I’m not sure that I’m as excited as Navin Johnson was when the new phone books were delivered — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7aIf1YnbbU – but I was pretty happy when FINRA published its 2014 Year in Review and Financial Report.
As everyone who studies FINRA’s Regulatory Notices is already well aware, two days from now, FINRA’s rule requiring background checks on prospective registered representatives goes into effect.
By now, it should be clear, we are oft to criticize FINRA in this blog.
We have complained before in this blog about some of the obvious inequities associated with the FINRA Enforcement process that disfavor respondents.
FINRA recently announced a multi-million dollar ad campaign to increase public awareness of BrokerCheck, in an effort to increase the number of investors who actually use it. I had a few initial thoughts.
On May 27, 2015, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) issued a new set of FAQs to provide guidance with respect to its research rule, NASD Rule 2711. The FAQs specifically focus on NASD Rule 2711(c)(4) and Rule 2711(e).
With the recent focus by the SEC and FINRA on cybersecurity for broker-dealers and investment advisers as a backdrop, FINRA recently brought and settled an enforcement action under SEC Regulation S-P against broker-dealer Sterne, Agee & Leach, Inc.
In FINRA Notice to Members 15-16, FINRA has solicited comments to its proposal that would make communications with the public a bit easier.
The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) is the largest independent, not-for-profit regulator of securities firms conducting business in the United States.
I recently had two clients, both respondents in pending matters – ask me the same question in the same day: should I mediate this case?