<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>BrokerDealer Blog &#187; securities and exchange commission</title>
	<atom:link href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/tag/securities-and-exchange-commission/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:20:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.40</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Equity Crowdfunding and BrokerDealer Rules</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/equity-crowdfunding-brokerdealer-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/equity-crowdfunding-brokerdealer-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2015 22:38:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BD rules]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broker Dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BrokerDealer.com directory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[database of brokerdealers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equity crowdfunding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investment advisor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investment-advisers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RaiseMoney.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC rules equity crowdfunding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wall street expats]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1666</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>BrokerDealer.com curators have received many inquiries from across the industry with regard to equity crowdfunding rules and regs.  As spotlighted by industry experts at RaiseMoney.com, the portal launched by Wall Street expats, the SEC is getting ready to formally announce new rules for the multi-billion dollar crowd fund industry, and towards addressing the common questions, [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/equity-crowdfunding-brokerdealer-rules/">Equity Crowdfunding and BrokerDealer Rules</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>BrokerDealer.com curators have received many inquiries from across the industry with regard to equity crowdfunding rules and regs.  As spotlighted by industry experts at <a href="http://raisemoney.com/sec-to-announce-new-rules-for-equity-crowdfunding/" target="_blank">RaiseMoney.com</a>, the portal launched by Wall Street expats, the SEC is getting ready to formally announce <a href="http://raisemoney.com/sec-to-announce-new-rules-for-equity-crowdfunding/" target="_blank"><strong>new rules</strong> </a>for the multi-billion dollar crowd fund industry, and towards addressing the common questions, below is post produced by Scott Purcell, serial entrepreneur and founder and CEO of <a href="http://www.fundamerica.com">FundAmerica</a>. Purcell keeps a <a href="http://www.fundamerica.com/blog/">highly informative blog</a>, focusing on equity crowdfunding in the US, and we are sharing the latest post below&#8230;and remind our readers that the following is for informational purposes only. BrokerDealers or Investment Advisors who are engaged in crowdfunding initiatives should consult with their compliance officer and an attorney.<br />
</em></p>
<p>This is the single most common question I get asked. There&#8217;s a lot of misinformation about this, so let&#8217;s clear it up&#8230;</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>BrokerDealer.com hosts the world&#8217;s most comprehensive database of brokerdealers operating across <a href="http://brokerdealer.com/member-access-global-database-broker-dealers-qualified-investors" target="_blank">35 countries worldwide</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>Keep in mind that a “platform” is just a website</strong>. It&#8217;s NOT a business in and of itself (people often confuse a 506b/c or Reg A platform with a Title III &#8220;portal&#8221; as defined in the JOBS Act, and they are very differrent things). A platform is simply a tool for general solicitation. So you are not a platform, you are an issuer/investment adviser/listing service/broker-dealer who might have a website that lists offerings of securities, might use other websites that promote offerings of securities, might use social media to promote offerings of securities, might run newspaper ads to promote offerings of securities, might send emails to promote offerings of securities…you get the picture.</p>
<p><strong>Platform Types:</strong></p>
<p>There are four main types of businesses using platforms to market securities pursuant to 506-D (aka “Title II of the JOBS Act”) and Regulation A (&#8220;Title IV&#8221;):</p>
<ul>
<li>Broker-dealers</li>
<li>Investment advisers</li>
<li>Ad/listing services</li>
<li>Direct Issuers</li>
</ul>
<p><em>Which one are you?</em> Well that depends upon your business model.</p>
<p><strong>Broker-dealers</strong> can charge commissions based upon the amount and/or success of an offering. They can also make specific recommendations (<em>not to be confused with “general solicitation”, which anyone can do in a 506(c) or Reg A offering whether registered or not</em>). BD’s typically charge around 8%+ of an offering to cover costs associated with compliance, due diligence, sales commissions, etc. So if you want to charge, for example, an 8% commission on a $1M offering then you need to either be a FINRA member firm or a registered representative of one.</p>
<p><em>NOTE: only BD&#8217;s and registered representatives can receive commissions or success-based compensation. You CANNOT receive commissions as a rep and then hand those over to an unregistered person or company. This is a huge mistake we have heard many operators are making; getting someone in their firm registered so the BD can pay them, and then having them hand over those fees as income to the firm. Illegal. Games cannot be played with this (e.g. charging the rep a huge office rent) as regulators are wise to that and the results will not be pretty. So unless you intend to register every single person in your business, or to buy all or part of a broker-dealer, there is no way for you to receive any income tied to the amount or success of a securities offering.</em></p>
<p><strong>Investment-advisers</strong> typically operate on a “2/20” model &#8211; meaning a 2% annual management fee on the assets resulting from the funds raised in the offering and an upside profit-share of 20% in the profits of the business/investment (<em>referred to in securities lingo as “carried interest” &#8211; it’s called that as it’s your interest in the success of the venture, so don’t confuse it with interest-rate or a commission on the deal</em>). This falls under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Thus, under this model it is not necessary (or advisable) to be a BD or a branch-office of one. Starting an IA is generally free as you are usually initially exempt from federal and state registration requirements due to de minimis exemptions. Even when you do hit the threshold for state or SEC registration, the costs are minuscule compared to those associated with operating a broker-dealer.</p>
<p><strong>Ad/Listing services</strong> might charge a listing fee that is non-refundable and/or a fixed transaction fee for processing data and/or other types of fees which are not (and cannot be) contingent upon the success of the deal. Issuers come to the platform and agree to pay the ad or listing fees (if any) for displaying their offering. The platform focuses on marketing itself and providing general solicitation services to issuers who engage them. They get no compensation in the form of commissions, fund management fees or carried interest like broker-dealers or investment advisers do. Thus, under this model it is not necessary (or advisable) to be a BD or a branch-office of one.</p>
<p><em>Interesting: investment advisers and broker-dealers can post the offerings or deals they are selling on listing services platforms. Some such platforms are even aggregating (re-displaying) offerings which are displayed on other platforms. My next article will discuss various forms of syndication.</em></p>
<p><strong>Issuer-Direct websites</strong> (platforms) are run by businesses (e.g. real estate developers, technology incubators and others) to solicit investors for their own deals, and as such don’t charge any fees at all. They are just platforms that list and advertise the offerings to prospective investors as allowed in 506-D and Reg A offerings. These platforms are not subject to any specific regulatory memberships or oversight, though of course the securities themselves still have to comply with the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933 (’33 Act), and the sale of those securities has to comply with each of the 50 &#8220;mini-SEC&#8217;s&#8221; state laws regarding securities dealers. Under this model it is not necessary (or advisable) to be a BD or a branch-office of one (but almost always necessary to engage one to &#8220;sell&#8221; your securities to states residents).</p>
<p><strong>Why not just go ahead and operate as a broker-dealer even if you really don’t have to?</strong> Because unless you&#8217;re already a broker-dealer then your expertise is likely elsewhere, it&#8217;s not what you do, and the added burden of regulatory compliance can be debilitating to your business and to the offerings your promote; and registered representatives can&#8217;t share fees with non-registered persons anyhow. So stick with what you know, and hire other firms to do what they do.</p>
<p><strong>But don’t offerings displayed on platforms have to be under the control of/underwritten by a broker-dealer?</strong> No.</p>
<p><strong>So, is my business model legal?</strong> Here are a few guidelines&#8230;<br />
<em>If operating as an investment advisor, listing service or issuer direct </em>- do not charge fees based upon the amount or success of the offering and don&#8217;t make specific investor recommendations (as opposed to <a href="http://www.fundamerica.com/blog/portals-ask-the-dos-donts-of-general-solicitation-for-non-broker-dealers/">general solicitation</a>, which is fine). Engage a broker-dealer to assist you with various federal and state compliance tasks.<br />
If you are operating as a broker-dealer &#8211; do not pay anyone (neither individuals nor businesses) any portion of the compensation you are receiving unless they too are registered and you have specific approval to do so from your broker-dealer.<br />
<em>But&#8230;as always&#8230;check with your securities attorney before you do anything.</em></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/equity-crowdfunding-brokerdealer-rules/">Equity Crowdfunding and BrokerDealer Rules</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/equity-crowdfunding-brokerdealer-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SEC OK’s Start-Ups’ Use of Social Media</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-oks-start-ups-use-social-media/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-oks-start-ups-use-social-media/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2015 19:10:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broker Dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crowdfunding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[start-ups]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Trying to figure out how many investors might want to fund your small business? Go ahead and tweet about it. The US Securities &#38; Exchange Commission (SEC) has given a social media greenlight to startups seeking to raise money and this week updated rules allowing for use of Twitter and other social media tools to [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-oks-start-ups-use-social-media/">SEC OK’s Start-Ups’ Use of Social Media</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>Trying to figure out how many investors might want to fund your small business? Go ahead and tweet about it.</h2>
<p>The US Securities &amp; Exchange Commission (SEC) has given a social media greenlight to startups seeking to raise money and this week updated rules allowing for use of Twitter and other social media tools to solicit investors.</p>
<p>The Division of Corporate Finance announced that tweets of 140 characters or less are a proper way for a startup to gauge potential investor interest in a stock or debt offering. The posting must include a link to a disclaimer that says the firm isn’t yet selling securities.</p>
<h3>If you are interesting in equity opportunities with start-ups, click here. Brokerdealer.com is the leading database for broker-dealers that want to help you.</h3>
<p>Bloomberg noted that the SEC has been warming up to social media since April 2013, when it approved the use of posts on Facebook and Twitter to communicate corporate announcements such as earnings. Its latest endorsement of social media applies only to companies looking to raise up to $50 million a year.</p>
<p class="indent">Firms that use Twitter to solicit investor interest must include a link to a required disclaimer that says the firm isn’t yet selling securities, the SEC said in this week’s announcement.</p>
<p class="indent">It’s not clear how many companies will take advantage of the higher fundraising cap. Fewer than 30 offerings were made from 2012 to 2014, when the limit was $5 million, according to the SEC.</p>
<p class="indent">This post is from <a href="http://raisemoney.com/" target="_blank">raisemoney.com.</a></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-oks-start-ups-use-social-media/">SEC OK’s Start-Ups’ Use of Social Media</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-oks-start-ups-use-social-media/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SEC Busts Boca Raton For Unregistered Broker-Dealer Activity</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-busts-boca-raton-unregistered-broker-dealer-activity/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-busts-boca-raton-unregistered-broker-dealer-activity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2015 18:22:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Boca Raton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EB-5 offerings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1521</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The Securities and Exchange Commission said Tuesday that it has charged two firms with illegally brokering more than $79 million of investments from foreigners seeking U.S. residency through the government’s EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program. The charges, the first against brokers handling investments in the EB-5 program, follow earlier SEC actions against fraudulent EB-5 offerings. To get [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-busts-boca-raton-unregistered-broker-dealer-activity/">SEC Busts Boca Raton For Unregistered Broker-Dealer Activity</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>The Securities and Exchange Commission said Tuesday that it has charged two firms with illegally brokering more than $79 million of investments from foreigners seeking U.S. residency through the government’s EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program.</h2>
<p class="marked">The charges, the first against brokers handling investments in the EB-5 program, follow earlier SEC actions against fraudulent <a style="color: #17467d;" href="http://www.thinkadvisor.com/2014/09/04/sec-charges-immigration-attorneys-with-bilking-for">EB-5 offerings</a>.</p>
<h3 class="marked">To get connect with Brokers and Investors today, <a href="http://brokerdealer.com/member-access-global-database-broker-dealers-qualified-investors" target="_blank">click here. </a> Brokerdealer.com is a great opportunity for better investments.</h3>
<p>Ireeco LLC, originally of Boca Raton, Florida, and its successor Ireeco Ltd., a Hong Kong-based company operating in the U.S., were charged with acting as unregistered brokers for 158 EB-5 investors. The EB-5 program, administered by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), provides a path to legal residency for foreigners who invest directly in a U.S. business or private “regional centers” that promote economic development in specific areas and industries, the SEC states. According to the SEC’s order, Ireeco LLC and Ireeco Ltd. used their website to solicit EB-5 investors, some of whom were already in the U.S. on a temporary visa.</p>
<p><span style="color: #222222;">The two companies offered to help potential EB-5 applicants choose the right regional centers. The centers paid the companies commissions of about $35,000 per investor once U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services approved the green card petition, according to the SEC.</span></p>
<p>To read the full article by the South Florida Business Journal,<a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/news/2015/06/24/sec-charges-boca-raton-company-with-unregistered.html" target="_blank"> click here. </a></p>
<p class="marked">
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-busts-boca-raton-unregistered-broker-dealer-activity/">SEC Busts Boca Raton For Unregistered Broker-Dealer Activity</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-busts-boca-raton-unregistered-broker-dealer-activity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rules on Foreign Finders Incorportated In Recent SEC Approval</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/rules-foreign-finders-incorportated-recent-sec-approval/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/rules-foreign-finders-incorportated-recent-sec-approval/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2015 20:01:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FINRA Rule 2040]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foreign finders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1517</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The longstanding rules on foreign finders – when a brokerage firm can pay transaction-based compensation to a non-registered foreign finder – will be incorporated into new FINRA Rule 2040, effective August 24, 2015. Rule 2040(c) replaces NASD Rule 1060(b) and NYSE Interpretation 345(a)(i)/03, and provides that a member firm and persons associated with a member [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/rules-foreign-finders-incorportated-recent-sec-approval/">Rules on Foreign Finders Incorportated In Recent SEC Approval</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>The longstanding rules on foreign finders – when a brokerage firm can pay transaction-based compensation to a non-registered foreign finder – will be incorporated into new FINRA Rule 2040, effective August 24, 2015.</h2>
<p>Rule 2040(c) replaces NASD Rule 1060(b) and NYSE Interpretation 345(a)(i)/03, and provides that a member firm and persons associated with a member firm may pay transaction related compensation to non-registered foreign finders where the finders&#8217; sole involvement is the initial referral to the member firm of non-U.S. customers, and the member firm complies with all the conditions set forth in the rule.</p>
<h3>If you are in need for additional assistance as a result of FINRA rule 2040, <a href="http://brokerdealer.com/member-access-global-database-broker-dealers-qualified-investors" target="_blank">click here. </a>Brokerdealer.com is a global database to find a brokerdelaer that can help you.</h3>
<p>Based solely on its activities in compliance with Rule 2040(c), a foreign finder would not be considered an associated person of the member firm. However, unless otherwise permitted by the federal securities laws or FINRA rules, a person who receives commissions or other transaction-based compensation in connection with securities transactions generally has to be a registered broker-dealer or an appropriately registered associated person of a broker-dealer who is supervised by a broker-dealer. Member firms that engage foreign finders would be required to have reasonable procedures that appropriately address the limited scope of activities permissible under such arrangements.</p>
<div id="lex-article-body" class="article-body">
<p>Where an arrangement with a foreign individual goes beyond initial referrals, the member firm may register that individual as a foreign associate under NASD Rule 1100. Foreign associates must conduct all of their activities outside the US and cannot engage in any securities activities with US persons. Although deemed an associated person for whom a Form U4 must be filed, a foreign associate is not required to pass a qualifying examination. For arrangements with foreign groups whose activities for foreign customers go beyond the initial referral to the member, registration of a foreign branch may be an alternative. To the extent a foreign finder solicits or negotiates with US persons, entering into a 15a-6 agreement may be a viable alternative.</p>
<p>To read the full article, <a href="http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ff389a98-5489-443e-8030-96f6ecbe2abe" target="_blank">click here.</a></p>
</div>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/rules-foreign-finders-incorportated-recent-sec-approval/">Rules on Foreign Finders Incorportated In Recent SEC Approval</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/rules-foreign-finders-incorportated-recent-sec-approval/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SEC Bags 3 Dozen BrokerDealers in Muni Bond Underwriter Sweep; Siebert &amp; Loop Snagged</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-bags-3-dozen-brokerdealers-muni-bond-underwriter-sweep-siebert-loop-snagged/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-bags-3-dozen-brokerdealers-muni-bond-underwriter-sweep-siebert-loop-snagged/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2015 13:47:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enforcement actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enforcement Division’s Municipal Securities and Public Pensions Unit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LeeAnn Ghazil Gaunt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LLC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loop Capital Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[municipal bond offerings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[municipal bond underwriting firms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[municipal bonds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Municipalities Continuing Disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Municipalities Continuing Disclosure Cooperation (MCDC) Initiative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[offering documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC Chair Mary Jo White]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Siebert Brandford Shank & Co.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[• Loop Capital Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[• Siebert Brandford Shank & Co.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1499</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>BrokerDealer.com profiles what could be called a “Muni Day Massacre” as the SEC just announced settlement with 36 municipal bond underwriting firms – for a total of $9.3 million– for offerings which they disclosed under the MCDC had compliance violations. The SEC sweep scooped up several MWBE-certified firms, including Siebert Brandford Shank &#38; Co., LLC, [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-bags-3-dozen-brokerdealers-muni-bond-underwriter-sweep-siebert-loop-snagged/">SEC Bags 3 Dozen BrokerDealers in Muni Bond Underwriter Sweep; Siebert &#038; Loop Snagged</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>BrokerDealer.com profiles what could be called a “Muni Day Massacre” as the SEC just announced settlement with <strong>36 municipal bond underwriting firms – for a total of $9.3 million</strong>– for offerings which they disclosed under the MCDC had compliance violations. The SEC sweep scooped up several MWBE-certified firms, including <a href="http://www.sbsco.com/firmPage/firm1.aspx">Siebert Brandford Shank &amp; Co., LLC</a>, which was fined $240,000 and Chicago-based <a href="http://loopcapital.com/about-us">Loop Capital Markets, LLC</a> was fined $60,000.</h2>
<p>Here is the official press release from the SEC:</p>
<p>June 18 2015&#8211;The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced enforcement actions against 36 municipal underwriting firms for violations in municipal bond offerings. The cases are the first brought against underwriters under the <a href="http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&amp;enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTUwNjE4LjQ2MTg1MDYxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE1MDYxOC40NjE4NTA2MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE2ODQ5NjI5JmVtYWlsaWQ9ZGViYmllQGljb21wYXNzbGxjLmNvbSZ1c2VyaWQ9ZGViYmllQGljb21wYXNzbGxjLmNvbSZmbD0mZXh0cmE9TXVsdGl2YXJpYXRlSWQ9JiYm&amp;&amp;&amp;102&amp;&amp;&amp;http://www.sec.gov/News/PressRelease/Detail/PressRelease/1370541090828">Municipalities Continuing Disclosure Cooperation (MCDC) Initiative</a>, a voluntary self-reporting program targeting material misstatements and omissions in municipal bond offering documents.</p>
<p><em>“The MCDC initiative has already resulted in significant improvements to the municipal securities market, including heightened awareness of issuers’ disclosure obligations and enhanced disclosure policies and procedures,”</em> said SEC Chair Mary Jo White.  <em>“This ongoing enforcement initiative will continue to bring lasting changes to the municipal securities markets for the benefit of investors.”</em></p>
<p>In today’s actions, the SEC alleged that between 2010 and 2014 the 36 firms violated federal securities laws by selling municipal bonds using offering documents that contained materially false statements or omissions about the bond issuers’ compliance with continuing disclosure obligations.  The underwriting firms also allegedly failed to conduct adequate due diligence to identify the misstatements and omissions before offering and selling the bonds to their</p>
<p><em>“The settlements announced today reflect these underwriters’ cooperation in self-reporting their own misconduct and agreeing to improve their procedures going forward,”</em> said LeeAnn Ghazil Gaunt, Chief of the Enforcement Division’s Municipal Securities and Public Pensions Unit.   <em>“Because these 36 firms underwrite a substantial portion of the country’s municipal bonds each year, we expect a large number of bondholders will benefit from the resulting improvements in due diligence and disclosure.”</em></p>
<p>As still remains customary within the wacky regulatory scheme in which the SEC deals with broker-dealers, the 36 firms did not admit or deny the findings, but agreed to cease and desist from such violations in the future.  Under the terms of the MCDC initiative, they will pay civil penalties based on the number and size of the fraudulent offerings identified, up to a cap based on the size of the firm.  <strong>The maximum penalty imposed is $500,000.</strong>  <em>In addition, each firm agreed to retain an independent consultant to review its policies and procedures on due diligence for municipal securities underwriting. </em></p>
<p>The MCDC initiative, which is continuing, is being coordinated by Kevin Guerrero of the Enforcement Division’s Municipal Securities and Public Pensions Unit.  *  *  *</p>
<p>Link to <a href="http://links.govdelivery.com:80/track?type=click&amp;enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTUwNjE4LjQ2MTg1MDYxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE1MDYxOC40NjE4NTA2MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE2ODQ5NjI5JmVtYWlsaWQ9ZGViYmllQGljb21wYXNzbGxjLmNvbSZ1c2VyaWQ9ZGViYmllQGljb21wYXNzbGxjLmNvbSZmbD0mZXh0cmE9TXVsdGl2YXJpYXRlSWQ9JiYm&amp;&amp;&amp;105&amp;&amp;&amp;http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin.shtml">the SEC’s orders</a> and penalty amounts:</p>
<ul>
<li>The Baker Group, LP – $250,000</li>
<li>B.C. Ziegler and Company – $250,000</li>
<li>Benchmark Securities, LLC – $100,000</li>
<li>Bernardi Securities, Inc. – $100,000</li>
<li>BMO Capital Markets GKST Inc. – $250,000</li>
<li>BNY Mellon Capital Markets, LLC – $120,000</li>
<li>BOSC, Inc. – $250,000</li>
<li>Central States Capital Markets, LLC – $60,000</li>
<li>Citigroup Global Markets Inc. – $500,000</li>
<li>City Securities Corporation – $250,000</li>
<li>Davenport &amp; Company LLC – $80,000</li>
<li>Dougherty &amp; Co. LLC – $250,000</li>
<li>First National Capital Markets, Inc. – $100,000</li>
<li>George K. Baum &amp; Company – $250,000</li>
<li>Goldman, Sachs &amp; Co. – $500,000</li>
<li>Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley &amp; Co. – $220,000</li>
<li>J.P. Morgan Securities LLC – $500,000</li>
<li>L.J. Hart and Company – $100,000</li>
<li>Loop Capital Markets, LLC – $60,000</li>
<li>Martin Nelson &amp; Co., Inc. – $100,000</li>
<li>Merchant Capital, L.L.C. – $100,000</li>
<li>Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner &amp; Smith Incorporated – $500,000</li>
<li>Morgan Stanley &amp; Co. LLC – $500,000</li>
<li>The Northern Trust Company – $60,000</li>
<li>Oppenheimer &amp; Co. Inc. – $400,000</li>
<li>Piper Jaffray &amp; Co. – $500,000</li>
<li>Raymond James &amp; Associates, Inc. – $500,000</li>
<li>RBC Capital Markets, LLC – $500,000</li>
<li>Robert W. Baird &amp; Co. Incorporated – $500,000</li>
<li>Siebert Brandford Shank &amp; Co., LLC  – $240,000</li>
<li>Smith Hayes Financial Services Corporation – $40,000</li>
<li>Stephens Inc. – $400,000</li>
<li>Sterne, Agee &amp; Leach, Inc. – $80,000</li>
<li>Stifel, Nicolaus &amp; Company, Inc. – $500,000</li>
<li>Wells Nelson &amp; Associates, LLC – $100,000</li>
<li>William Blair &amp; Co., L.L.C. – $80,000</li>
</ul>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-bags-3-dozen-brokerdealers-muni-bond-underwriter-sweep-siebert-loop-snagged/">SEC Bags 3 Dozen BrokerDealers in Muni Bond Underwriter Sweep; Siebert &#038; Loop Snagged</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-bags-3-dozen-brokerdealers-muni-bond-underwriter-sweep-siebert-loop-snagged/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SEC Appointment Of In-House Judge “Likely Unconstitutional”</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-appointment-house-judge-likely-unconstitutional/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-appointment-house-judge-likely-unconstitutional/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2015 02:52:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[broker deal blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In-House Judge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insider trading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leigh Martin May]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wall street journal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1444</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Secruities and Exchange Commission could face potential problems after a federal court ruled that its appointment of an in-house judge to preside over administrative insider trading cases was “likely unconstitutional.” BrokerDealer.com update profiles what could turn into a legal brouhaha as the SEC&#8217;s recent strategy to use internal arbitrators could prove to be a major conflict of [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-appointment-house-judge-likely-unconstitutional/">SEC Appointment Of In-House Judge “Likely Unconstitutional”</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2><span style="color: #000000;">Secruities and Exchange Commission could face potential problems after a federal court ruled that its appointment of an in-house judge to preside over administrative <a style="color: #f09217; text-decoration: underline;" href="http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/05/sec-insider-trading-2/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #000000;">insider trading</span></a> cases was “<a style="color: #f09217; text-decoration: underline;" href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-judge-rules-sec-in-house-judges-appointment-likely-unconstitutional-1433796161" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><span style="color: #000000;">likely unconstitutional.”</span></a></span></h2>
<p><span style="color: #222222;">BrokerDealer.com update profiles what could turn into a legal brouhaha as the SEC&#8217;s recent strategy to use internal arbitrators could prove to be a major conflict of legal interest, as U.S. District Judge Leigh Martin May&#8217;s decision Monday that the SEC may not have the authority to divert such cases from regular courts halted its action against a Georgia real-estate developer. Charles Hill was accused of profiting from trades made after he received a tip from a friend. He sued in Atlanta federal court to block the administrative action.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>BrokerDealer.com provides a comprehensive <a href="http://brokerdealer.com/member-access-global-database-broker-dealers-qualified-investors" target="_blank">global database directory</a> with information for thousands of broker-dealer firms in more than 30 countries throughout the free market world.</strong></p>
<p>The SEC has increasingly been using its five administrative-law judges to hear its cases, rather than sending them to federal court, legal experts said. Although the ruling was preliminary, and won’t necessarily be duplicated in other federal courts, it could have ramifications for other SEC cases and potentially other federal agencies.</p>
<p>The decision is the first by a federal judge to find the SEC’s in-house tribunal could breach the Constitution. Previous constitutional challenges to the SEC’s system of judges, based on different legal arguments, have been inconclusive or unsuccessful.</p>
<p>To read more, check out <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-judge-rules-sec-in-house-judges-appointment-likely-unconstitutional-1433796161?cb=logged0.6811190366279334">this article </a>by the WSJ.</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-appointment-house-judge-likely-unconstitutional/">SEC Appointment Of In-House Judge “Likely Unconstitutional”</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/sec-appointment-house-judge-likely-unconstitutional/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Finra Focuses On Educational Communication With Investors In New Compensation Proposal</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/finra-focuses-educational-communication-investors-new-compensation-proposal/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/finra-focuses-educational-communication-investors-new-compensation-proposal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2015 14:15:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broker compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broker Dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer database]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FINRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finra Ceo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finra proposal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investment News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investmentnews.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Ketchum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Brokerdealer.com blog update profiles a new proposal from Finra that has educating investors as their main focus. This proposal is a revised version of the one Finra filed last spring with the SEC. In the previous filing, brokers would have required brokers to disclose to investors recruiting incentives above $100,000 they received for switching to a [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/finra-focuses-educational-communication-investors-new-compensation-proposal/">Finra Focuses On Educational Communication With Investors In New Compensation Proposal</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brokerdealer.com blog update profiles a new proposal from Finra that has educating investors as their main focus. This proposal is a revised version of the one Finra filed last spring with the SEC. In the previous filing, <a href="http://brokerdealer.com/member-access-global-database-broker-dealers-qualified-investors">brokers</a> <span style="color: #222222;">would have required brokers to disclose to investors recruiting incentives above $100,000 they received for switching to a new firm. This new proposal requires firms to send &#8220;educational communication&#8221; to investors when a broker moves to that firm. This educational communication proposal is drawing a lot of backlash as critics believe it watered down the original idea for compensation disclosures. This brokerdealer.com blog update is courtesy of InvestmentNews&#8217; Mark Schoeff Jr.  and his article, &#8220;<a href="http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150527/FREE/150529936/finra-releases-revised-broker-compensation-proposal?utm_source=BreakingNews-20150527&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=investmentnews&amp;utm_term=text">Finra releases revised broker compensation proposal</a>&#8220;.<br />
</span></p>
<p>Finra released a revised proposal Wednesday for a rule designed to help investors understand the financial incentives their brokers had for switching to a new firm.</p>
<p>Under the rule, brokerages would have to send an “educational communication” to investors working with a broker who is moving to their firm. The document customers receive would outline questions they should ask their broker about the compensation and other inducements the broker is getting to transfer to the new firm.</p>
<p>The questions would help investors determine whether the broker&#8217;s financial incentives create a conflict of interest and whether investors would incur costs by following the broker to a new firm.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/notice_doc_file_ref/Regulatory_Notice_15-19.pdf" target="_blank">The broker-compensation proposal</a> is a revised version of one the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in March 2014 but <a href="http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20140623/FREE/140629980" target="_blank">later withdrew</a> amid industry resistance.</p>
<p>To continue reading about this investor educational communication focused Finra proposal, click <a href="http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150527/FREE/150529936/finra-releases-revised-broker-compensation-proposal?utm_source=BreakingNews-20150527&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=investmentnews&amp;utm_term=text">here</a>.</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/finra-focuses-educational-communication-investors-new-compensation-proposal/">Finra Focuses On Educational Communication With Investors In New Compensation Proposal</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/finra-focuses-educational-communication-investors-new-compensation-proposal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s Best For The Customer Doesn&#8217;t Matter According To Finra CEO Ketchum</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/whats-best-for-the-customer-doesnt-matter-according-to-finra-ceo-ketchum/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/whats-best-for-the-customer-doesnt-matter-according-to-finra-ceo-ketchum/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2015 14:15:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broker Dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Labor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FINRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finra Ceo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mary jo white]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retirement investors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Ketchum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1414</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Brokerdealer.com blog update profiles Finra CEO, Richard Ketchum has come back at the Department of Labor (DOL), as it proposed to raise invesment advice standards for broker dealers. Ketchum claims this could cause firms to discontinue sales of individual retirement accounts as it would force there be a bias against products with higher fees, regardless [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/whats-best-for-the-customer-doesnt-matter-according-to-finra-ceo-ketchum/">What&#8217;s Best For The Customer Doesn&#8217;t Matter According To Finra CEO Ketchum</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="color: #222222;">Brokerdealer.com blog update profiles Finra CEO, Richard Ketchum has come back at the Department of Labor (DOL), as it proposed to raise invesment advice standards for broker dealers. Ketchum claims this could cause firms to discontinue sales of individual retirement accounts as it would force there be a bias against products with higher fees, regardless of what&#8217;s best for the customer. This brokerdealer.com blog update profiling the implications of this new DOL proposal is courtesy of InvestmentNews article, &#8220;<a href="http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150527/FREE/150529942/finras-ketchum-criticizes-dol-fiduciary-rule?NLID=daily&amp;NL_issueDate=20150527&amp;utm_source=Daily-20150527&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=investmentnews&amp;utm_term=text">Finra&#8217;s Ketchum criticizes DOL fiduciary rule</a>&#8220;, with an excerpt below.</p>
<p style="color: #222222;">Finra&#8217;s CEO Richard Ketchum criticized a Department of Labor proposal to raise investment advice standards for brokers Wednesday, saying it might cause firms to curtail &#8212; or even discontinue &#8212; sales of individual retirement accounts.</p>
<p style="color: #222222;">Mr. Ketchum said the <a style="font-weight: bold; color: #b92025;" href="http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150414/FREE/150419976/labor-department-proposes-controversial-fiduciary-rule" target="_blank">DOL proposal</a> would create a bias against financial products with higher fees, even if they&#8217;re the best recommendation for a client, and that it could force firms to move to a fee-based rather than brokerage business model. He also said it&#8217;s not a good idea to regulate retirement products, such as 401(k)s and IRAs, differently than other investments.</p>
<p style="color: #222222;">The Securities and Exchange Commission should take the lead in drafting a fiduciary-duty rule “across all securities products,” Mr. Ketchum told reporters on the sidelines of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc&#8217;s annual conference in Washington. SEC Chairwoman Mary Jo White <a style="font-weight: bold; color: #b92025;" href="http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150324/FREE/150329964/secs-white-fiduciary-battle-far-from-over" target="_blank">favors such a rule</a>, but has acknowledged it&#8217;s not clear whether she has the support of the five-member panel to make a proposal.</p>
<p style="color: #222222;">To continue reading about Finra CEO Ketchum and his take on the DOL proposal and his opinion on the SEC acting on this issue first, click <a href="http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150527/FREE/150529942/finras-ketchum-criticizes-dol-fiduciary-rule?NLID=daily&amp;NL_issueDate=20150527&amp;utm_source=Daily-20150527&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=investmentnews&amp;utm_term=text">here</a>.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<div class="bodyAdBlock advertisement" style="color: #000000;"></div>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/whats-best-for-the-customer-doesnt-matter-according-to-finra-ceo-ketchum/">What&#8217;s Best For The Customer Doesn&#8217;t Matter According To Finra CEO Ketchum</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/whats-best-for-the-customer-doesnt-matter-according-to-finra-ceo-ketchum/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>International Fraud Lands New York BrokerDealer In Hot Water</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/international-fraud-lands-new-york-brokerdealer-hot-water/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/international-fraud-lands-new-york-brokerdealer-hot-water/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2015 14:15:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broker Dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer database]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[London]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pangaea Trading Partners LLC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Depalo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wall street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wall street journal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wsj]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1390</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Brokerdealer.com blog update profiles New York broker dealer, Robert Depalo, being charge with several charges after a year long investigation discoverd Depalo was running a highly sophisticated international fraud scheme. Depalo schemed more than 20 wealthy London investors with the help of 37 year old associate, Joshua Gladtke. Both are being charged by the Manhattan DA [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/international-fraud-lands-new-york-brokerdealer-hot-water/">International Fraud Lands New York BrokerDealer In Hot Water</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brokerdealer.com blog update profiles New York <a href="http://brokerdealer.com/member-access-global-database-broker-dealers-qualified-investors">broker dealer</a>, Robert Depalo, being charge with several charges after a year long investigation discoverd Depalo was running a highly sophisticated international fraud scheme. Depalo schemed more than 20 wealthy London investors with the help of 37 year old associate, Joshua Gladtke. Both are being charged by the Manhattan DA as well as the SEC. This update is courtesy of the Wall Street Journal&#8217;s article, &#8220;<a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/manhattan-da-charges-ny-broker-dealer-in-international-fraud-1432144347">Manhattan DA Charges NY Broker-Dealer in International Fraud</a>&#8220;, with an excerpt below. The Manhattan district attorney’s office charged New York broker-dealer Robert Depalo with running a sophisticated investment fraud, following a yearslong investigation that the office nearly dropped after hitting a dead-end. Prosecutors alleged in court documents that Mr. Depalo duped more than 20 high-net-worth investors in London into pouring $6.5 million into a fraudulent investment vehicle called Pangaea Trading Partners LLC. The Securities and Exchange Commission filed similar civil charges Wednesday afternoon. The alleged scheme involves a complicated trail of money and sham entities that not only befuddled investors but prosecutors as well, the people said. It also highlights the efforts of the district attorney’s office to pursue increasingly complex and international cases that are more frequently handled by city prosecutors’ federal counterparts blocks away at the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office.</p>
<p>To continue reading about the international fraud scheme, Depalo&#8217;s charges, click <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/manhattan-da-charges-ny-broker-dealer-in-international-fraud-1432144347">here</a></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/international-fraud-lands-new-york-brokerdealer-hot-water/">International Fraud Lands New York BrokerDealer In Hot Water</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/international-fraud-lands-new-york-brokerdealer-hot-water/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>69 Red Flags Raised Before Action Was Taken Against Ponzi Scheme Involved Broker</title>
		<link>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/69-red-flags-raised-action-taken-ponzi-scheme-involved-broker/</link>
		<comments>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/69-red-flags-raised-action-taken-ponzi-scheme-involved-broker/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2015 14:00:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[admin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broker Dealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer database]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brokerdealer.com blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cicolani]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FINRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jerry Cicolani]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ponzi scheme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ponzi schemes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[red flag]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities and exchange commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Exchange Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wall street]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://brokerdealer.com/blog/?p=1380</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Brokerdealer.com blog update profiles broker, Jerry A. Cicolani Jr, who just recently was barred from the broker industry. Normally this wouldn&#8217;t be unusual, except it took 69 complaints filed against Cicolani before the Finra, or the FBI, finally did something about it. Not only had Cicolani received 69 complaints in his record, but he also was [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/69-red-flags-raised-action-taken-ponzi-scheme-involved-broker/">69 Red Flags Raised Before Action Was Taken Against Ponzi Scheme Involved Broker</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="302" data-total-count="302">Brokerdealer.com blog update profiles broker, Jerry A. Cicolani Jr, who just recently was barred from the broker industry. Normally this wouldn&#8217;t be unusual, except it took 69 complaints filed against Cicolani before the Finra, or the FBI, finally did something about it. Not only had Cicolani received 69 complaints in his record, but he also was involved in a Ponzi Scheme as well. This brokerdealer.com blog update is courtesy of The New York Times&#8217;<span style="color: #222222;"> Susan Antilla and her article, &#8220;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/business/dealbook/years-of-overlooked-red-flags-catch-up-to-stockbroker.html">Many Years of Overlooked Red Flags Catch Up to Stockbroker</a>&#8220;. An excerpt from the article is below.<br />
</span></p>
<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="302" data-total-count="302"><strong>There are many brokerdealers who are Finra, SEC, and FBI compliant, to find one of those click <a href="http://brokerdealer.com/member-access-global-database-broker-dealers-qualified-investors">here</a>. </strong></p>
<p id="story-continues-1" class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="302" data-total-count="302">In most professions, it would take only one or two acts of egregious conduct before troubled employees were shown the door. In the case of one stockbroker who has repeatedly had complaints from investors, it took <a style="color: #326891;" title="A link to Jerry A. Cicolani Jr.’s record at Finra." href="http://brokercheck.finra.org/Report/Download/35885238">69 customer disputes</a> filed over the last 13 years before he was barred from the business.</p>
<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="329" data-total-count="631">The stockbroker, Jerry A. Cicolani Jr., had complaint after complaint documented in his formal record. Regulators and employers spotted red flags. Yet the organization primarily responsible for monitoring the nation’s 637,000 brokers, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, <a style="color: #326891;" title="A link to Finra’s disciplinary action on Mr. Cicolani." href="http://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/publication_file/september%202014%20disciplinary%20action.pdf">did not bar </a>Mr. Cicolani until September 2014.</p>
<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="287" data-total-count="918">The <a style="color: #326891;" title="More articles about the U.S. Securities And Exchange Commission." href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/s/securities_and_exchange_commission/index.html?inline=nyt-org">Securities and Exchange Commission </a><a style="color: #326891;" title="A link to the S.E.C. complaint." href="http://www.investorclaims.com/documents/SEC-KGTA-complaint.pdf">had already sued him, in May 2014,</a> over his role in a <a style="color: #326891;" title="More articles about Ponzi schemes." href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/frauds_and_swindling/ponzi_schemes/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier">Ponzi scheme</a>. His most recent employer, PrimeSolutions Securities, based in Cleveland, fired him a day after that lawsuit was filed. And his customers had lodged complaints as far back as 2002.</p>
<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="287" data-total-count="918">To continue reading about the legal implications Mr. Cicolani is now facing, click <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/business/dealbook/years-of-overlooked-red-flags-catch-up-to-stockbroker.html">here</a></p>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog/69-red-flags-raised-action-taken-ponzi-scheme-involved-broker/">69 Red Flags Raised Before Action Was Taken Against Ponzi Scheme Involved Broker</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brokerdealer.com/blog">BrokerDealer Blog</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://brokerdealer.com/blog/69-red-flags-raised-action-taken-ponzi-scheme-involved-broker/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
