3 years of consulting experience, straight out of college who had never walked a day in my shoes, did not understand the complexity of the businesses I was supporting, nor had not a clue in terms of how to execute against / mitigate the risk I was seeking to address. I felt as if I was paying an exorbitant price to train people how to do their jobs – with not much to show at the end of the day except some fancy PowerPoint presentations and an acknowledgement of the risk I already knew I had.

Based on this common theme, the decision to launch CRC ( in what I would call a highly commoditized space), came from a genuine desire to distinguish ourselves from the pack through the quality of services being provided in the regulatory compliance vertical. How were we going to achieve this? Quite simply, as we’ve grown as an organization over the last 3 ½ years, we had stayed committed and true to our operating model. We don’t hire any professional consultants. We only retain former CCOs and Senior Level Compliance Officers. The average tenure of our 15+ team members averages from 15-30 years in the financial services industry. We’ve all been in our clients’ shoes and have been in the “hot seat”. We are a “plug and play” provider that truly gets it. This truly resonates with our clients.

Equally (if not more important), we are a boutique organization employing a services model that is predicated on strong execution. We are not a “check the box” provider that merely acknowledges the existence of risk. If we are not solutions oriented thought leaders that can help our clients execute against and mitigate their discrete compliance related risks – we aren’t doing our jobs. Whether we are being retained as a full outsourced compliance provider or to undertake a discrete review of a certain aspect of a client’s business – we bring our “A” game and “A” team every day.

In closing, the best evidence of our model truly working is the satisfaction demonstrated by our clients through their loyalty and willingness to help tell our story when they encounter others in need of compliance professional services. This, in and of itself is the biggest reward that has come out of CRC - and something we are all extremely proud and excited to be a part of as we continue our mission and journey as an organization.

The post Beware of the Consulting “Rope-a-Dope” appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
CRC Among Top 25 Most Recommended Compliance Service Providers https://compliance-risk.com/crc-among-top-25-recommended-compliance-service-providers/ Wed, 22 Jun 2016 17:08:30 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4887

Compliance Risk Concepts is honored to be recognized by Enterprise Services Outlook (ES Outlook) as […]

The post CRC Among Top 25 Most Recommended Compliance Service Providers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Compliance Risk Concepts is honored to be recognized by Enterprise Services Outlook (ES Outlook) as one of the top 25 Most Recommended Compliance Services Providers of 2016.

"Given that the market is swarming with compliance service providers, picking a particular agency is often a daunting exercise. ...the editorial team at ES Outlook has critically evaluated a slew of service providers based on their domain expertise," ES Outlook explains in 25 Most Recommended Compliance Services Providers 2016.

"CRC is one of these organizations, that have been able to deliver phenomenal results year-after-year and have already positioned themselves as the leading market players."

About ES Outlook

ES Outlook is a print magazine which provides a platform to thinkers, practitioners, strategists and visionaries in the Enterprise Services landscape.

The ES Outlook platform is uniquely positioned to let upcoming and promising enterprise services vendors showcase their innovative services. Sourcing professionals working for US corporations are in search for a one-stop resource that will help them keep track of new innovative offerings from service providers. Enterprise Services Outlook provides deeper information about outsourcing companies, makes available practical experiences and advice from their peers working in other reputed companies in the U.S. who have similar problems and keeps them abreast with important news, analysis and thought leadership in the services arena. Enterprise Services Outlook is that source which provides value to senior sourcing executives that shelf life of the magazine is forever.

The post CRC Among Top 25 Most Recommended Compliance Service Providers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
CRC Enters Mobile Space with New Compliance Hotline App https://compliance-risk.com/crc-enters-mobile-space-with-launch-of-hotline-app/ Mon, 13 Jun 2016 07:00:38 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4846

NEW YORK, NY– Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC") launches new mobile app for financial service organizations. The […]

The post CRC Enters Mobile Space with New Compliance Hotline App appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

NEW YORK, NY– Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC") launches new mobile app for financial service organizations. The CRC Hotline app offers on-the-go answers from industry experts regarding ongoing and onerous regulatory compliance issues.

It connects Compliance Officers, CEOs of independent broker-dealers, Managing Partners of independent investment advisers, Chief Financial Officers ("CFOs"), Chief Operating Officers ("COOs"), Chief Risk Officers ("CROs"), insurance underwriters and private equity firms with the real-time compliance resources they need, when they need it most.

"The intersection of compliance and technology has been core to our strategic vision since our inception," explained CRC's Founder and Managing Partner, Mitch Avnet. "The launch of the CRC App is one of many strategic investments our organization has made over the past several years geared toward making the life of the compliance officer easier. This App represents yet another access point to our extremely talented team."

Available for iPhone and Android, the CRC Hotline app saves FINRA registered broker-dealers, SEC and State-registered investment advisers, hedge funds, State chartered and nationally regulated banks, insurance underwriters and private equity firms from having to pay hundreds of dollars per hour to outside counsel and while providing mobile access to intellectual capital of former industry Chief Compliance Officers ("CCOs").

"The CRC Hotline app takes compliance mobile," said Roland Reyes, Director of Professional Services at CRC. "Which is essential nowadays for executives navigating this increasingly challenging regulatory environment."

The user-friendly design of the CRC Hotline app makes the intellectual capital of former industry Chief Compliance Officers ("CCOs") available by simply submitting a question or calling the CRC "Hotline" directly.

Download The New CRC Hotline App

To find the new CRC Hotline app, search Compliance Risk Concepts in Google Play or the Apple store.
google playapple-store

The post CRC Enters Mobile Space with New Compliance Hotline App appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Data Integrity and Governance Roundtable https://compliance-risk.com/roundtable-discussion-data-integrity-and-governance/ Mon, 16 May 2016 19:38:33 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4736 data-integrity-and-governance-roundtable

Join Gresham and Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) for a Data Integrity and Governance for Broker-Dealers […]

The post Data Integrity and Governance Roundtable appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
data-integrity-and-governance-roundtable

Join Gresham and Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) for a Data Integrity and Governance for Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers roundtable discussion and hear first-hand, from two former Senior Executives at FINRA, Bill Hayden and Jeff Holik.

Date: Tuesday, June 14, 2016 Time: Time: 12:00 pm - 5:00 pm ET

Lunch 12:00pm - 12:45pm Roundtable discussion 1:00pm - 3:45pm Cocktail reception 4:00pm - 5:00pm

Location: The Bryant Park Hotel, 40 W. 40th St. New York, NY

Today, there is a new paradigm of regulatory expectations, creating increasingly daunting compliance and operational risk management challenges. Many of these challenges relate to the data that is reported to ensure organizations continue to meet the ever expanding list of ongoing regulatory and compliance requirements. Our discussion will focus on common challenges and issues impacting Compliance Departments, such as:

  • Regulatory Scrutiny, Fines and Sanctions
  • Handling Massive Volumes of Data
  • Managing Across Bifurcated and Disparate Systems and Platforms
  • Operating in Manual Environments
  • Moving Forward: Understanding Your Internal Processes and Effecting Change

Register below to secure your place!

Sending


Bill Hayden CCO of KeyBanc Capital Markets Bill Hayden has industry experience as both a regulator and a senior compliance officer at large financial institutions. He is currently the Chief Compliance Officer for KeyBanc Capital Markets (KBCM) in Ohio. Before joining KBCM in 2013, Bill was the Director of FINRA’s Office of Emerging Regulatory Issues, where he helped the SRO identify trends in the financial industry and assess the impact on regulatory policy. Prior to his time at FINRA, Bill held a number of senior compliance positions at Wachovia Capital Markets, including Chief Compliance Officer for Corporate Investment Banking. Bill is a former branch chief/staff attorney in the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE). Prior to his work in the industry, Bill was a criminal prosecutor in Maryland and served as an intelligence officer in the U.S. Navy. He holds a law degree from the University of Baltimore School of Law and an undergraduate degree from Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. jeffrey holik Shareholder, Shulman Rogers Jeffrey S. Holik is a seasoned and accomplished lawyer who knows how to solve problems from both a legal and a practical business perspective. With more than 30 years of experience as a senior financial services regulator, industry leader and partner in global law firms, he has a deep understanding of the financial services industry. After many years as a leader of regulatory programs at FINRA and as chief legal officer for the retail investment businesses of PNC Bank, Jeff brings a proven track record of success partnering with compliance officers and business leaders to achieve corporate goals, resolve customer and business disputes, manage legal, regulatory and reputational risk, maintain strong relationships with regulators, and keep regulatory and litigation matters off the front page of the newspapers. Read Jeffrey Holik's full bio >> bill-blythe-gresham Bill Blythe is the Global Business Development Director for Gresham Computing. Bill has more than 18 years of experience in the financial technology sector. Previously at SmartStream Technologies where he held the role of Managing Director for North America and the UK, based out of New York, Bill was in charge of business strategy and sales management. Under his supervision the North American business grew by more than 400% in two years. Prior to working for SmartStream Technologies, Bill held management positions at Singularity, Mercator Software (formally Braid) and Misys. Mitch Avnet Founder and Managing Partner of Compliance Risk Concepts Mitch Avnet is the founder and Managing Partner of CRC LLC. Avnet is responsible for business development, relationship management and overseeing the execution of all client driven / business focused Compliance and Ethics Risk Management strategic engagements. Prior to launching CRC, Avnet was a member of Corporate Leadership Group (CLG) at Lincoln Financial Group (LFG) where he was Senior Vice President and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer, having direct oversight of the company’s anti-money laundering, privacy, ethics and compliance risk management programs.

The post Data Integrity and Governance Roundtable appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Breakfast Forum: Conflicts of Interest https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-breakfast-forum-conflicts-of-interest/ Thu, 28 Apr 2016 18:28:13 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4722

Compliance Breakfast Forum: Conflicts of Interest Join Compliance Science (CSI) and Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) […]

The post Compliance Breakfast Forum: Conflicts of Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Compliance Breakfast Forum: Conflicts of Interest

Join Compliance Science (CSI) and Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) as we present a Conflicts of Interest roundtable discussion.

Date: Thursday, May 19, 2016
Time: Time: 8:30 am - 11:00 am ET
Location: Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, New York, NY

REGISTER-NOW

The success of any end-to-end Conflicts Management Program is predicated on the knowledge and expertise of the team responsible for creating and implementing the required processes and infrastructure to support a sustainable and scalable program. Our discussion will focus on recommendations specific to monitoring and mitigating potential conflicts as well as enhancements to existing compliance policies, procedures, and processes.

A preview of the topics we will be covering include a comprehensive discussion covering the following discrete types of conflicts prevalent in all financial services organizations:
• Conflicts applicable to all employees
• Firm vs. Client Conflicts
• Client vs. Client Conflicts
• Employee vs. Client Conflicts
• Employee vs. Firm Conflicts
• Vendor vs. Client Conflicts

The post Compliance Breakfast Forum: Conflicts of Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory Compliance Series - Data Integrity and Governance [whitepaper] https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-compliance-series-data-integrity-governance-whitepaper/ Tue, 05 Apr 2016 19:51:27 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4687 data-integrity-and-governance

Today, there is a new paradigm of regulatory expectations, creating increasingly daunting compliance and operational […]

The post Regulatory Compliance Series - Data Integrity and Governance [whitepaper] appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
data-integrity-and-governance

Today, there is a new paradigm of regulatory expectations, creating increasingly daunting compliance and operational risk management challenges on FINRA registered broker-dealers. Many of these challenges are related to the governance and control environments, specific to the data that is so heavily relied upon to ensure broker-dealers continue to meet the ever expanding list of ongoing regulatory and compliance requirements, aimed at customer protection and market integrity. Given FINRA’s 2016 examination and regulatory priorities, it is evident that data management and data integrity is and will continue to be a focal point for regulators for the foreseeable future. Understanding the magnitude of data related issues that have surfaced within our industry, CRC is committed to providing our clients and prospects with practical solutions to data related risks specific to broker-dealers. Based on the above, CRC is pleased to announce our joint guide with Gresham Computing on Data Integrity and Governance for FINRA registered broker-dealers. This guide provides insight into the discrete data related issues faced by broker-dealers, offering readers an opportunity to understand the common data related struggles faced by our entire industry, as well as a solution aimed at alleviating these issues in a cost-effective and practical manner.

Download Complimentary Whitepaper

Submit the following to be taken to your complimentary copy of the Regulatory Compliance Series Data Integrity and Governance whitepaper for FINRA registered broker-dealers.

Sending

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Regulatory Compliance Series - Data Integrity and Governance [whitepaper] appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Thomson Reuters Financial and Risk Summit https://compliance-risk.com/thomson-reuters-financial-risk-summit/ Thu, 31 Mar 2016 19:06:18 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4670   Thomson Reuters Annual Financial and Risk Summit in New York Date: May 4, 2016 […]

The post Thomson Reuters Financial and Risk Summit appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
 

Thomson Reuters Annual Financial and Risk Summit in New York

Date: May 4, 2016 Time: Time: 8:00 am - 5:30 pm ET Location: Marriott Marquis, New York Click Here To Register

Mitch Avnet is thrilled to be participating in the upcoming Thomson Reuters Annual Financial and Risk Summit in New York City in the following sessions:

Preparing your Employees to be the Compliance Front Line

1:00 pm Breakout Session with Mitch Avnet Maintaining a culture of compliance requires far more than strong compliance programs and processes. As the front line in compliance, the business has a leading role to play to ensure that compliance is in the DNA of the organization. During this session we will discuss how to ensure that your employees, at all levels, are engaged around ethical and compliant behavior via robust training, code of conduct, managing conflicts, cases, escalations and more.

  • Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Partner, Compliance
    Risk Concepts
  • Marcy Cohen, General Counsel,ING Financial Holdings Corp
  • Lamond Kearse, Chief Compliance Officer, MTA

This is a complimentary event for Thomson Reuters customers, associates and industry professionals. Attendees are eligible to earn up to six NASBA certified CPE credits. For more information or to register visit: http://info.risk.thomsonreuters.com/NYCFinancialRiskSummitHomepage

The post Thomson Reuters Financial and Risk Summit appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
See Ya Lata – Bad Data! https://compliance-risk.com/see-ya-lata-bad-data/ Mon, 14 Mar 2016 17:21:59 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4633 see-ya-later-crc

CRC Announces Forthcoming Whitepaper Addressing Data Quality and Data Integrity Issues Impacting Broker-Dealers CRC is […]

The post See Ya Lata – Bad Data! appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
see-ya-later-crc

CRC Announces Forthcoming Whitepaper Addressing Data Quality and Data Integrity Issues Impacting Broker-Dealers

CRC is pleased to announce a forthcoming whitepaper written in conjunction with Gresham Computing plc addressing data quality and data integrity issues impacting FINRA Registered broker-dealers.

As we’ve all recently learned in FINRA’s Regulatory and Examinations Priorities Letter for 2016, FINRA is focusing on the following areas specific to broker-dealer data:

  • Operational breakdowns specific to changes from legacy to new compliance systems
  • Technology governance and change management practices related to algorithm maintenance (including order-routing algorithms)
  • Back-office and vendor system changes
  • Lifecycle development and new system implementation
  • Data quality controls and reporting practices
  • Verification of the accuracy of data sources relied upon to conduct monitoring and surveillance

Since CRC’s inception in 2013, our organization has dedicated itself to helping financial services firms address regulatory issues in a practical and actionable manner.

Our forthcoming whitepaper will not only pinpoint the issues most / if not all broker-dealers are facing as it relates to their data management – it will provide insight into a practical solution that will efficiently and cost effectively assist broker-dealers in mitigating the discrete regulatory risks specific to data quality and integrity.

Sign up and be among the first to receive this exclusive whitepaper:

 Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post See Ya Lata – Bad Data! appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
What to Do—and Not Do—at Your Next SEC Exam https://compliance-risk.com/next-sec-exam/ Fri, 19 Feb 2016 20:37:48 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4609 webinar-feb25

Navigating Your Next SEC Exam Experienced and skilled compliance officers are adept at managing almost […]

The post What to Do—and Not Do—at Your Next SEC Exam appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
webinar-feb25

Navigating Your Next SEC Exam

Experienced and skilled compliance officers are adept at managing almost any regulatory exams. These compliance officers use their instincts, training, and experience to manage through the issues that arise during an exam.

As a compliance consultant for the last two years, I have seen the inner-workings of multiple firms and have witnessed many different styles of managing regulators. It has surprised me how often well-meaning compliance officers miss the mark on managing an exam. The problematic styles I have observed include:

  • Acting too relaxed and unconcerned
  • Being dominant and overbearing
  • Behaving in a threatening manner
  • Delivering too many documents
  • Hiding the ball
  • Being uncommunicative
  • Acting overly sociable
  • Being too cautious

At times, these styles are the result of a strategic decision regarding exam management. Often, however, the strategy seems to develop out of fear of the examiners or regulators, or even as a result of guidance by senior management within the firm. Senior officers have become sensitized to the regulatory environment and they understand the ramifications of a negative exam. At the same time, senior officers may fear the regulatory process and, as a result, set a tone of either defensive or offensive regulatory management. In addition, in situations where compliance reports to the legal department, or the chief compliance officer and general counsel are the same individual, litigation training and instincts can overshadow good regulatory management.

As a result, I have at times guided senior managers as compliance officers toward the most effective way of managing a good regulatory exam. I’ve also helped mitigate penalties that are the result of an adverse regulatory exam.

By far, regulators value individual and firm credibility the most. No matter how negatively an exam is going, maintaining credibility should be the first concern. The following are mechanisms that enhance credibility:

  • Timely responses
  • Quality responses
  • Knowledgeable responses
  • Accepting responsibility (it should be noted that this suggestion must be handled with sensitivity to ensure that the regulators are not looking to you for personal liability)

There are, of course, ways to ease into the examination process. The value of leading the examiners through your firm with openness is significant. Often times, I have experienced pushback from firms in regard to this approach because the regulators do not require it. My experience, however, has been that this approach not only assists the regulators in helping them ask relevant questions, it often shortens the exam process. I would recommend taking the following steps:

  • Prepare an introductory presentation
  • Explain investment strategy and market opportunity
  • Identify risk areas and relevant compliance controls
  • Identify key personnel

Not only are these tactics tried and true, I have also surveyed multiple regulators in the past few months about the best way to influence members of their profession. Each participant responded that credibility and knowledge were the leading characteristics that lead to regulatory trust.

HAVE QUESTIONS?

Compliance Science, Inc. is hosting a February webinar entitled, “Navigating Your Next SEC Exam“. The webinar conversation will focus on a range of considerations that represent the end-to-end lifecycle of an exam. REGISTER NOW!

The post What to Do—and Not Do—at Your Next SEC Exam appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Webinar: Navigating Your Next SEC Exam https://compliance-risk.com/webinar-navigating-sec-exam/ Mon, 15 Feb 2016 16:42:08 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4578 webinar-feb25

Compliance Science, Inc. is hosting a February webinar entitled, "Navigating Your Next SEC Exam". The […]

The post Webinar: Navigating Your Next SEC Exam appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
webinar-feb25

Compliance Science, Inc. is hosting a February webinar entitled, "Navigating Your Next SEC Exam". The webinar conversation will focus on a range of considerations that represent the end-to-end lifecycle of an exam.

This 60 minute webinar will be moderated by Charles Steerman, VP Product Solutions, Compliance Science with guest panelists Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC).

Date: Feb. 25, 2016
Time: 12:30 am - 1:30 pm EST.

Navigating Your Next SEC Exam

Moderated By:

Charles Steerman, VP Product Solutions, Compliance Science

Guest Panelists: 

Mitch Avnet, Founder and Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts

 

The post Webinar: Navigating Your Next SEC Exam appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
GRC Briefing For The Financial Services Industry https://compliance-risk.com/grc-briefing-financial-services-industry/ Mon, 15 Feb 2016 15:42:19 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4563 the-financial-services-industry

FSO Knowledge Xchange is hosting its exclusive Governance, Risk Management, and Compliance Breakfast Briefing on February 25th, […]

The post GRC Briefing For The Financial Services Industry appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
the-financial-services-industry

FSO Knowledge Xchange is hosting its exclusive Governance, Risk Management, and Compliance Breakfast Briefing on February 25th, 2016 at the University Club in New York City. During this half day forum, industry experts from leading financial firms, will share innovative ideas, emerging trends, and best practices for adhering to enterprise-wide GRC requirements, and making them an integral part of the strategic planning processes.

Date: Feb. 25, 2016
Time: 8:00 am - 11:30 am
Where: The University Club, NYC

 

8:00 am - 8:45 am Registration and Networking Breakfast
8:45 am - 9:45 am Welcome Remarks and Keynote
9:45 am - 10:30 am Building Effective Governance, Control and Process Framework

 

The post GRC Briefing For The Financial Services Industry appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Three Years Later - The Song Remains the Same... https://compliance-risk.com/building-a-compliance-professional-services-organization/ Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:11:08 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4448 led-zeppelin-crc

Building a Compliance Professional Services Organization   Are we Hipster Chic? This past weekend I […]

The post Three Years Later - The Song Remains the Same... appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
led-zeppelin-crc

Building a Compliance Professional Services Organization

 

Are we Hipster Chic?

This past weekend I frequented a hipster coffee shop in Greenwich Village.   As I drank my “chichi” cup of coffee, I couldn’t help but overhear the conversation at the table next to me.  It was two young gentlemen discussing how the nuances and imperfections of vinyl improve the overall music “listening experience”.  I silently chuckled to myself and began to feel very nostalgic.  Long before the Internet, Pay-for-Music Services, MTV, etc. the only way we could connect with bands we loved was through their albums, album art, band photos and the lyric sheets that were on the album jacket.  The resurgence of vinyl in stores such as Urban Outfitters and the pending relaunch of Columbia House (for Vinyl Albums)-  illustrates a very important point – people will always want the ability to connect to something they believe in. 

Get the Led Out!

When I arrived home, I decided to go through my old albums.  This is a collection that I assembled since I began listening to music in earnest in the early 1980’s.   I decided to listen to Houses of the Holy by Led Zeppelin.  One of my favorite tracks on this album is “The Song Remains the Same”.  I have listened to this album and song hundreds if not thousands of times since I first purchased it in 1984.  However, this time around – it resonated as it never had before.  As I contemplated the rationale behind this, the answer became very clear.

 

This past weekend marked the three year anniversary of Compliance Risk Concepts (“CRC”).  As CRC’s founder and managing partner, achieving this milestone conjures up great pride and a strong sense of satisfaction.  It also causes me to pause and reflect on the strategic vision I initially had for CRC – and question if The Song Remains the Same”?

Recipe for Success?

By way of background, I am a career Financial Services Compliance Officer.   I spent 20 years working for Investment Banks, Broker-Dealers and Asset Managers and other Integrated Financial Services Organizations.   Twelve of those years was as a Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”).

Prior to launching CRC, I developed a business model aimed at changing the manner in which Compliance Professional Services were delivered within the financial services industry.  In essence, I sought to “reverse engineer” the system.

You may ask what this actually means.   Well, as a buyer of Compliance Professional Services for a good portion of my career, I had been “Big 4’d” to the point where I felt truly disenchanted.   I had a significant amount of first hand experience with failed engagements with Big 4 firm that either yielded no results – or lofty and unrealistic recommendations that were not practical – thus, never implemented.    All that was achieved was wasted time, efforts and resources.

Firms can no longer tolerate nor afford a model where they pay a senior partner $700 per hour for an engagement that is executed by individuals with little or no relevant experience at $200-$300 per hour.  It’s a strategy aimed at racking up billable hours – where the Consultant wins – and the Client loses.     The goal for CRC was to chip away at this model through one operating premise: Develop long term strategic relationships based on short term incremental and cost effective wins.   Bottom line: Deliver practical and achievable outcomes for our clients.

The “George Constanza” Method.

So – how was CRC going to compete and succeed in a highly commoditized vertical?   This is where the strategic vision came into play.   The approach was going to be honest, straight-forward, with one clear objective: EXECUTION.

Since I had been to this dance before, I knew exactly what I didn’t want to do.   I didn’t want to speak in catch-phrases and jargon – and in the end rack up a ton of billable hours and ultimately deliver nothing of substance or value.   Seinfeld fans will understand this next reference.   I call this the “George Costanza” method.   -  Do the opposite of what one normally does – and you will succeed!

I wish it were that simple.   Having said that, the operating premise holds true.   Isn’t the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over expecting different results?  So, at the end of the day – for CRC to be successful, we would have to become recognized as an industry leader that distinguished itself by offering a service level that was predicated on a value proposition that actually delivered beneficial and measurable results to our clients.

What’s Our Belief System?

As a company early in its evolution, we needed to quickly establish our “belief system”.   What was our organizational DNA?  If somebody were to ask me the “Top 5” things we’ve embraced as a company, I would list the following:

  1. Truly “know” our clients. It’s critical to establish a vested interest in our clients’ outcomes.  This must go above and beyond any single engagement.  We are building a relationships.  Always looking at things with a long term view.
  2. Surround ourselves with talent. The reason CRC has grown and continues to grow is based on our ability to retain quality individuals with an average industry tenure of 15-20 years of relevant experience as CCOs or MD Level Compliance Officers that deliver consistently with superior service.  We do not “settle” when it comes to human capital.   Our success is predicated on our team’s success.
  3. Be thought leaders and decision makers. Our clients are hiring us for a reason.   They need our leadership and direction.   They didn’t hire us to merely reiterate the problem they knew they already had.    It’s our job to move the ball down the field – and get the client to an end result.
  4. Do what we love / love what we do.  Be passionate and show our willingness to have skin in the game.   It resonates and inspires trust and confidence.   We demand this in all of our employees – and won’t settle for less.
  5. Work with great vendor partners. Our clients constantly look to us for recommendations regarding technology vendors that can help assist in the execution of their compliance programs.   CRC has developed great relationships with several vendor partners that deliver functionality to our clients in a cost effective and efficient manner.   We work with vendors that can provide technology functionality to those who have historically priced out of such solutions – and never take a “one-size-fits-all” approach.

What Should Clients Demand?

Over the past few years, we have witnessed some pretty interesting service / support models of other Compliance Consulting organizations.    Based on our findings and our understanding of regulatory expectations, firms engaging with Compliance Consulting Service providers should be aware / weary of the following:

  1. “Checkers Checking Checkers”. Before signing on the dotted line – please be sure you know / understand the level of expertise and support that will be dedicated to your organization.    Is there a revolving door?  Will you have a new consultant supporting you every week / month, etc.?   Also – has this person ever spent a material amount of time within a financial services organization similar to yours?    Don’t buy a “checklist”.   Demand true expertise.
  2. Template Policies and Procedures / WSPs. It may be initially attractive and inexpensive to buy an “out of the box” set up policies and procedures.   However, please understand that regulators know all the templates.    Your policies and procedures must be truly reflective of your business model and business practice – and indicate with great clarity the supervisory reviews undertaken (who, what, where, why and how often).
  3. Gold, Silver and Bronze Support Plans. You are not buying new windows or a subscription to satellite television.    Don’t be sucked into a level of support based on your willingness to pay additional money.     A good and reputable consulting firm will customize a program specific to your needs – and not look to add a bunch of “al a carte” services to beef up their bottom line.

Bringing it Home

As an entrepreneurial organization in its early stages, we’ve learned many things over the past three years.  Most importantly, we have seen that people do want to connect with something they believe in.   We enjoy some of the greatest client relationships anyone could ever hope for.  Our clients connect with us, largely in part because we take the time and energy to find ways to truly connect with them. We work to understand their needs and issues, leveraging our deep bench strength to create sustainable and scalable results time and time again.   After all, it’s one thing to win a piece of business.  It’s a completely different animal when it comes to fulfilling that business.

In closing, does the Song Remain the Same for CRC?   It absolutely does.    As we continue to grow as an organization – it is imperative that we stay true to our core values.  We are a boutique provider that will continue to embrace our strategic vision and business philosophy, distinguishing ourselves from our peers through the quality of our execution and the strength of relationships we build with all our clients and prospects.

I leave you with one final thought.  If you are contemplating engaging a Compliance Consulting firm for the first time – or switching from your existing provider, please consider what I’ve discussed above.  Surround yourself with best-in-class service providers that will spend every day proving themselves to you – earning your trust and respect – and never taking your business for granted.   This is something we should all think about and demand in all our dealings.

As 2016 kicks-off, I wish you all much happiness, health and success in the coming year.

 

 

The post Three Years Later - The Song Remains the Same... appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
IT Employee Trades On Confidential Goldman Emails https://compliance-risk.com/it-employee-trades-on-confidential-goldman-emails/ Mon, 30 Nov 2015 17:35:57 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4409 handcuffed

The SEC alleges that an employee, who worked as an associate in Goldman’s compliance department, […]

The post IT Employee Trades On Confidential Goldman Emails appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
handcuffed

The SEC alleges that an employee, who worked as an associate in Goldman’s compliance department, traded on confidential information contained in e-mails sent and received by Goldman investment bankers. The employee gained access to investment banker e-mails as part of his work developing surveillance software designed to monitor other employees for potential misconduct such as insider trading.

Washington D.C., Nov. 25, 2015 —The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced insider trading charges against a former Goldman Sachs employee accused of stealing nonpublic information in the firm’s e-mail system so he could trade illegally in advance of client mergers and make more than $450,000 in illicit profits. The SEC has obtained an emergency court order to freeze the assets of the trader and accounts he used to place the illicit trades. READ THE FULL SEC RELEASE >

 

The post IT Employee Trades On Confidential Goldman Emails appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Assessing Outsourced CCO Risk Before the SEC Completes the Assessment for You https://compliance-risk.com/assessing-outsourced-cco-risk-before-the-sec-completes-the-assessment-for-you/ Tue, 10 Nov 2015 17:35:54 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4334

The OCIE staff of the SEC released a Risk Alert relating to the Outsourcing of […]

The post Assessing Outsourced CCO Risk Before the SEC Completes the Assessment for You appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

The OCIE staff of the SEC released a Risk Alert relating to the Outsourcing of Chief Compliance Officers and Compliance Activities. Truly, the findings and risks shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. My colleagues and I have all recently left “in-house” Compliance positions to become “outsourced compliance advisors.” As Consultants that have recently had the opportunity to observe multiple Financial Firms that have utilize outsourced compliance we have spotted many of the issues that the SEC reported. A few things my colleagues and I have noted since leaving our “in-house” positions: Many Financial Institutions may have a false sense of security with respect to their Outsourced Compliance Office as they deem "no news" to be "good news". Prior to hiring a Compliance Consultant, Financial Firms should ask the following questions:

  • What is the experience of the individual(s) who will be supporting the Financial Institutions?
  • How many other Financial Firms is the Compliance Consultant Supporting?
  • Do the individuals have sales and consulting experience or Compliance Experience?
  • For individuals with Compliance Experience what type of Firms did they provide Compliance advice to and what were their Compliance responsibilities.
  • How many years of Experience do they have?
  • Who will be the backup for the Firm’s Compliance support and what is the turn-over rate of the Compliance Consultants?
  • How often will the Compliance Consultant be on-site?
  • How often will the Firm meet with the Compliance Consultant?

Within moments of looking at a Firm’s policies and procedures, we can determine which Compliance Consulting Firm wrote the policies and procedures. Most Compliance Consulting Firms have "template" policies and procedures that they implement in each Financial Institution. And indeed it seems as if most Compliance Consulting Firms implement the entire policies and procedures without tailoring them to the particular Financial Institution. Not being privy to the agreements between the Consultant and Financial Firm, our belief, based on what we have observed, is that the Financial Firm is told they will be tailored. We have not been able to identify the exact cause of why the policies were not tailored, but it seems as if it is a combination of lack of experience, quality or business knowledge of the Consultant implementing the procedures. NATIONAL EXAM PROGRAM RISK ALERT Often times a Compliance Consultant will complete a review by interviewing the Firm’s personal and then document the conversation as a report with few to no findings. If the Compliance Consultant hasn’t requested specific samples and has left it up to the Firm to determine the Compliance Consultant reviews, the Firm will be at risk. This is especially true when it comes to AML reviews. Compliance Consultants may not actually understand the business of the Financial Institution. If a Compliance Consultant does not have the requisite experience in the same type of Financial Firm as the Financial Firm they will be supporting the Firm is at risk to a lack of business knowledge. This is a key point that smaller Financial Firms overlook; it is easy to underestimate the specialization of Compliance Officers and to find that you have hired a Consultant that does not have experience with your particular business. What the SEC is asking: Has your Firm hired Compliance in Box and how effective is your appointed Outsourced CCO? As the demand for Outsourced Compliance Officers has increased, the field of Qualified Compliance Consultants has shrunk. One Compliance Consulting Firm has offered “Free 15 Minute Consultations.” That suggests that a Firm has 15 minutes to share information and receive recommendations from the Consulting Firm. This hardly seems to be a Consultant looking to for a long-term relationship, or a Consultant that would address the SEC concerns. In addition, some Compliance Consulting Firms have a link to the SEC Risk Alert and a statement that their programs address the SEC concerns and however, they offer little to no information on how their programs support the SEC concerns. If your firm is seeking to retain an industry savvy and seasoned Compliance Professional, see how CRC's programs support the SEC's concerns. Please contact us to get started.

The post Assessing Outsourced CCO Risk Before the SEC Completes the Assessment for You appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Summit 2015 https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-summit-2015/ Mon, 09 Nov 2015 15:21:43 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4313

  Date: Nov 16-17, 2015  Sponsored by: Compliance Science This year’s conference is shaping up to be […]

The post Compliance Summit 2015 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

 

Date: Nov 16-17, 2015 
Sponsored by: Compliance Science

This year’s conference is shaping up to be another great one. The list of speakers include Mitch Avnet and Compliance Science partners from leading security, consulting, and law firms as well as other seasoned compliance professionals who will discuss best practices for compliance automation and SEC exam preparation.

 

 

The post Compliance Summit 2015 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Annual Year End Compliance Requirements for Broker Dealers - Tricks or Treats? https://compliance-risk.com/annual-year-end-compliance-requirements-for-broker-dealers-tricks-or-treats/ Mon, 26 Oct 2015 21:53:46 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4270 frightened-guy

ENTER IF YOU DARE!   As Halloween is quickly creeping toward us – 2015 will […]

The post Annual Year End Compliance Requirements for Broker Dealers - Tricks or Treats? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
frightened-guy

ENTER IF YOU DARE!

 

As Halloween is quickly creeping toward us – 2015 will vanish right before our very eyes! As former Chief Compliance Officers, CRC understands how frightening, scary and daunting it can be for Broker-Dealers to prepare for / and execute their year-end Compliance requirements.

Over the last few years, we’ve helped dozens of Broker-Dealers complete each of the discrete tasks identified below.   Additionally, we have helped many broker-dealers through their cycle exams in 2015 and have a very clear understanding of FINRA’s hot button items, which includes cyber-security, Retention of Books and Records and Business Resiliency. It’s almost as if we are looking directly into a witch’s eye (Creepily Laughing in background).

Increasingly, more and more firms are turning to external third parties to conduct Year-End reviews.   It eliminates the appearance and perception of potential conflicts of interest – as firm’s remove the individuals that are responsible for the execution of the programs throughout the year from the actual testing being done – creating a true independent review of the state of play within an organization.

Based on the above, CRC provides our clients with a cost-effective approach to execute any / all of the requirements below.   We remove the “pricing barrier” – by providing “modular” approaches that enable our clients to truly benefit from our significant knowledge base and expertise.

  • FINRA 3120 / 3130 Annual Testing of Supervisory Controls / CEO Certification

Annually, FINRA member broker-dealers are required to test and verify the adequacy of their supervisory program, and the CEOs are required to certify their awareness of the program’s state.

As part of the annual review, firms should identify and discuss the impact of “hot topic” industry issues on their respective organizations.   For instance, WORM Storage / Books and Records is an area that firms’ should consider assessing as part of their 2015 Annual Testing Program.

In 2015, we’ve seen it become commonplace for FINRA to assess electronic storage of Books and Records within Broker-Dealers.   While many of us have grown accustomed to having our electronic communications stored in WORM Format (Write Once, Read Many) – there are several types of records within a broker-dealer that FINRA will assess to understand the mechanism in which these records are being stored and whether or not there is adequate business resiliency in place if / when these records should need to be accessed.

Based on the above, firms’ should proactively consider the best way to assess / measure their internal record retention requirements and ensure they have appropriate documentation and controls in place to evidence oversight and compliance with SEC Rule 17a-4. (Records to be Maintained by a Broker-Dealer).

The annual review may offer a practical way for firms’ to assess this discrete risk – as part of their overall assessment of the state of compliance and supervision within their respective organizations.

  • SEC Rule 17a-5 – Annual Compliance Report

SEC Rule 17a-5 requires broker-dealers that did not claim exemption from Rule 15c3-3 throughout the most recent fiscal year to prepare and file an annual report on compliance, and internal control over compliance, with certain financial responsibility rules (“FRRs”), specifically the Net Capital Rule (Rule 15c3-1), Customer Protection Rule (Rule 15c3-3), Quarterly Security Count Rule (Rule 17a-13), and Account Statement Rules.

The compliance report must include statements as to whether:

  1. The broker-dealer has established and maintained internal control over compliance
  2. The internal control over compliance of the broker-dealer was effective during the most recent fiscal year
  3. The internal control over compliance of the broker-dealer was effective as of the end of the most recent fiscal year
  4. The broker-dealer was in compliance with Rule 15c3-1 and paragraph (e) of Rule 15c3-3 as of the end of the most recent fiscal year
  5. The information the broker-dealer used to state whether it was in compliance with Rule 15c3-1 and paragraph (e) of Rule 15c3-3 was derived from the books and records of the broker-dealer

Impacted Broker-Dealers will also be required to engage their independent registered public accountant to examine the broker-dealer’s statements (2) through (5), above, in its compliance report.

Following PCAOB standards, the independent registered public accountant would issue a report based on that examination.

  • Independent Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) Test / Review:

Every broker-dealer is required to perform an annual review of their Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Program (“AMLCP”). This review must be undertaken by a qualified individual that has a strong working knowledge of the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”).

The review can be performed by an outside consultant or someone employed by the firm. However, it cannot be performed by the Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officer (“AMLCO”) or someone that reports to the AMLCO.

As an FYI – FINRA allows firms that do not have any customers / customer accounts to perform this review once every two years.

  • Written Supervisory Procedures (“WSPs”) Review

As part of its responsibilities under FINRA Rule 3012, a Firm must ensure that all business areas and new regulatory requirements are sufficiently addressed in its annual review of WSPs.

  • Continuing Education

All FINRA member firms must complete their Firm and Regulatory Element Continuing Education obligations by year-end.

  • Branch Office Reviews

FINRA member firms must perform inspections of all offices of supervisory jurisdiction (“OSJs”) and branch offices that supervise one or more non-branch locations on an annual basis. Each branch office that does not supervise non-branch locations must be inspected at least once every three years.

  • Annual Compliance Meeting

All FINRA member firms are required to complete an annual compliance meeting (“ACM”). Although all registered representatives and principals are required to be present, an interactive internet based “ACM on Demand” approach is acceptable in most circumstances.

  • Registrations and Renewals

Broker Dealers have until December 18th, 2015 to pay their Preliminary Renewal Account. Failure to pay by the deadline may endanger a firm’s ability to do business in jurisdictions in which it has previously done business. Although there are a number of ways to pay, firms need to ensure that there are sufficient funds in their CRD Daily Account.

HOW CAN CRC HELP?

An independent review conducted by longstanding industry professionals, reconciling your current “state of compliance” is the most effective way to ascertain your program’s status and ensure your firm continues to meet its ongoing regulatory requirements. A great deal of regulatory intelligence is required to demonstrate an organization’s understanding of its regulatory obligations (both existing and newly enacted).

At CRC, we strive to do more than perform a “check the box” review - we strive to partner. Our team of former Chief Compliance Officers (“CCOs”) and Regulators not only provide key insights into what is required of your firm, but assist your firm by executing seamlessly, helping to build a stronger program- one that your management team and regulators can have confidence in.

Please contact us for help on any of the items identified above / or for a full review / assessment of your broker-dealer’s compliance and supervisory system.

Let CRC help you turn your risk into reward.

 

The post Annual Year End Compliance Requirements for Broker Dealers - Tricks or Treats? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Goldman, Twitter & Square Entwinement https://compliance-risk.com/goldman-twitter-square-entwinement/ Mon, 12 Oct 2015 17:33:17 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4255 twitter-goldman

Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. will report earnings on 10/15/2015 before the market opens. Last week […]

The post Goldman, Twitter & Square Entwinement appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
twitter-goldman

Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. will report earnings on 10/15/2015 before the market opens. Last week Goldman publicized that it would announce its earnings via Twitter (@Twitter). The talk since the publication has been about the use of social media and Twitter becoming a viable and safe competitor in the field of company news distributors. That talk and the Twitter announcement by Goldman (@GoldmanSachs) maybe helping to drive Twitter stock price upwards. The timeline below suggests that Goldman, Twitter & Square (@Square) are tightly entwined. It
isn’t clear that there is any customer harm from the relationships or other type of wrongdoing. However the timeline is an interesting window into actions that appear isolated and how they may be related:

5/18/12 – Goldman Sachs is third banker on the Facebook IPO loosing out to Morgan Stanley and JP Morgan 11/7/13 – Goldman Sachs leads Twitter IPO with Investment Banker Anthony Noto as the lead banker 5/13/14- Anthony Noto resigns from Goldman Sachs 7/1/14 - Anthony Noto announced as the CFO for Twitter and according to executive compensation filings the highest paid executive at Twitter 7/1/15 – Jack Dorsey becomes interim CEO of Twitter – Anthony Noto is widely speculated to become CEO. 7/24/15 - Square with Jack Dorsey at the helm filed for an IPO at the same time Twitter states that Jack Dorsey who is interim Chair of Twitter will not be permanent as long as he is at Square. 8/5/15 – 8/7/15 – 3 Executive Insiders at Twitter purchase shares of Twitter: Jack Dorsey, Interim CEO; Anthony Noto, CFO; and Peter Fenton, Independent Director (Is a director truly independent when they own shares of a company?) 9/30/15 – Jack Dorsey named permanent CEO of Twitter 10/7/15 – Goldman Sachs announces that it will release its earnings on Twitter – speculation arises that Twitter has found a mechanism for income via earnings releases.

Is Goldman’s support of Twitter related to the decision for Square to choose Goldman for its Lead Banker? Is the use of Twitter the best for shareholders and the investing public or was it a strategic relationship decision? Would Goldman have won the Square IPO without supporting Twitter?

 

 

The post Goldman, Twitter & Square Entwinement appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Are Broker Dealers Prepared To Respond To Customer Withdrawal of Funds ? https://compliance-risk.com/are-broker-dealers-prepared-to-respond-to-customer-withdrawal-of-funds/ Sat, 19 Sep 2015 20:18:50 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=4158 nightmare

9 of 24 BDs Reviewed NOT PREPARED to Respond to Customer Withdrawal of Funds Recently […]

The post Are Broker Dealers Prepared To Respond To Customer Withdrawal of Funds ? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
nightmare

9 of 24 BDs Reviewed NOT PREPARED to Respond to Customer Withdrawal of Funds

Recently FINRA published its findings regarding a funding and liquidity review of 43 broker/dealers.  Has anyone noticed that 9 out of 24 BD's Reviewed are not prepared to respond to customer withdrawal of funds.  In fact, the only test that all 43 Firms were prepared for was liquidating inventory.  I am not sure liquidating inventory is going to assist the investing public.

The results aren't so surprising, but what is surprising is that these statistics fall at the very end of the Notice (FINRA Regulatory Notice 15-33).  Would it have made a difference if FINRA had published this report to the investing public and informed the investing public that FINRA has direct knowledge that 9 Broker/Dealers could not respond to an influx of customer withdrawals.

While noble that FINRA is issuing guidance to broker/dealers - does FINRA have responsibility to the investing public to inform them of these 9 ill prepared broker/dealers? And what is FINRA doing to ensure that these 9 broker/dealers become prepared quickly. Seven years ago was the last financial crisis. Are Broker/Dealers any better prepared now?

The post Are Broker Dealers Prepared To Respond To Customer Withdrawal of Funds ? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Spotlight On Talent: Kevin Wheeler On NY's Virtual Currency Regulation https://compliance-risk.com/spotlight-on-talent-kevin-wheeler/ Thu, 17 Sep 2015 22:36:09 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=3620

The State of New York recently passed legislation requiring those transacting in virtual currency to […]

The post Spotlight On Talent: Kevin Wheeler On NY's Virtual Currency Regulation appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

bitcoinThe State of New York recently passed legislation requiring those transacting in virtual currency to become licensed. The new rules mirror much of what is already in place for many broker-dealers, banks, and other financial institutions. However, there are some important parts of the legislation that may change written policies or require new policies be written and implemented.

While the new rules do not go into effect immediately – there is a 45-day comment period starting on July 23 – we summarize the legislation in anticipation of it being put into place without major changes.

Most poignantly, the New York Virtual Currency Regulation (VCR) requires, with few exceptions, all companies that store, control, buy, sell, transfer, or exchange Bitcoins (or other cryptocurrency) to become licensed with the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS). In order to obtain a license, an application must be completed providing: (1) identifying information about the applicant and its individual and entity affiliates, (2) a background report prepared by an independent investigatory agency, (3) fingerprints, (4) photographs, (5) organization charts, (6) current financial statements, (7) business plans, (8) details of banking arrangements, (10) copies of written VCR policies and procedures, (11) copies of insurance policies, (12) an explanation of the methodology used to calculate the value of the virtual currency into traditional currency and(13) verification from the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance.

Since the DFS has 90 days to approve or deny your application, presumably, the NYDFS will be supplying forms to assist in the application process; if for no other reason, to provide itself the consistency necessary to process the applications it will receive.
Importantly, the non-refundable license fee required under the VCR is $5,000. You may also have to submit other fees to process additional paperwork related to the license, if the NYDFS requires. In other words, if you apply and are rejected for a license, the Department of Financial Services keeps your $5,000. Thus, it will be important that you follow the steps necessary to properly provide all required information with your application. CRC can assist in this regard.

There are capital requirements that must be maintained at all times and each licensee must maintain a surety bond. The capital requirements and the amount of the surety bond have not yet been set by the NYDFS. In addition, if a licensee undergoes a change of control or engages in a merger, the NYDFS must be given prior notice and a written application must be completed providing the detailed information about the new control group identified above. The NYDFS has authority to stop any change in control or merger if the new control group does not pass licensing requirements.

Some important items each licensee must be aware of and implement with its Virtual Currency License are:

1) Designation of a Digital Currency Compliance Officer
2) Maintenance of a Digital Currency compliance policy covering items relating to anti-money laundering, cyber security, privacy, and information security.
3) Books Records policies similar to current securities and banking books and records requirements.

The AML requirements are very similar to current AML requirements from FINRA and the Bank Secrecy Act. However, the VCR’s AML requirements require each licensee’s AML program to maintain a customer identification program. This requirement is antithetical to the nature and spirit of the origins relating to the anonymity of digital currency. However, a robust AML program combined with an even more robust privacy and information program may be a point of differentiation for you with your competitors and could be a way to encourage customers to use your services who desire to maintain their anonymity.

The VCR’s cyber security mandates mirror current regulations such as the Gramm-Leach Bliley Act and the Federal Information Security Act. Every licensee must create and enforce a cyber security written policy and designate a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO). The cyber security program requirements under the VCR include identifying risks, protecting electronic systems, detecting intrusions, recovering and restoring operations and systems. There are also annual reporting and auditing requirements that may necessitate substantial administrative work by the CISO.

The VCR requires each licensee to provide quarterly and annual financial disclosures and reports to the NYDFS. These disclosure and reports are standard types of information, but will add another regulatory requirement to the already heavy regulatory requirements of many broker-dealers, banks, and other financial institutions.

Lastly, there are disclosure requirements and advertising/marketing limitations under the new laws. The disclosure requirements are specific to virtual currency transactions and involve adding language to account applications “in clear, conspicuous and legible writing in the English language and in any other predominant language spoken by the customers of the licensee.” The list of disclosures in the legislation is extensive and will likely lengthen already long account applications. However, it may be a good idea to review your current account applications with a representative from CRC to determine the best was to combine the VCR disclosure requirements with your current regulatory disclosures. The advertising/marketing disclosures merely require each licensee’s advertising to contain the following phrase “Licensed to engage in Virtual Currency Business Activity by the New York State Department of Financial Services.”

There are other parts of the VCR with which entities and individuals who obtain licensure will have to comply. Ultimately, living within the requirements of the law will require careful consideration of the VCR’s provision for new written policies and internal procedures.
Please contact Compliance Risk Concepts if you would like more information about digital currency regulations or are interested in learning more about compliance issues relating to digital currency issues.

spotlight-kevin-wheeler

The post Spotlight On Talent: Kevin Wheeler On NY's Virtual Currency Regulation appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
FINRA Technology Upgrade Raises Data Standards for Firms https://compliance-risk.com/finra-technology-upgrade-raises-data-standards-for-firms/ Wed, 19 Aug 2015 13:00:22 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=3596 technology-upgrade

  Emmanuel Olaoye, Thomson Reuters As the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority embraces the cloud and […]

The post FINRA Technology Upgrade Raises Data Standards for Firms appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
technology-upgrade

 

Emmanuel Olaoye, Thomson Reuters

As the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority embraces the cloud and expands its monitoring technology for the big data era, firms may feel pressure to increase their own capacity to provide data.

As the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority expands its monitoring technology for the big-data era, firms may feel pressure to increase their own capacity to provide data. Some compliance experts are questioning, however, whether the regulator’s emphasis on technology will be effective in rooting out compliance deficiencies and wrongdoing, and suggest concerns over issues such as data privacy may make firms wary.

FINRA, the industry funded brokerage regulator, is moving its market-surveillance technology to “the cloud” in a push that began in 2014 and will carry on into next year.

Moving its data operations to third-party “cloud computing” data centers will allow FINRA’s analysts to more efficiently store and retrieve, and better analyze, the vast amounts of market data that FINRA collects, said FINRA Chief Executive Rick Ketchum. For example, the regulator analyzes about 20 billion market transactions a day, more than seven times the number of likes and status updates posted by Facebook users.

Money that FINRA collects from fines, which it is barred from using on staff or other operations, has helped fund the tech push. FINRA’s overall spending on computer operations and data communications rose to $40 million in 2014, from $31.2 million the year before.

The regulator is also using enhanced data analytics to identify exam targets based on risk factors in their business models, and to narrow the focus of individual exams, FINRA spokesman George Smaragdis said.

Said Ketchum, in a letter last year on FINRA exam priorities: “All the data that we’re gathering and analyzing is also helping us see effective and sometimes ineffective compliance practices.”


 

Mitch Avnet, a founding partner of the consultancy Compliance Risk Concepts, said: “The fact that a regulator is adding to their technology budget to get better information will hopefully send firms themselves to invest in technology ... to get better information in terms of their supervision and compliance.”


 

Firms regulated by FINRA face pressure to keep up with the technological advances. “You want to follow on from what [FINRA] is doing,” said Linda Riefberg, a former chief counsel in FINRA’s enforcement division and now a partner at the law firm Cozen O’Connor Riefberg. “If they come in and they ask for a lot of trading records, it is going to take you the resources to deliver it and you will have to analyze it.”

Mitch Avnet, a founding partner of the consultancy Compliance Risk Concepts, said: “The fact that a regulator is adding to their technology budget to get better information will hopefully send firms themselves to invest in technology ... to get better information in terms of their supervision and compliance.”

Firms can continue to supply data to FINRA as they are accustomed, through an electronic-exchange software application, Smaragdis said.
The process allows for them to securely submit, manage and track FINRA information requests, he said. An industry veteran who has been a vocal critic of Wall Street regulation questioned whether FINRA’s tech emphasis will yield substantive improvements in prevention or enforcement.

read the entire article here: http://tabbforum.com/opinions/finra-technology-upgrade-raises-data-standards-for-firms?print_preview=true&single=true

The post FINRA Technology Upgrade Raises Data Standards for Firms appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Exploring Opportunities for Compliance Lawyers and Consultants https://compliance-risk.com/exploring-opportunities-for-compliance-lawyers-and-consultants/ Wed, 12 Aug 2015 19:13:49 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=3583 compliance-arrow

What Help Do Compliance Clients Need? By Lori Tripoli Law Practice Management Expert Even as […]

The post Exploring Opportunities for Compliance Lawyers and Consultants appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
compliance-arrow

What Help Do Compliance Clients Need? By Lori Tripoli Law Practice Management Expert Even as the regulatory environment burgeons and touches on seemingly every aspect of everyday life as well as on one’s workaday world, it can be easy to forget how flummoxed the regulated community might be by even a slight change in a regulation’s parameters. Even as a newly finalized regulation might not take effect for a period of time, those subject to it may still be challenged to revise or implement various business policies and practices to comply with it. Simply adding a new field to a computerized form can be a hassle; what if whole new systems have to be developed? A regulatory change can be that much more imposing where the regulated entity is an especially large one, spread across multiple functions and jurisdictions. Gearing up to comply with a new regulatory regime and informing stakeholders of the need to do so isn’t easy.

Moreover, “many firms are still struggling with antiquated and manual internal processes,” explains Mitch Avnet, managing partner at Compliance Risk Concepts in New York. “They need to challenge what has historically existed — and ensure they are building processes that can be automated and become easily repeatable,” Avnet notes.

“‘Compliance’ is a broad rubric that encompasses many regulatory frameworks,” explains Laura Martino, general counsel and national compliance director for Tower Legal Solutions in New York. That, of course, is where a compliance consultant can assist a business in addressing new regulatory requirements. Will systems have to be revised or newly developed? Will new procedures have to be put in place? Will new reporting requirements apply? Will employee training have to be developed and rolled out? This is where a compliance consultant may be of great service to a corporation. “Tower’s compliance practice areas are anti-bribery, third-party due diligence, sanctions screening, anti-money laundering, financial compliance and cybersecurity,” Martino explains. “Given Tower’s focus on anti-bribery and sanctions compliance, Tower helps companies address risks posed by doing business with blacklisted and restricted persons as well as third-party intermediaries. Industries that are especially impacted are those with international supply chains and those that rely on global channel networks for doing business. This is due to the fact that companies can be liable for the acts of their third-party intermediaries,” Martino says.

"The assistance that Compliance Risk Concepts provides can include “strategic organization modeling, complete outsourcing of a compliance function, overflow support (personal dealing reviews, electronic communication reviews, etc.), project support (mock regulatory exams, regulatory filings, policy and procedure development, employee training), regulatory exam management, and compliance technology procurement and implementation.,” Avnet says.

How exactly any compliance consultant works with clients can, of course, vary. “Tower’s compliance practice works across function areas: corporate in-house counsel, human resources, corporate compliance, risk and security, and more. One of the benefits of working with Tower in an outsourced engagement is Tower’s ability to harmonize compliance practices across several function areas and streamline workflow based on best practices, experience, and third-party objectivity,” Martino says. Click here to read the full article on about.com

The post Exploring Opportunities for Compliance Lawyers and Consultants appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitch Avnet To Speak At Cleveland Compliance Officer Network Event https://compliance-risk.com/mitch-avnet-to-speak-at-cleveland-compliance-officer-network-event/ Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:18:01 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=3524 c-con

  C-CON Cleveland - Compliance Officer Network Location: McDonald Hopkins LLC, 600 Superior Ave, Cleveland, […]

The post Mitch Avnet To Speak At Cleveland Compliance Officer Network Event appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
c-con

 

C-CON Cleveland - Compliance Officer Network

Location: McDonald Hopkins LLC, 600 Superior Ave, Cleveland, Oh 44114
Date: Tuesday August 4, 2015
Time: 3:30 pm
CPE Credit: 1 Credit

Program Agenda:

3:15 – 3:30 p.m. Registration
3:30 p.m. Molly Brown on Cybersecurity
4:00 p.m. Mitch Avnet on Managing Conflicts & Trends in Compliance Technology
4:45 p.m. Afterwards & Next meeting

The post Mitch Avnet To Speak At Cleveland Compliance Officer Network Event appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Former SEC Chairperson, Mary Schapiro Shares Insights https://compliance-risk.com/former-sec-chairperson-mary-schapiro-shares-insights/ Tue, 07 Jul 2015 14:05:36 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2955 Mary-Schipro

Beautiful day in Washington D.C., as Mitch Avnet had an opportunity to connect with former […]

The post Former SEC Chairperson, Mary Schapiro Shares Insights appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mary-Schipro

Beautiful day in Washington D.C., as Mitch Avnet had an opportunity to connect with former chairperson of SEC, Mary Schapiro.

 

As Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Mary L. Schapiro helped strengthen and revitalize the agency; oversaw a more rigorous enforcement program; and, shaped new rules by which Wall Street must play.

Chairman Schapiro’s priorities at the SEC included reinvigorating a financial regulatory system that must protect investors and vigorously enforce the rules; and working to deepen the SEC’s commitment to transparency, accountability, and disclosure while always keeping the needs and concerns of investors front and center. During her tenure, the agency’s dedicated work force brought a record number of Enforcement actions, swiftly reacted to the May 6, 2010 Flash Crash, and achieved significant regulatory reform to protect investors.

The post Former SEC Chairperson, Mary Schapiro Shares Insights appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
MassMutual Life Insurance Co. Makes Move For Improved Governance and Consistency Across Actuarial and Risk Functions https://compliance-risk.com/massachusetts-mutual-life-insurance-co-makes-move-for-improved-governance-and-consistency-across-actuarial-and-risk-functions/ Tue, 23 Jun 2015 15:19:40 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2915

This article originally published by The Global Association of Risk Professionals (GARP) Massachusetts Mutual Life […]

The post MassMutual Life Insurance Co. Makes Move For Improved Governance and Consistency Across Actuarial and Risk Functions appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

This article originally published by The Global Association of Risk Professionals (GARP)


Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co. has assigned executive vice president and chief enterprise risk officer Elizabeth (Betsy) Ward the additional role of chief actuary. The move is seen as part of a trend to streamline and clarify risk governance amid growing marketplace complexity.

“Managing risk is critical to our success, and by bringing together our actuarial and risk functions, we are strengthening our ability to help more people secure their future and protect the ones they love,” Roger Crandall, chairman, president and CEO of MassMutual, said in a May 18 announcement.

Ward has been chief enterprise risk officer since 2007. When she stepped into that role, she was also chief risk officer of Babson Capital Management, a MassMutual subsidiary that she had joined in 2001 and where she was managing director.

Effective May 29, Ward succeeded Isadore Jermyn as chief actuary. He retired after more than a decade in that position and 34 years overall with MassMutual.

Concurrent with Ward’s change in status, Brad Hoffman was promoted to senior vice president in the enterprise risk and actuarial organization. A 24-year veteran of the company, Hoffman has been a member of the enterprise risk management team since 2009, helping to standardize the risk identification and management process across the firm. He also serves as chief risk officer for broker-dealer MML Distributors.

Hoffman has degrees in mathematical economics (B.A., Colgate University) and law (Marshall Wythe School of Law at the College of William and Mary).

“Expect to see more risk functions combined and evolve in this way to create true, comprehensive and consistent risk management programs throughout organizations, enabling risk to be defined, ranked and mitigated in a manner in which the measuring scales are equal whether you are looking at quantitative or qualitative risk,” said Mitch Avnet, founder and managing partner of Compliance Risk Concepts in New York.

Consolidating titles, such as chief risk officer with chief actuary or with chief compliance officer, is typically part of an effort to coordinate oversight and break down silos.

“Roles are being combined especially in operational risk areas to create continuity and consistency in the overall risk management program, because it can be very siloed,” Avnet explained.

Ward, who has actuarial experience, said, “Given how much life insurance involves financial risk management, it’s natural to have the combined roles be part of strategic planning in forecasting risk, supplementing it with necessary operational consideration and balancing it with strategic risk taking and risk protection.”

Read the article in it's entirety here: http://goo.gl/ptekYK


About The Global Association of Risk Professionals

The Global Association of Risk Professionals is a not-for-profit organization and the only globally recognized membership association for risk managers. GARP's goal is to help create a culture of risk awareness within organizations, from entry level to board level.  Follow: @GARP_Risk

The post MassMutual Life Insurance Co. Makes Move For Improved Governance and Consistency Across Actuarial and Risk Functions appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Financial Services Firms Get New View For Compliance Programs https://compliance-risk.com/crc-strikes-co-brand-agreement-with-finwebtech-for-release-of-compliance-automation-software/ Sat, 20 Jun 2015 19:58:05 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2848 learn-more-graphic

In a non-exclusive co-branding agreement, Compliance Risk Concepts and FinWebTech have teamed up to provide […]

The post Financial Services Firms Get New View For Compliance Programs appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
learn-more-graphic

In a non-exclusive co-branding agreement, Compliance Risk Concepts and FinWebTech have teamed up to provide broker-dealers, registered investment advisors, banks and other financial institutions, an automated cost effective solution to improving operations, reducing risk and maintaining a strong culture of compliance.

Cost Effective Compliance Solution For The Financial Industry

Developed with input from ex-regulators from FINRA and the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), Catalyst features algorithms and compliance processes like: Supervisory Task Manager, Trade Surveillance, AML Surveillance, Document Library and Risk Monitoring and Scoring. Learn more about this new Automated Compliance Solution and how it is changing how compliance officers and firms are viewing and managing their compliance programs.

DOWNLOAD CATALYST OVERVIEW

Provide your information below to download the overview today!

Only 1 Click Needed! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Financial Services Firms Get New View For Compliance Programs appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Electronic Communications Surveillance Platforms: Checking The Box or Providing Value? https://compliance-risk.com/electronic-communications-surveillance-platforms-checking-the-box-or-providing-value/ Mon, 01 Jun 2015 22:19:04 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2818 the-box-or-providing-value

As a Former Chief Compliance Officer, I am frequently asked by my clients to help […]

The post Electronic Communications Surveillance Platforms: Checking The Box or Providing Value? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
the-box-or-providing-value

As a Former Chief Compliance Officer, I am frequently asked by my clients to help them find /understand where the “risk” is in their compliance programs / throughout their organizations. For me, a huge part of an organization's risk profile comes down to the quality of their surveillance protocols and the quality of information gleaned from these processes. As most Compliance Officers within Financial Services recently saw in the widely publicized insider trading case involving the Ex-JP Morgan Banker and his father – the two were able to devise a scheme utilizing “golf-related code” in their illegal emails, where “tips” were provided, enabling the Banker’s father to earn over $1 million in illegal profits. In case you missed this, read it here: http://www.sec.gov/news/pressrelease/2015-90.html

Know the Code? The following “coded” emails were pinpointed and referenced by the SEC in their case. Do you think your electronic surveillance platform could have surfaced these communications?

The following “coded” emails were pinpointed and referenced by the SEC in their case. Do you think your electronic surveillance platform could have surfaced these communications? Based on the answer I’m sure most of us would be afraid to utter, Compliance Officers should be pondering if their electronic surveillance platforms are doing all that they can to help detect, prevent, and mitigate the risk associated with deceptive communications.

Searching for a Needle in a Stack of Needles Within the Financial Services vertical, electronic communications surveillance has become an area where most firms / Compliance officers have become “accepting” of their process. It has almost become an area where firms /individuals rest on their laurels – assuming their process will pass muster with the regulators, satisfying the

Within the Financial Services vertical, electronic communications surveillance has become an area where most firms / Compliance officers have become “accepting” of their process. It has almost become an area where firms /individuals rest on their laurels – assuming their process will pass muster with the regulators, satisfying the review and retention requirements stipulated by FINRA and the SEC. needle in needlesThis “comfort” leaves firms exposed. Since most electronic surveillance technologies are based on key word / key phrase searches, they often come up short in terms of their overall utility to an organization. In fact, most individuals charged with the supervisory responsibility of reviewing emails often complain about the redundancy in the process / the amount of false positives – and the valuable time wasted reviewing and approving emails that have no applicability nor present any true risk to their organizations. Truthfully, I’ve heard the process described as worse than “finding a needle in a haystack”. It’s more like “finding a needle in a stack of needles”.

Is There a Better Way?

As fraud-detection technologies have evolved, better solutions have emerged. Now, technologies exist that are policy driven, relying on complex algorithms to identify “behaviors”. As these technologies improve, they will actually learn from the behaviors you don’t want to see versus the ones you do. The Ex- JP Morgan Banker case presents an interesting dilemma for firms. Do you still rely on antiquated technology – or do you use this as an opportunity to test the waters for improved surveillance /detection systems that can help better defend your firm from these types of outcomes.

Is There a Business Case Here? Something All Compliance Officers Should Ponder…

In the end, nothing can protect a firm against an employee driven fraud. Fraudsters are smart – and will always devise schemes that allow them to penetrate company defenses. The question is – how quickly can you catch these individuals and mitigate against reputational risk, regulatory issues and financial loss. It’s a very interesting problem and dilemma to contemplate. In the end, it is my opinion that when these market events occur, Compliance Officers have a limited window of opportunity to improve their company’s defenses – and they should seize the opportunity!

The post Electronic Communications Surveillance Platforms: Checking The Box or Providing Value? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
RegEd Compliance Alliance Conference https://compliance-risk.com/reged-compliance-alliance-conference/ Fri, 24 Apr 2015 22:03:45 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2726 compliance-alliance-conference

  RegEd 2015 Compliance Alliance Client Conference Date: May 4-6, 2015 Location: Raleigh Marriott City […]

The post RegEd Compliance Alliance Conference appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
compliance-alliance-conference

 

RegEd 2015 Compliance Alliance Client Conference

Date: May 4-6, 2015
Location: Raleigh Marriott City Center | Raleigh, NC

Join financial services CCOs, Compliance Professionals, senior representatives, regulators and former regulators and gain a new understanding of expanding and new compliance obligations. Learn how other firms are working through their challenges and learn best practices from regulators, leading consultants, RegEd and industry peers.

How Firms have Implemented New Supervision Rules
Mitch Avnet On Panel Discussion
Date: Tuesday May 5, 2015
Time: 3:15-3:45 pm

Regulatory Change Management Best Practices
Mitch Avnet On Panel Discussion
Date: Wednesday May 6, 2015
Time: 10:30-11:25 am

Click to view preliminary 2015 RegEd Compliance Alliance agenda

The post RegEd Compliance Alliance Conference appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
BlackRock Charged By SEC With Failing to Disclose Conflict of Interest https://compliance-risk.com/blackrock-charged-by-sec-with-failing-to-disclose-conflict-of-interest/ Wed, 22 Apr 2015 01:00:28 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2680

Washington D.C., April 20, 2015 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged BlackRock Advisors […]

The post BlackRock Charged By SEC With Failing to Disclose Conflict of Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

Washington D.C., April 20,
2015 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged BlackRock Advisors LLC with breaching its fiduciary duty by failing to disclose a conflict of interest created by the outside business activity of a top-performing portfolio manager.

BlackRock agreed to settle the charges and pay a $12 million penalty. The firm also must engage an independent compliance consultant to conduct an internal review.

According to the SEC’s order instituting a settled administrative proceeding, Daniel J. Rice III was managing energy-focused funds and separately managed accounts at BlackRock when he founded Rice Energy, a family-owned and operated oil-and-natural gas company. Rice was the general partner of Rice Energy and personally invested approximately $50 million in the company. Rice Energy later formed a joint venture with a publicly-traded coal company that eventually became the largest holding (almost 10 percent) in the $1.7 billion BlackRock Energy & Resources Portfolio, the largest Rice-managed fund. The SEC’s order finds that BlackRock knew and approved of Rice’s investment and involvement with Rice Energy as well as the joint venture, but failed to disclose this conflict of interest to either the boards of the BlackRock registered funds or its advisory clients.
Click here to read the SEC Press Release in its entirety

 

 

 

The post BlackRock Charged By SEC With Failing to Disclose Conflict of Interest appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
How Would You Respond To A Cyber Incident? https://compliance-risk.com/how-would-you-respond-to-a-cyber-incident/ Mon, 30 Mar 2015 16:49:02 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2582 The world has changed in cyber space. It used to be a company could create […]

The post How Would You Respond To A Cyber Incident? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
The world has changed in cyber space. It used to be a company could create a strong exterior wall with firewalls, intrusion detection, virtual private networks and a robust set of virus response tools to keep the “bad guys” out of the critical data you use to perform your business dealings. That was Then and but this is Now. “Now” is defined by a much more complex world in which the statistics point to the majority businesses having already been hacked in some way. And in the B2B environment we live in, up and down stream partners are also a part of a company’s over all risk. And a risk to one may very well be a risk inherited by all within a supply chain or electronic interface community. Whether you have already felt the pain and loss of a hacking incident or fear you are still waiting for the proverbial “shoe to drop”, how you respond to and recover from a cyber incident will dictate how much you lose both in direct impacts and public confidence. “Now” means shifting our mindset from just building and defending the IT infrastructure and applications to also preparing for how to respond to when a cyber incident occurs. The most important factor to consider in preparing to respond to a cyber incident is time. The speed which makes world-wide B2B electronic transactions so much of a business advantage also creates an enormous amount of risk for the company. During a cyber incident a company needs to not have to think, they just need to do and do quickly. The second factor to consider is that in the 21st Century every business is an information technology business. Responding to a cyber incident is a team sport which requires involvement from information technology, operations, strategic communications, human resources, security, risk, vendor management, general counsel, finance, sales and leadership. So you have a lot of people, with their own important missions, needing to be aligned together to move out quickly and seamlessly, many times across countries and continents, without having to think during a cyber incident. What could go wrong you ask? Basically everything, if you are not prepared to respond. We believe there is much for commercial industry to learn from the US military model for handling incidents and crises. Our Service members use mission minded military concepts everyday to respond to natural disasters and keep our enemies at bay. They do it better than anyone else. We are so impressed with this military model we have created a consulting product to help companies like yours develop and implement a high speed cyber response capability. We will come along side your staff with prior military and Department of Defense employees to build military discipline and rigor into a response capability which will posture your organization with plans and associated products like exercises and assessments to be ready to respond quickly and effectively. As we have done with others, let us help you mitigate your risk by developing a cyber incident response capability using tried and true US military concepts. Enjoyed reading this article?

Enter your information in the form provided to download a copy:

First

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post How Would You Respond To A Cyber Incident? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitch Avnet Featured In Compliance Week https://compliance-risk.com/mitch-avnet-featured-in-compliance-week/ Thu, 26 Mar 2015 19:34:35 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2566 Amid a tough climate of regulatory enforcement and an explosion of new rules after the […]

The post Mitch Avnet Featured In Compliance Week appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Amid a tough climate of regulatory enforcement and an explosion of new rules after the financial crisis, many large companies—especially financial institutions—have beefed up their staffing on risk and compliance.

Citigroup, for example, now boasts nearly 30,000 employees dedicated to regulatory and compliance issues. As 2014 drew to a close, HSBC was well on its way toward a goal of 7,000. Since 2013, JPMorgan Chase has increased compliance- and risk-related spending by $4 billion and added 5,000 new employees. Last year, Deutsche Bank added 500 U.S. compliance officers to its ranks.


“It is one thing to have a big head count, but it can be caveman compliance: They are just hunting and gathering. How much of their time is really being used to conduct high-quality analytical work and provide good advice to your stakeholders?”

-Mitch Avnet, CEO, Compliance Risk Concepts


"While few would argue that these investments are a bad thing, ramping up does require a carefully developed strategy that matches adequate talent with a coordinated game plan", says Mitch Avnet, CEO of Compliance Risk Concepts, a consulting firm.

“While companies have taken huge steps to increase the size of their compliance functions, I can’t tell you that those functions are any better today than they were historically,” he says.

“There can be a lot of confusion among a lot of the added compliance folks in terms of where they fit in, who owns what, and who is stepping on whose toes.”

Read the full Compliance Week article, which included additional M. Avnet commentary, by Joe Mont titled Putting All That Talent to Work Smartly (subscription required)

compliance-week

The post Mitch Avnet Featured In Compliance Week appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Bulletin 01-15: A TALE OF TWO VERTICALS https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-bulletin-01-15-tale-two-verticals/ Sun, 22 Feb 2015 23:29:05 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2526 bulletin-01-15

The Differences Between Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers Over the past few years, we have discovered […]

The post Compliance Bulletin 01-15: A TALE OF TWO VERTICALS appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
bulletin-01-15

The Differences Between Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers compliance bulletin 01-15Over the past few years, we have discovered that many of our clients and prospects have taken a genuine interest and are often seeking information, trying to ascertain the benefits / issues that exist within the Broker-Dealer and Investment Adviser models. This includes, but is not limited to, regulatory requirements, commission / fee structures, infrastructure requirements, operational issues, fiduciary versus suitability standards, etc. Whether you operate within a Broker-Dealer or Investment Adviser – the basic operating premise must be the needs of the customer outweigh the needs of the firm / investment professional. Having said that, both models offer viable solutions and approaches to customers. However, as we all know – you can’t be all things to all people. There are certain activities an organization can only undertake within a broker-dealer entity (i.e., IPO’s, Secondary Offerings, M&A Advisory, Private Placements, etc.). Conversely, in order to receive a fee for providing advice to customers, an organization must be registered as an Investment Adviser. We hope you find this side-by-side analysis helpful and educational. As always, feel free to reach out with any questions, comments, etc. Happy Reading! Fill out the form below to download your complimentary Compliance Bulletin titled:

A TALE OF TWO VERTICALS: The Differences Between Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Compliance Bulletin 01-15: A TALE OF TWO VERTICALS appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Cybersecurity: High Profile Exam Priority for FINRA and the SEC https://compliance-risk.com/exam-priority-finra-sec-cybersecurity-risk/ Tue, 20 Jan 2015 17:52:39 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2489 high-profile-exam-priority

As we all contemplate our priorities for 2015, we can be rest assured that Cybersecurity will continue to be a focus area for FINRA, the SEC and other regulators in the coming year. Based on our understanding and utilization of the NIST CICS framework, we can offer your organization a best-in-class, cost effective assessment, training, and technological suite of solutions that can be tailored to meet your company’s specific needs, requirements and budgetary constraints.

The post Cybersecurity: High Profile Exam Priority for FINRA and the SEC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
high-profile-exam-priority

Earlier this month, FINRA and the SEC issued their exam priorities for 2015. Both agencies continue to pinpoint cybersecurity as a top priority for 2015. Although these priority letters serve as a “roadmap” highlighting areas of regulatory focus during the coming year, most firms continue to struggle in terms of how they should conduct their internal Cybersecurity Risk Assessments and evidence their diligence and vigilance with respect to this high profile industry risk.

In the wake of the many highly publicized data-breaches in 2014, our clients have reached out to us for advice and guidance in an effort to increase the overall awareness of Cybersecurity risk within their respective organizations.   Many of these clients are seeking comprehensive training and a robust framework and methodology to conduct Cybersecurity Risk Assessments on a targeted and/or enterprise basis.

Based on the risks and costs (both financial and reputational) that can result from a Cybersecurity breach, all financial services organizations, large and small must assess the following attributes:

  1. Identification:  Can your organization identify the critical processes and the data that supports your business end-to-end?  Can you recognize the difference between a “breach” and an “attack”?
  2. Protection:  What is your company doing to protect its critical data and the infrastructure and devices it rides on?  How quickly after an incident can your company realize that something is amiss?
  3. Detection:  What mechanisms does your organization have in place to detect if something is going on with critical data, and how is that detection escalated throughout the firm?
  4. Response:  How is your organization prepared to respond when Cyber incidents are detected?
  5. Recovery:  How will your organization recover from a Cyber incident?   How will your company keep its great name in tact at reduced risk and quickly on the mend?

Vendors and Business Partners

CybersecurityIn addition to the items discussed above, organizations must consider the impact of their vendors and business partners in their Cybersecurity awareness efforts.   When we look at many of the high profile breaches that occurred in 2014 – service providers to the companies we do business with were the targets of a significant portion of these attacks.   With that said, here are some of  the important questions firms must ask themselves when assessing vendor / service provider Cybersecurity risk:

  • Do our business partners have good Cyber-business practices in place?     How do we know?
  • Do our contracts with partners and vendors require a legal level of Cyber-diligence to get and keep our business?
  • Are your business units, vendors, partners, and processes compliant with ever changing regulations, reporting requirements, and industry standards?
  • Does their critical data and our critical data ever co-mingle?
    • Does our firm have on-boarding contracts, processes and training to ensure appropriate governance over our Cybersecurity risk?
    • How does our firm keep a non-tech savvy workforce well trained and ever-vigilant against Cyber threats?
    • What if you have a potential whistle-blower situation? What are our processes to handle and escalate?

The Year Ahead….

With the knowledge that FINRA and the SEC have made Cybersecurity an exam priority for the coming year, Firms should operate under the following premises:

  • Assume that the criminals are already in your networks.   With this in mind, organizations should respond by proactively assessing their respective risks and creating the appropriate mitigation strategies to ensure your firm is appropriately protected.
  • Multiple studies are showing that in 2014 +40% of all businesses were hacked, exploited or denied service, mainly from overseas non-state actors.   Due to the rise in the number of “network citizens” outside of the United States, this trend is only expected to continue.

According to J.R. Helmig, Founder of Leveraged Outcomes, LLC, a financial and national security consultancy, the primary point is for firms to implement solutions to meet future threats and regulations.
________________________________________________________________________________

“Too often firms spend time and resources to meet yesterday’s compliance obligation or risks. Instead, look at what the requirements and risks are going to be for the time frame when you will be implementing the solution set, otherwise you will be outdated and outgunned before the start”.
________________________________________________________________________________

How Do We “Attack” the “Attacks”?

Through our ongoing efforts to provide thought leadership and impactful guidance to our clients, we have spent a significant amount of time and resources contemplating the best ways for firms to assess Cybersecurity threats within their respective organizations.  Based on our research, we have determined one of the most comprehensive and current Cyber Frameworks to apply is the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) Critical Infrastructure and Cybersecurity (“CICS”) Framework.   NIST CICS addresses all of the FINRA and SEC Sweep letter requirements.

Incremental Tactical Wins Lead to Long Term Strategic Success

The NIST CICS Framework is very modular and can be applied incrementally as firms deem necessary and appropriate.  This allows firms to “leg-in” to a Cybersecurity framework over time with a careful, thoughtful and pragmatic approach toward addressing their risk based on the risk profile of the organization and with sensitivity to internal budgetary constraints.

Buyer Beware!

Firms must be mindful of partnering with third-party vendors / service providers that cannot show some acceptable "criteria-based" framework to assess Cybersecurity risk like NIST CICS.  Companies need the ability to look across their entire enterprise, from the board room to the shop floor, when considering Cybersecurity. Almost all we do today has some sort of Information Technology component  associated with it.  The NIST CICS framework helps companies recognize the scope and breadth of the task at hand.
cyber security

How Can Compliance Risk Concepts Help?

CRC has the capability to assess all or a part of your enterprise that will meet or exceed the spirit and intent of the FINRA Sweep letter.  Based on our understanding and utilization of the NIST CICS framework, we can offer your organization a best-in-class, cost effective assessment, training, and technological suite of solutions that can be tailored to meet your company’s specific needs, requirements and budgetary constraints.

Have Questions?

Use the form below to request an exploratory conversation or in-person meeting to discuss your organizations discrete needs.

First

Only 1 Click Required  Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Cybersecurity: High Profile Exam Priority for FINRA and the SEC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Just in Time For The Holidays – The Gift of Cybersecurity Awareness https://compliance-risk.com/just-in-time-for-the-holidays-the-gift-of-cybersecurity-awareness/ Mon, 03 Nov 2014 00:26:12 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2346

In the wake of the many highly publicized data-breaches in 2014, our clients have reached out to us for advice and guidance in an effort to increase the overall awareness of Cybersecurity risk within their respective organizations. 

The post Just in Time For The Holidays – The Gift of Cybersecurity Awareness appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

The Gift That Keeps on Giving…..

In early 2014, FINRA and SEC regulated firms caught a glimpse of regulatory focus in the form of targeted examination “sweep” letters focused on Cybersecurity.  Although these letters raised awareness of regulatory focus and concern regarding Cybersecurity within the Broker-Dealer and Investment Adviser communities – most firms are still  “in the dark” in terms of how they should conduct internal Cybersecurity Risk Assessments, ensuring they are meeting regulatory expectations if / when tasked by the FINRA or the SEC to evidence their diligence in this high profile area.

In the wake of the many highly publicized data-breaches in 2014, our clients have reached out to us for advice and guidance in an effort to increase the overall awareness of Cybersecurity risk within their respective organizations.   Many of these clients are seeking comprehensive training and a robust framework and methodology to conduct Cybersecurity Risk Assessments on a targeted and/or enterprise basis.

Based on the risks and costs (both financial and reputational) that can result from a Cybersecurity breach, all financial services organizations, large and small must assess the following attributes:

  1. Identification:  Can your organization identify the critical processes and the data that supports your business end-to-end?  Can you recognize the difference between a “breach” and an “attack”?
  2. Protection:  What is your company doing to protect its critical data and the infrastructure and devices it rides on?  How quickly after an incident can your company realize that something is amiss?
  3. Detection:  What mechanisms does your organization have in place to detect if something is going on with critical data, and how is that detection escalated throughout the firm?
  4. Response:  How is your organization prepared to respond when Cyber incidents are detected?
  5. Recovery:  How will your organization recover from a Cyber incident?   How will your company keep its great name in tact at reduced risk and quickly on the mend?

Vendors and Business Partners

cyber security snowglobeIn addition to the items discussed above, organizations must consider the impact of their vendors and business partners in their Cybersecurity awareness efforts.   When we look at many of the high profile breaches that occurred in 2014 – service providers to the companies we do business with were the targets of a significant portion of these attacks.   With that said, here are some of  the important questions firms must ask themselves when assessing vendor / service provider Cybersecurity risk:

  • Do our business partners have good Cyber-business practices in place?     How do we know?
  • Do our contracts with partners and vendors require a legal level of Cyber-diligence to get and keep our business?
  • Are your business units, vendors, partners, and processes compliant with ever changing regulations, reporting requirements, and industry standards?
  • Does their critical data and our critical data ever co-mingle?
    • Does our firm have on-boarding contracts, processes and training to ensure appropriate governance over our Cybersecurity risk?
    • How does our firm keep a non-tech savvy workforce well trained and ever-vigilant against Cyber threats?
    • What if you have a potential whistle-blower situation? What are our processes to handle and escalate?

The Year Ahead….

As we all contemplate our priorities for 2015, we can be rest assured that Cybersecurity will continue to be a focus area for FINRA, the SEC and other regulators in the coming year.    Based on this, firms should understand the following:

  • Assume that the criminals are already in your networks.   With this in mind, organizations should respond by proactively assessing their respective risks and creating the appropriate mitigation strategies to ensure your firm is appropriately protected.
  • Multiple studies are showing that in 2014 +40% of all businesses were hacked, exploited or denied service, mainly from overseas non-state actors.   Due to the rise in the number of “network citizens” outside of the United States, this trend is only expected to continue.
  • Change is coming.  FINRA, The SEC and other regulators are expected to require the entire Financial Services sector to assess Cyber Risk and maturity.

According to J.R. Helmig, Founder of Leveraged Outcomes, LLC, a financial and national security consultancy, the primary point is for firms to implement solutions to meet future threats and regulations.
________________________________________________________________________________

“Too often firms spend time and resources to meet yesterday’s compliance obligation or risks. Instead, look at what the requirements and risks are going to be for the time frame when you will be implementing the solution set, otherwise you will be outdated and outgunned before the start”.
________________________________________________________________________________

How Do We “Attack” the “Attacks”?

snowglobe year aheadThrough our ongoing efforts to provide thought leadership and impactful guidance to our clients, we have spent a significant amount of time and resources contemplating the best ways for firms to assess Cybersecurity threats within their respective organizations.  Based on our research, we have determined one of the most comprehensive and current Cyber Frameworks to apply is the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) Critical Infrastructure and Cybersecurity (“CICS”) Framework.   NIST CICS addresses all of the FINRA and SEC Sweep letter requirements.

Incremental Tactical Wins Lead to Long Term Strategic Success

The NIST CICS Framework is very modular and can be applied incrementally as firms deem necessary and appropriate.  This allows firms to “leg-in” to a Cybersecurity framework over time with a careful, thoughtful and pragmatic approach toward addressing their risk based on the risk profile of the organization and with sensitivity to internal budgetary constraints.

Buyer Beware!

Firms must be mindful of partnering with third-party vendors / service providers that cannot show some acceptable "criteria-based" framework to assess Cybersecurity risk like NIST CICS.  Companies need the ability to look across their entire enterprise, from the board room to the shop floor, when considering Cybersecurity. Almost all we do today has some sort of Information Technology component  associated with it.  The NIST CICS framework helps companies recognize the scope and breadth of the task at hand.

How Can Compliance Risk Concepts Help?

CRC has the capability to assess all or a part of your enterprise that will meet or exceed the spirit and intent of the FINRA Sweep letter.  Based on our understanding and utilization of the NIST CICS framework, we can offer your organization a best-in-class, cost effective assessment, training, and technological suite of solutions that can be tailored to meet your company’s specific needs, requirements and budgetary constraints.

Have Questions?

Use the form below to request an exploratory conversation or in-person meeting to discuss your organizations discrete needs.

First

Only 1 Click Required  Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Just in Time For The Holidays – The Gift of Cybersecurity Awareness appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Faulty Broker Dealer Gatekeeping Leads To SEC Enforcement Action https://compliance-risk.com/faulty-broker-dealer-gatekeeping-leads-to-sec-enforcement-action/ Fri, 17 Oct 2014 18:47:30 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2238 secetrade2

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) recently announced an enforcement action against two broker-dealers that […]

The post Faulty Broker Dealer Gatekeeping Leads To SEC Enforcement Action appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
secetrade2

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) recently announced an enforcement action against two broker-dealers that apparently failed in their “gatekeeper roles” and improperly engaged in unregistered sales of microcap stocks on behalf of their customers.

This action, along with issuance of the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (“OCIE”) National Exam Program Risk Alert (“Risk Alert”) and the Division of Trading and Markets’ “Responses to Frequently Asked Questions about a Broker-Dealer's Duties When Relying on the Securities Act Section 4(a)(4) Exemption to Execute Customer Orders” (“FAQ”) will certainly have impact to broker-dealers policies and procedures, as well as other controls related to suspicious activity reports and related areas.

Red Flags Ignored
The SEC investigation found that the firms sold billions of shares in microcap companies for customers during a four-year period while ignoring “red flags” that the offerings were being conducted without an applicable exemption from the registration provisions of the federal securities laws. Red Flags ignored included:

  • a customer opens a new account and delivers physical certificates representing a large block of thinly traded or low-priced securities;
  • a customer has a pattern of depositing physical share certificates, immediately selling the shares and then wiring out the proceeds of the resale;
  • a customer deposits share certificates that are recently issued or represent a large percentage of the float for the security;
  • share certificates reference a company or customer name that has been changed or that does not match the name on the account;
  • the lack of a restrictive legend on deposited shares seems inconsistent with the date the customer acquired the securities or the nature of the transaction in which the securities were acquired;
  • there is a sudden spike in investor demand for, coupled with a rising prince in, a thinly traded or low-priced security;
  • the company was a shell company when it issued the shares;
  • a customer with limited or no other assets under management at the firm receives an electronic transfer or journal transactions of large amounts of low-priced, unlisted securities;
  • the issuer has been thought several recent name changes business combinations or recapitalizations, or the company’s officers are also officers of numerous similar companies; and
  • the issuer’s SEC filings are not current, are incomplete, or non-existent.

Finding successSection 4(a)(4) of the Securities Act of 1933 provides a registration exemption for broker-dealers when executing customers’ unregistered sales of securities if, after reasonable inquiry, the broker-dealer is not aware of circumstances indicating that the customer would be violating the registration requirements of Section 5 of the Securities Act.

In addition to a combined penalty of $1 million, the two firms agreed to settle the SEC’s charges by paying back more than $1.5 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest from commissions they earned on the improper sales. See SEC Press Release 2014-225.

The Risk Alert and the FAQ
OCIE staff, during their targeted sweep of 22 broker-dealers, identified the following concerns in the Risk Alert:

  • Insufficient policies and procedures to monitor for and identify potential red flags in customer-initiated sales.
  • Inadequate controls to evaluate how customers acquired the securities and whether they could be lawfully resold without registration.
  • Failure to file suspicious activity reports, as required by the Bank Secrecy Act, when encountering unusual or suspicious activity in connection with customers’ sales of microcap securities.

Risk AlertAs per the Risk Alert, of the 22 firms examined, 80% were issued letters of deficiency for material control weaknesses and/or potential violations of law, with the majority of the firms examined were also referred to the Division of Enforcement or another regulatory agency for further consideration of whether violations of law occurred.

OCIE concluded “most of the examined broker-dealers have policies and procedures requiring the firm to conduct a reasonable inquiry into the facts surrounding a proposed unregistered sale to determine if the customer is an underwriter.” However, the OCIE examinations “illuminated control weaknesses in the design or implementation of those policies and procedures.” The Risk Alert presented examples of certain situations where these control weaknesses have resulted in the broker-dealers failing to conduct a reasonable inquiry and/or failing to file SARs regarding suspicious sales activity. Control weaknesses identified included:

  • Some firms’ policies and procedures did not contain sufficient detail to assist the firms’ employees in their efforts to effectively monitor and identify situations where facts and circumstances suggest the customer may not have had a claimed exemption. For example, some firms’ policies and procedures merely stated that a reasonable inquiry should be conducted, without providing any additional discussion of potential red flags that could indicate a possible Section 5 violation, protocols that the staff should follow when encountering red flags, or supervisory reviews that should be conducted to determine whether the securities were resold in compliance with an available exemption;
  • Some firms relied, without further inquiry, on the absence of restrictive legends on stock certificates to conclude that the securities could be resold in unregistered transactions.
  • Some firms relied, without further inquiry, on the delivery of the shares into a customer’s account in electronic form through a transfer from the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (“DTCC”) or the issuer’s transfer agent as a basis for believing either that the shares were not restricted securities or that no further inquiry regarding the customer was necessary; and
  • Some firms did not collect information from the customer about how large blocks of shares, deposited into the customer’s account that the customer requested the broker-dealer to sell, had been acquired, despite the fact that the firms did not know how the customer had acquired the shares.

In addition, OCIE discussed in the Risk Alert their observations that certain types of accounts as being frequently associated with “dumping” of microcap securities.

The Division of Trading and Markets issued an FAQ in effort to remind broker-dealers of their obligation to conduct a reasonable inquiry when selling securities in an unregistered transaction in reliance on Section 4(a)(4) of the Securities Act of 1933.

The post Faulty Broker Dealer Gatekeeping Leads To SEC Enforcement Action appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Bulletin 04-14 https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-bulletin-04-14/ Tue, 14 Oct 2014 21:11:45 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2200 inf-below

YOU BETTER CHECK YOURSELF - BEFORE YOU WRECK YOURSELF End of Year Compliance Requirements For […]

The post Compliance Bulletin 04-14 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
inf-below

YOU BETTER CHECK YOURSELF - BEFORE YOU WRECK YOURSELF
End of Year Compliance Requirements For Broker Dealers

As the end of 2014 quickly approaches, this Compliance Bulletin serves as a notice and reminder to Broker-Dealers regarding year-end responsibilities that must be executed in accordance with FINRA / SEC regulatory requirements. Reconciling your current “state of compliance” is the most effective way to ascertain your program’s status and ensure your firm continues to meet its ongoing regulatory requirements.

submit info below

Compliance Bulletin 04-14 includes information on:

  • FINRA 3012 / 3130 Testing and Certification – Identifying Hot Topic Issues
  • SEC Rule 17a-5 – Annual Compliance Report
  • Independent Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) Test / Review
  • Written Supervisory Procedures (“WSPs”) Review
  • Continuing Education and Branch Office Reviews
  • Annual Compliance Meeting, Registrations and Renewals

Fill out the form below to download your complimentary Compliance Bulletin titled You Better Check Yourself- Before You Wreck Yourself.

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Compliance Bulletin 04-14 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Regulatory Mapping Support Model https://compliance-risk.com/regulatory-mapping-support/ Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:13:45 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2083 support-model-openv2

Over the past several years, the massive and sweeping changes in the regulatory environment have […]

The post Regulatory Mapping Support Model appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
support-model-openv2

Over the past several years, the massive and sweeping changes in the regulatory environment have forced financial services organizations to focus their attention and efforts toward ensuring their internal controls adequately capture all applicable laws & regulations.

So many firms are still struggling with the methodology and infrastructure required to effectively execute on these demands. Organizations implementing a Governance, Risk and Compliance (“GRC”) solution often misunderstand and underestimate the requirements and complexity of a successful GRC undertaking, often thinking that once they have access to regulatory intelligence and content – their problems are solved. This couldn’t be further from the truth…

support-model-openv2

CRC quickly recognized the “gap” in organizational thinking and failure to adequately plan / budget for internal regulatory mapping efforts and created a regulatory mapping support model that addresses this gap. Download the following service spotlight to learn more about the CRC support model:

Provide your information in the form below to download the Regulatory Mapping Support Model Service Spotlight:

Click Only Once Please!  Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post Regulatory Mapping Support Model appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
The Time is Now!: Think Tank 2.0 https://compliance-risk.com/think-tank-2-0/ Mon, 08 Sep 2014 16:09:33 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2031 think-tank

SAVE THE DATE : October 22, 2014 Think Tank 2.0 Meet with your peers to discuss challenges and practical solutions around the Dodd Frank Trade Reconstruction Regulation.

The post The Time is Now!: Think Tank 2.0 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
think-tank

TRADE RECONSTRUCTION IN 72 HOURS

Meet with your peers to discuss challenges and practical solutions around the Dodd Frank Trade Reconstruction Regulation.

Date: October 22, 2014

Time: 12pm-7pm

Location: Bloomberg | 731 Lexington Ave, New York, NY 10022

    • Lunch and Introductions - 12-1pm
    • Think Tank Session - 1-5pm
    • Cocktail Mixer / Networking Session (in Bloomberg Offices) - 5pm-7pm

Follow @ThinkTankNYC to stay in the loop on event details. ThinkTank 2.0

Fill in the form below to reserve your spot:

Click Only Once Please! Processing may take up to 90 seconds

The post The Time is Now!: Think Tank 2.0 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Tackling the Challenges of Trade Reconstruction https://compliance-risk.com/mitch-avnet-to-moderate-bloomberg-vault-webinar-august-21st-2/ Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:02:44 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=2048 webinar-sept

Join SmartBrief Risk and Compliance Editor Sean McMahon and panel Harald Collet, Stephen Marsh and Mitch Avnet, as they discuss trade reconstruction challenges in a webinar sponsored by Bloomberg Vault Tuesday September 16 1:00pm-2:00pm EDT

The post Tackling the Challenges of Trade Reconstruction appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
webinar-sept

Join SmartBrief Risk and Compliance Editor Sean McMahon and a panel of industry experts as they discuss trade reconstruction challenges in a webinar sponsored by Bloomberg Vault.

TITLE Tackling the Challenges of Trade Reconstruction
SPONSORED BY Bloomberg Vault
WHEN Tuesday September 16 1:00pm-2:00pm EDT
PANEL
Harald Collet, Global Head of Bloomberg Vault
Stephen Marsh, Founder and CEO of Smarsh
Mitch Avnet, Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts

webinar sign up

The post Tackling the Challenges of Trade Reconstruction appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
M. Avnet Commentary | Ignites Financial Times Article https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-chiefs-top-worry-culture/ Thu, 07 Aug 2014 11:35:44 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1992 ignites-financia-times-article

Mitch Avnet notes that firms lacking “consistent and cohesive training and messaging to mid-level managers” place their organizations at great risk. "An organization must create an awareness and culture encouraging employees to raise their hands...

The post M. Avnet Commentary | Ignites Financial Times Article appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
ignites-financia-times-article

Compliance Chiefs' Top Worry: Culture written by Peter Ortiz.  Visit Ignites/Financial Times (paid subscription) to read the entire article.. 

Compliance training has moved from instruction on regulatory requirements and how not to flout them to a more intense focus on fostering an ethics-friendly culture, compliance chiefs say. Recently released results of a survey of 763 professionals who deal with compliance or legal responsibilities show that 90% cite creating a culture of ethics and respect as the top training objective.

 

Complying with laws and regulations (89%) and preventing future misconduct (82%) came in second and third, according to the Navex Global 2014 Ethics and Compliance Training Benchmark report. The Navex survey spanned 39 industries, including banking and financial services. Survey co-author Ingrid Fredeen notes that strong oversight by the Securities and Exchange Commission and other regulators helped fund firms stand out.

“The key takeaway I have for CCOs is if you are in a position where you are looking at effectiveness, then budget for measurements of effectiveness,” Fredeen says. “Don’t just assume completion equals effectiveness, otherwise it won’t happen.”

Jim Volk, CCO for SEI Investment Manager Services says that the best training program will do little good unless the organization’s top executives lead by example.

“If people are following the rules but doing it kicking and screaming, then you are not really changing the culture,” he says. “If the culture is good, then the nuts and bolts will take care of themselves.”

Volk stresses that firms should invest in high-quality training that includes presentations with powerful graphics that sink in, rather than issuing lengthy documents for employees to pore over. SEI also uses video where employees and hired actors demonstrate good and bad compliance action. In one scenario, an employee’s personal views expressed on social media get improperly tied to SEI.

“The point is when you invest the time to make it more vibrant and to catch their attention, it makes it more memorable and lets them know if we in invest in [the presentations] that much it must be important,” Volk says.

To prepare his compliance staff, Todd Spillane, CCO of Invesco, encourages them to sharpen their presentation skills by participating in a weekly public speaking group in Invesco’s Houston headquarters. He has joined in on those meetings along with more junior staff.

The survey also found that 45% of respondents say their organizations plan to implement more training for middle managers.

Mitch Avnet, managing partner at Compliance Risk Concepts, notes that firms lacking “consistent and cohesive training and messaging to mid-level managers” place their organizations at great risk.

“Employees who don’t think they can take an issue to their direct manager ... are in turn likely to go externally with their issues,” Avnet writes in an e-mail response to questions. “An organization must create an awareness and culture encouraging employees to raise their hands — bring issues to their direct mangers with no fear of repercussions.”

The post M. Avnet Commentary | Ignites Financial Times Article appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitch Avnet To Moderate Bloomberg Vault Webinar August 21st https://compliance-risk.com/mitch-avnet-to-moderate-bloomberg-vault-webinar-august-21st/ Mon, 04 Aug 2014 17:19:40 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1979 webinar-banner

Bloomberg Vault Webinar: Trade Reconstruction for Compliance Officers Thursday August 21 1:00pm-2:00pm EDT Presented By: Harald Collet Global Head of Bloomberg Vault and Moderated By: Mitch Avnet Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts

The post Mitch Avnet To Moderate Bloomberg Vault Webinar August 21st appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
webinar-banner

Bloomberg Vault Webinar: Trade Reconstruction for Compliance Officers WHEN: Thursday August 21 1:00pm-2:00pm EDT Presented By: Harald Collet Global Head of Bloomberg Vault Moderated By: Mitch Avnet Managing Partner, Compliance Risk Concepts OVERVIEW: It’s only a matter of time before regulators begin requesting trade reconstruction in conjunction with regulatory exams. Are your systems ready? Join Bloomberg Vault for a webinar, Trade Reconstruction for Compliance Officers, and learn what you need to do to ensure your process is CFTC-compliant. webinar sign up

The post Mitch Avnet To Moderate Bloomberg Vault Webinar August 21st appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Bloomberg Vault Publishes Practical Guide For Compliance Officers https://compliance-risk.com/bloomberg-vault-publishes-practical-guide-for-compliance-officers/ Mon, 14 Jul 2014 15:33:45 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1941 bloomberg-whitepaper

Not since the Great Depression has such a comprehensive financial regulatory reform measure been taken […]

The post Bloomberg Vault Publishes Practical Guide For Compliance Officers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
bloomberg-whitepaper

Not since the Great Depression has such a comprehensive financial regulatory reform measure been taken as the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or “Dodd-Frank Act”. Under these new rules, one of the most significant challenges for Compliance Officers is the work set surrounding the CFTC’s trade reconstruction requirement. Trade reconstruction imposes a new standard on swap entities, requiring impacted firms to produce a time-sequenced complete reconstruction of a swap trade within 72 hours of the request by the CFTC. In response, CRC had the honor of collaborating with the talented team at Bloomberg Vault in hosting a DFA Think Tank at Bloomberg Headquarters in NYC. Senior compliance executives and financial services firms representing nearly 10 percent of institutional investment firms impacted by these regulatory requirements met to discuss challenges and practical solutions around the Dodd Frank Trade Reconstruction Regulation. CRC is extremely appreciative of the opportunity to be part of the thought leadership that contributed to resulting industry white paper titled "Practical Guide For Compliance Officers | Swap Trade Reconstruction in 4 Phases". This white paper offers Compliance Officers practical guidance on meeting the trade reconstruction challenge based on emerging industry best practices. The paper initially analyzes the challenges, and then offers a phased project plan to help firms structure the process in a straightforward manner.

Download a copy of the Bloomberg Vault DFA Swap Trade Reconstruction white paper by filling out the form below.

NOTE: We are in the process of planning our next DFA Think Tank session, if you are interested in receiving more information regarding the upcoming session scheduled for October 22nd, 2014 please be sure to select YES when filling out the form.

First
Last

The post Bloomberg Vault Publishes Practical Guide For Compliance Officers appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
John Anderson Named VP of Business Development https://compliance-risk.com/john-anderson-named-vp-of-business-development/ Mon, 07 Jul 2014 16:57:52 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1912 john-anderson

NEW YORK, NY, July 7, 2014 - Compliance Risk-Concepts ("CRC") announced today that John Anderson […]

The post John Anderson Named VP of Business Development appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
john-anderson

NEW YORK, NY, July 7, 2014 - Compliance Risk-Concepts ("CRC") announced today that John Anderson has been named as Vice President of Business Development.

Former VP of Corporate Bond Trading/Sales at Wells Fargo, John’s diversity of experience has enabled him to gain deep transactional knowledge of various equity, fixed income and derivative products, as well as the compliance challenges unique to each sector.

Recognized for ethics and collaboration, John's skill for intuitive and quick assessment of situational needs and management of complex transactions will be a great asset to CRC. John has a proven track record of consistently exceeding expectations, while gaining a high level of trust liaising with executive decision makers, support personnel and prospects.

Along with 15 years experience on Wall Street as a Front Office Sales and Trading Specialist, John has held positions at UBS, William Blair, Knight-Libertas, Wachovia Securities and Forum Capital Partners. John currently maintains FINRA Series 7, 55 and 63 securities license designations. He graduated with a Bachelor of Arts Degree from Marist College.

The post John Anderson Named VP of Business Development appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Four Points Attributes Accelerated Growth to CRC Partnership https://compliance-risk.com/four-points-attributes-accelerated-growth-to-crc-partnership-and-announces-immediate-plans-for-expansion/ Wed, 18 Jun 2014 16:56:36 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1839 crcdesign

The strategic partnership between Four Points and Compliance Risk Concepts serves as a success model for Independent Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers challenged by the current regulatory and economic environment.

The post Four Points Attributes Accelerated Growth to CRC Partnership appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
crcdesign

NEW YORK, NY, June 18, 2014 /24-7PressRelease/ -- Four Points Capital Partners LLC ("Four Points"), a New York based independent brokerage has found a way to rise above, in their strategic partnership with Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC"). The strategic partnership between Four Points and Compliance Risk Concepts serves as a success model for Independent Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers challenged by the current regulatory and economic environment.

"As our partnership continues with CRC, we are finally able to leverage the strength of our platform. CRC's expertise to assess opportunities in the marketplace has helped to expand our reach and provide greater long term value for our clients," said Michael C. Martino, Chief Executive Officer of Four Points Capital Partners LLC. "This includes the launch of our the third Four Points Branch office - and the formation of a separate and distinct Investment Advisory firm that is currently becoming a registered entity."

Empowered by CRC's expertise and commitment to maintaining a strong risk management culture, Four Points is optimistic about future strategic growth opportunities in the market and their positioning for long term, sustainable and scalable success.

"The foundational work with Four Points over the last several months, has enabled CRC to evidence itself as a strategic partner that looks holistically at client relationships. We have utilized the principles of strong compliance and risk management as necessary components, in the identification of revenue generation and growth opportunities for Four Points," said Mitch Avnet, Founding and Managing Partner of Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC"). "We could not be more pleased to work with such an excellent management team at Four Points and look forward to continuing the strong trajectory and building of a future leader in the Independent Broker-Dealer and Investment Adviser sectors."

About Four Points Capital Partners LLC Four Points Capital Partners LLC, is an Independent Broker Dealer with headquarters in New York and members of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC). 4Points

The post Four Points Attributes Accelerated Growth to CRC Partnership appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitch Avnet To Speak At Thomson Reuter's Compliance and Risk Summit https://compliance-risk.com/mitch-avnet-to-speak-at-thomson-reuters-compliance-and-risk-summit/ Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:01:15 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1778 Mitch Avnet confirmed as speaker for Thomson Reuter's Compliance and Risk Summit at the Marriott Marquis Hotel in New York City.

The post Mitch Avnet To Speak At Thomson Reuter's Compliance and Risk Summit appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitch Avnet stays ahead of the curve and confirms he will be speaking June 18th, at Thomson Reuter's Compliance and Risk Summit at the Marriott Marquis Hotel in New York City.

The post Mitch Avnet To Speak At Thomson Reuter's Compliance and Risk Summit appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Bulletin 03-14 https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-bulletin-03-14/ Mon, 02 Jun 2014 18:22:57 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1761 compliance-bulletin

Recent SEC enforcement actions have increased focus on how well advisers and boards of registered and unregistered investment companies provide compliance oversight. Download the Investment Adviser Bulletin and stay up to date with the regulatory landscape. This month Valerie Lewis examines four examples that touch on best execution practices and disclosures, valuation of securities, and oversight of sub-advisers.

The post Compliance Bulletin 03-14 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
compliance-bulletin

INVESTMENT ADVISER BULLETIN

With the recent SEC enforcement actions taking place, greater emphasis is being put on compliance rules. Valerie Pierrat examines the regulatory landscape and identifies three compliance mandates for advisers to recognize within four recent SEC enforcement actions including: best execution practices and disclosures, valuation of securities, and oversight of sub-advisers.

compliance-bulletin-3-14

Fill out the form below to download your complimentary Investment Adviser Compliance Bulletin.

The Compliance Bulletin Service

The monthly Compliance Bulletin Service provides the information your organization needs- at the speed it can handle it. Let the trusted Compliance professionals at CRC do the hunting, gathering and data-mining for you.

Thank you again for your interest in Compliance Risk Concepts.  We strive to continually evidence our overall credibility as a “go to” resource – and create long term value for our clients.

The post Compliance Bulletin 03-14 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
You Are Invited https://compliance-risk.com/the-clock-is-ticking-what-can-you-do-in-72-hours/ Wed, 23 Apr 2014 22:23:08 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1550 think-tank

SAVE THE DATE : June 5th, 2014 Meet with your peers to discuss challenges and practical solutions around the Dodd Frank Trade Reconstruction Regulation.

The post You Are Invited appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
think-tank

 

Meet with your peers to discuss challenges and practical solutions around the Dodd Frank Trade Reconstruction Regulation.

Event Topic: The Clock Is Ticking: What Can You Accomplish in 72 Hours?

Date: June 5th, 2014

Time: 12pm-7pm

Location: Bloomberg | 731 Lexington Ave, New York, NY 10022

    • Lunch and Introductions - 12-1pm
    • Think Tank Session - 1-5pm
    • Cocktail Mixer / Networking Session - 5pm-7pm

Fill in the form below to reserve your spot:

Sending

The post You Are Invited appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Bulletin 02-14 https://compliance-risk.com/social-media-bulletin-02-14/ Fri, 18 Apr 2014 18:49:17 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1450 compliance-bulletin-02-14

Public companies should determine the best way to embrace and utilize social media –The Social Media Governance for Public Companies Bulletin provides recommendations for guidance and ongoing training in regard to your company's Next Generation Social Media Policy.

The post Compliance Bulletin 02-14 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
compliance-bulletin-02-14

EMBRACING SOCIAL MEDIA

Social Media Governance for Public Companies

Compliance Bulletin 02-14

Last year, the SEC’s Division of Enforcement conducted an inquiry into a post by Netflix CEO Reed Hastings on his personal Facebook page. This served as a wake up call to many in our industry.

Whether a public company is an early adopter or not – sooner or later, social media will become just another facet of how we all communicate.

We recommend all public companies utilizing social media for corporate communications implement controls to ensure that all social media communications on behalf of the company are true and complete and that the company controls the timing to comply with Regulation FD and to avoid premature disclosure and that disclosures are crafted in a manner that protects companies from 10b-5 fraud or inside trading claims.

Fill out the form below to download your complimentary Social Media Governance for Public Companies to receive CRC's recommendations for guidance and ongoing training in regard to your company's Next Generation Social Media Policy.

The Compliance Bulletin Service

The monthly Compliance Bulletin Service provides the information your organization needs- at the speed it can handle it. Let the trusted Compliance professionals at CRC do the hunting, gathering and data-mining for you.

Additionally, as part of our service, we provide guidance and recommendations that organizations should weigh / consider as it relates to new rules or modified / amended rules impacting public companies.

Thank you again for your interest in Compliance Risk Concepts. Our ultimate goal is to evidence our overall credibility as a “go to” resource – and create long term value for our clients.

P.S. - If you aren’t yet familiar with our Financial Services support model, please click on the following link: https://compliance-risk.com/service-model-verticals/

The post Compliance Bulletin 02-14 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitch Avnet Moderates FINRA and SEC Exam Trends Panel at RCA2014 https://compliance-risk.com/mitch-avnet-moderates-finra-and-sec-exam-trends-panel-at-rca2014/ Thu, 10 Apr 2014 17:37:55 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1327 rca-panel-mitch

Mitch Avnet had the honor of moderating this year's RCA panel on recent FINRA and SEC exam trends. This is RegEd's 3rd year of hosting the spectacular event, that brings over 100 compliance professionals, industry experts, regulators and industry consultants together under one roof.

The post Mitch Avnet Moderates FINRA and SEC Exam Trends Panel at RCA2014 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
rca-panel-mitch

2014 Compliance Alliance Conference Hosted by RegEd
Mitch Avnet had the honor of moderating this year's RCA panel on recent FINRA and SEC exam trends. This is RegEd's 3rd year of hosting the spectacular event, that brings over 100 compliance professionals, industry experts, regulators and industry consultants together under one roof.

The post Mitch Avnet Moderates FINRA and SEC Exam Trends Panel at RCA2014 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Turning Risk Into Reward | The Electronic Flipbook https://compliance-risk.com/turning-risk-into-reward-the-electronic-flipbook/ Tue, 18 Mar 2014 18:36:23 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1298 crc-flipbook-pages

In keeping with our overall objective, we are pleased to announce the launch of CRC’s new electronic brochure. This interactive overview provides a consolidated view of client testimonials, our services and solutions and the verticals we currently support.

The post Turning Risk Into Reward | The Electronic Flipbook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
crc-flipbook-pages

At Compliance Risk Concepts, we constantly strive to provide quality content and collateral that differentiates us from our competitors, evidencing the overall strength of our support model and the intellectual capital we bring to the table for each and every client, prospect and engagement. In keeping with our overall objective, we are pleased to offer an interactive overview of the services and solutions and the verticals CRC currently supports.

crc-flipbook-pages

Please fill out the form below to browse through our interactive brochure and/or print the downloadable version of the brochure for your reading pleasure.

The post Turning Risk Into Reward | The Electronic Flipbook appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
ALERT: FINRA Cyber-Security Sweep https://compliance-risk.com/cyber-security-alert/ Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:26:44 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1261 cyber-security-sweep

In light of the critical role information technology (IT) plays in the securities industry, the increasing threat to firms' IT systems from a variety of sources, and the potential harm to investors, firms, and the financial system as a whole that these threats pose FINRA is now conducting an assessment of firms' approaches to managing cyber-security threats.The four broad goals that you need to know about FINRA's Cyber Security assessment...

The post ALERT: FINRA Cyber-Security Sweep appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
cyber-security-sweep

FINRA is conducting an assessment of firms' approaches to managing cyber-security threats. FINRA is conducting this assessment in light of the critical role information technology (IT) plays in the securities industry, the increasing threat to firms' IT systems from a variety of sources, and the potential harm to investors, firms, and the financial system as a whole that these threats pose.

FINRA has four broad goals in performing this assessment:

  • To understand better the types of threats that firms face
  • To increase its understanding of firms' risk appetite, exposure and major areas of vulnerabilities in their IT systems
  • To understand better firms' approaches to managing these threats, including through risk assessment processes, IT protocols, application management practices and supervision
  • As appropriate, to share observations and findings with firms

 

 

Note: The assessment addresses a number of areas related to cyber-security, including firms':

 

  • Approaches to information technology risk assessment
  • Business continuity plans in case of a cyber-attack;
  • Organizational structures and reporting lines
  • Processes for sharing and obtaining information about cyber-security threats;
  • Understanding of concerns and threats faced by the industry
  • Assessment of the impact of cyber-attacks on the firm over the past twelve months
  • Approaches to handling distributed denial of service attacks
  • Training programs
  • Insurance coverage for cyber-security related events; and
  • Contractual arrangements with third-party service provider

 

 

Click Here to download the FINRA Cyber-Security Sweep Alert.
For questions regarding this Alert or any other regulatory matter can be directed to:

Mitch Avnet, Managing PartnerEmail or T:(646) 346-2468

Bill Schloth, National Director of Client DevelopmentEmail or T: (203) 247-3687

The post ALERT: FINRA Cyber-Security Sweep appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Bulletin 01-14 https://compliance-risk.com/investment-adviser-bulletin/ Mon, 20 Jan 2014 23:07:23 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1177 investment-adviser-bulletin

The SEC’s Compliance Program Initiative and 2014 Examination Priorities should serve as a “wake up call”.

The post Compliance Bulletin 01-14 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
investment-adviser-bulletin

A 2014 WAKE UP CALL FOR INVESTMENT ADVISERS

Compliance Bulletin 01-14

Now more than ever, Investment Advisers must ensure they have regular and rigorous compliance programs in place to keep pace with industry requirements and expectations. The investment-adviser-bulletinSEC’s Compliance Program Initiative and 2014 Examination Priorities should serve as a “wake up call” to Investment Advisers.

As a former Chief Compliance Officer for a Fortune 200 Company, I understand these challenges and have created this bulletin as a “road map” / “checklist” for Investment Advisers to review and reconcile their respective controls, policies and procedures and discrete risk management activities.

The Compliance Bulletin Service

The monthly Compliance Bulletin Service provides the information your organization needs- at the speed it can handle it. Let the trusted Compliance professionals at CRC do the hunting, gathering and data-mining for you. Want a peek at the monthly bulletin exclusively offered with this service?

Fill out the form below to download your complimentary copy.

Additionally, as part of our service, we provide guidance and recommendations that organizations should weigh / consider as it relates to new rules or modified / amended rules impacting Institutional and Retail broker-dealers and registered investment advisers, wealth / asset managers, hedge funds, private equity, Municipal Advisors, M&A, etc.

Thank you again for your interest in Compliance Risk Concepts.  Our ultimate goal is to evidence our overall credibility as a “go to” resource – and create long term value for our clients.

P.S. -   If you aren’t yet familiar with our Financial Services support model, please click on the following link: https://compliance-risk.com/service-model-verticals/

The post Compliance Bulletin 01-14 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
2014 National Examination Priorities https://compliance-risk.com/2014-national-examination-priorities/ Fri, 10 Jan 2014 18:21:24 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1197

On January 9th, the SEC published it's National Examination Priorities for 2014. On the top of their list - Fraud Detection and Prevention, Corporate Governance, Conflicts of Interest, Enterprise Risk Management, Technology and issues specific to Dual Registrants.

The post 2014 National Examination Priorities appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>

On January 9th, the SEC published it's National Examination Priorities for 2014. On the top of their list - Fraud Detection and Prevention, Corporate Governance, Conflicts of Interest, Enterprise Risk Management, Technology and issues specific to Dual Registrants.

Now is a good time to review these priorities vs. your organization's current control environment, policies and procedures and discrete risk management activities. Read more: http://ow.ly/sLwgd 

The post 2014 National Examination Priorities appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Bulletin 01-13 https://compliance-risk.com/can-you-afford-not-to-manage-through-regulatory-change/ Fri, 20 Dec 2013 00:47:27 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1060 crc-bulletin4

The monthly Compliance Bulletin Service provides the information your organization needs- at the speed it can handle it. Let the trusted Compliance professionals at CRC do the hunting, gathering and data-mining for you. Take a peak by downloading a complimentary Compliance Bulletin.

The post Compliance Bulletin 01-13 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
crc-bulletin4

The CRC Solution To Managing Through Regulatory Change

 

crc-bulletin4

Now more than ever, compliance departments need to stay abreast of regulatory changes in the industry. But maintaining  a “culture of compliance” amidst the tactical day-to-day operations is difficult enough without trying to somehow dedicate additional resources to “data-mine” for changes and requirements that may / may not be impacting your discrete compliance activities and presenting real “risk” to your organization.

As a former Chief Compliance Officer for a Fortune 200 Company, I understand these challenges and have created a feasible solution for small to mid-size organizations and the Independent Broker-Dealer and Investment Adviser communities struggling to meet those needs.

The Compliance Bulletin Service

The monthly Compliance Bulletin Service provides the information your organization needs- at the speed it can handle it. Let the trusted Compliance professionals at CRC do the hunting, gathering and data-mining for you.
Want a peak at the monthly bulletin exclusively offered with this service? Fill out the form below to download your complimentary copy.

Additionally, as part of our service, we provide guidance and recommendations that organizations should weigh / consider as it relates to new rules or modified / amended rules impacting Institutional and Retail broker-dealers and registered investment advisers, wealth / asset managers, hedge funds, private equity, Municipal Advisors, M&A, etc.

Thank you again for your interest in Compliance Risk Concepts.  Our ultimate goal is to evidence our overall credibility as a “go to” resource – and create long term value for our clients.

P.S. -   If you aren’t yet familiar with our Financial Services support model, please click on the following link: https://compliance-risk.com/financial-service

The post Compliance Bulletin 01-13 appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
It's Time For Your 15 Minutes... https://compliance-risk.com/schedule-a-call/ Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:05:43 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=1009 fifteen1

It's Time For Your 15 Minutes... As a CRC insider, for a limited time we are offering a 15 minute call to discuss a complimentary review of one of the following...

The post It's Time For Your 15 Minutes... appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
fifteen1

SCHEDULE YOUR CALL BELOW

Thank you for your recent download of our whitepaper. As a CRC insider, for a limited time we are offering a 15 minute call to discuss a complimentary review of one of the following:

1. Your Firm’s Code of Conduct
2. Your Firm’s / Department’s Compliance Manual
3. Your Firm’s / Department’s Written Supervisory Procedures

Just fill in the form below with the best time for a call and you will be contacted to confirm.

Thank you again and I look forward to speaking with you.

Sincerely,

Mitch Avnet

The post It's Time For Your 15 Minutes... appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) Holds First Compliance Roundtable in NYC https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-risk-concepts-crc-holds-first-compliance-roundtable-in-nyc/ Fri, 01 Nov 2013 17:17:42 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=967 roundtable1

On 10/30/2013, CRC conducted its first industry Compliance Roundtable. Hosted by Barry Barbash, Partner at […]

The post Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) Holds First Compliance Roundtable in NYC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
roundtable1

On 10/30/2013, CRC conducted its first industry Compliance Roundtable. Hosted by Barry Barbash, Partner at Willkie, Farr and Gallagher LLP, there were over 30 people in attendance.

Panelists and guests included Chief Compliance Officers and Senior Compliance Officers from TD Securities, PNC Capital Markets, Santander, Wells Fargo, Deutsche Bank and Key Capital Markets.

In addition to the impressive Compliance Officer lineup - leadership from technology companies - TradeDynamix and Nasdaq OMX were on-site to contribute to the discussion.

Roundtable Topics / Discussions included:

  1. Current Regulatory Enforcement Actions and Themes
  2. Regulatory Change Management, Information Flows and GRC integration
  3. The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Creating Smarter and Practical Compliance Surveillance Programs
  4. Trade Manipulation and Real Time Market Transparency
  5. SEC Rule 613: Consolidated Audit Trail Implications, Costs and Impact on Member Firms

Based on the overall engagement of the attendees and the vibrant interaction, CRC intends to conduct 2-3 additional Compliance Roundtables over the next 6 to 12 months.

Want to stay in the know about upcoming Compliance Roundtables?

Please sign up below to add your name to the Compliance Roundtable list for future invitations:

The post Compliance Risk Concepts (CRC) Holds First Compliance Roundtable in NYC appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Three Investment Advisers Sanctioned for Repeatedly Ignoring Problems with their Compliance Programs https://compliance-risk.com/sec-sanctions/ Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:03:02 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=936 enforcement-actions-slide

The recent action taken by the SEC against three Investment Advisers should serve as a “wake up call” for the IA sector. IAs should utilize the recent sanctions as a “road map” / “checklist” for their own internal controls.

The post Three Investment Advisers Sanctioned for Repeatedly Ignoring Problems with their Compliance Programs appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
enforcement-actions-slide

Three Investment Advisers Sanctioned for Repeatedly Ignoring Problems with their Compliance Programs. Read the press release here: http://ow.ly/qf0PP The recent action taken by the SEC against three Investment Advisers should serve as a “wake up call” for the IA sector. IAs must ensure they have regular and rigorous compliance programs in place to keep pace with industry requirements and expectations. IAs should utilize the recent sanctions as a “road map” / “checklist” for their own internal controls.

“The Compliance Program Initiative is designed to address repeated compliance failures that may lead to bigger problems,” said Andrew J. Ceresney, co-director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “That risk materialized with these firms, whose compliance programs were not adequate to prevent misleading statements in marketing materials or inadvertent overbilling of clients. Firms must not only have policies and procedures in place, but also need to properly implement those policies and procedures.” The firms charged today – Modern Portfolio Management Inc., Equitas Capital Advisers LLC, and Equitas Partners LLC – have agreed to settlements in which they will pay financial penalties and hire compliance consultants.

As part of your ongoing IA Compliance responsibilities, CRC can assist with the following discrete activities:

  • Mock SEC Exams
  • Gap Analysis
  • Advertising and Marketing Reviews
  • Access Person / Personal Account Trading Reviews
  • Form ADV Part 1, 2A and 2B
  • Annual Compliance Reviews –Rule 206(4)-7 of the Investment Advisers Act
  • Code of Ethics
  • Drafting / Revision of Policies and Procedures

For further assistance or an introductory conversation, please contact Mitch at Compliance Risk Concepts.

The post Three Investment Advisers Sanctioned for Repeatedly Ignoring Problems with their Compliance Programs appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Compliance In Financial Services White Paper https://compliance-risk.com/compliance-in-financial-services-white-paper/ Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:53:48 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=894 yarcwhitepaper500

Compliance in Financial Services White Paper | Compliance organizations have had good success leveraging new technologies to improve efficiency, but recent trends as discussed will increasingly force compliance leaders to take action to mitigate the risks arising from the data and regulation explosion.

The post Compliance In Financial Services White Paper appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
yarcwhitepaper500

HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO:

Improve Efficiency and Turbocharge Your Threat Discovery
Compliance in Financial Services White Paper

"Compliance organizations have had good success leveraging new technologies to improve efficiency, but recent trends as discussed will increasingly force compliance leaders to take action to mitigate the risks arising from the data and regulation explosion. Those leaders that act on these challenges by deploying solutions to achieve the twin pillars of increased efficiency and improved detection effectiveness will see significant and lasting returns on their investment..."

Download the full version now:

The post Compliance In Financial Services White Paper appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
You Are Invited To Our Roundtable | Oct. 30th https://compliance-risk.com/you-are-invited-to-our-round-table-oct-30th/ Tue, 01 Oct 2013 14:13:13 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=868 Our-Roundtable-Oct-30th

Round table discussion of senior compliance risk management executives from leading financial services institutions on October 30, 2013. Expected attendees include other senior compliance risk management executives.

The post You Are Invited To Our Roundtable | Oct. 30th appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Our-Roundtable-Oct-30th

You are invited to attend a special invitation-only event… Come listen to a roundtable discussion of senior compliance risk management executives from leading financial services institutions on October 30, 2013. Expected attendees include other senior compliance risk management executives. Topics for discussion to be circulated shortly and could include topics such as:

  • How is it possible to proactively identify new risk patterns in ever-increasing volumes of data?
  • Is it possible to automate what is largely a very manual investigative process without having to hire additional expensive headcount to keep up?
  • How can you improve the efficiency of the risk and compliance process without having to constantly invest in new technologies that only bring a small return

Discussion to be followed by a networking session with cocktails and appetizers. Date: October 30 Agenda: 4:00pm – 4:15pm Attendees arrive, get seated 4:15pm – 4:30pm Introductions 4:30pm – 5:30pm Roundtable discussion and Q&A 5:30pm – 7:00pm Networking and cocktails Location: Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP 787 Seventh Avenue New York, N.Y. 10019-6099, U.S.A

I Will Be Attending

The post You Are Invited To Our Roundtable | Oct. 30th appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Four Points Strives For Regulatory Standard Of Excellence By Partnering With Compliance Risk Concepts https://compliance-risk.com/four-points-capt/ Mon, 09 Sep 2013 14:57:33 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=799 crcdoor

Four Points Capital Partners Llc Announces Partnership With CRC, to create and shape its Compliance Culture in the early stages of its evolution.

The post Four Points Strives For Regulatory Standard Of Excellence By Partnering With Compliance Risk Concepts appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
crcdoor

New York, NY— Sept. 10, 2013 —Four Points Capital Partners LLC (“Four Points”), a New York based independent brokerage firm announced a partnership today with Compliance Risk Concepts ("CRC") in an ongoing effort to develop and maintain a strategic approach toward its compliance program.

We continue to operate in a difficult environment and have sought the expert support and guidance of CRC to help us navigate the regulatory landscape.” said Michael Martino, Chief Executive Officer of Four Points Capital Partners LLC . “We are excited about this partnership and the opportunity CRC brings to Four Points to continue a successful trajectory while maintaining compliance as a cornerstone of our foundation.

Four Points has an incredible opportunity to create and shape its Compliance Culture in the early stages of its evolution – positioning itself for long term, sustainable and scalable success,”, said Mitch Avnet, Founding and Managing Partner of CRC. “CRC’s mission is to help firms like Four Points who strive for excellence, not just in client service, but also in regulatory standards of excellence.”
Four Points Capital Partners LLC

Four Points Capital Partners LLC., members of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC), are focused on delivering the highest level of customer service, the finest range of financial products and an array of customized solutions to meet the needs of today’s discerning investors.

The post Four Points Strives For Regulatory Standard Of Excellence By Partnering With Compliance Risk Concepts appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Broker-Dealers: Is Your “Regulatory” House in Order? https://compliance-risk.com/broker-dealers-is-your-regulatory-house-in-order/ Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:24:52 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=761 risk-management-thumb

CRC Service Spotlight: 3012 / 3130 Testing and Certification Annually, FINRA member broker-dealers are required […]

The post Broker-Dealers: Is Your “Regulatory” House in Order? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
risk-management-thumb

CRC Service Spotlight: 3012 / 3130 Testing and Certification FINRA Annually, FINRA member broker-dealers are required to test and verify the adequacy of their supervisory program, and the CEO is required to certify their awareness of the program’s state.

But can your firm’s principal sign with confidence?

Regulators require a report for testing and verifying supervisory controls. With that said, here are two important questions every Broker-Dealer should be thinking about:

  1. Is your firm prepared to perform a critical review of key compliance and operational functions to the satisfaction of its CEO?
  2. Can your firm’s resources step far enough away from their duties long enough to assess them thoroughly and objectively?

Broker-Dealler An independent review by longstanding industry professionals is the most effective way to ascertain a program’s status. At CRC, we strive to do more than perform a review- we strive to partner. Our industry veterans not only provide key insights into what is required of your firm, but assist your firm in building a stronger program- one that your management and regulators can have confidence in. Let CRC help you turn your risk into reward.  

The post Broker-Dealers: Is Your “Regulatory” House in Order? appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
Mitch Invites You Behind The Scenes https://compliance-risk.com/mitch-invites-you-behind-the-scenes-at-crc/ Thu, 08 Aug 2013 18:20:38 +0000 https://compliance-risk.com/?p=738 crcvideo

Look behind the scenes at how Mitch Avnet and his team are developing business cases to substantiate investments in Compliance technology.

The post Mitch Invites You Behind The Scenes appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>
crcvideo

We are currently seeing a significant upswing within the Financial Services sector. And the question that I am being asked most is "How does an organization go about developing a business case to substantiate investments in Compliance technology?". To answer this, I have put together this behind the scenes look at the CRC process and how we work with internal teams to help decipher, understand and ultimately articulate the needs of the organization related to process improvements, optimization of existing technology, and /or the outright purchase of a completely new platform.

These teams come to us frustrated by a lack of internal resources, knowledge and bandwidth. We cut through the noise and help establish and maintain a “strong” culture of capabilities and competencies.”

Let us know what you think. Enjoy the show!

The post Mitch Invites You Behind The Scenes appeared first on Compliance Risk Concepts.

]]>