BROWSE BY TOPIC
Stories of Interest
- Wells Fargo Has Shown Us Its Contemptible Values
- UBS to Counter Trading Troubles With M&A Work
- SEC Moves Quickly To Shut Down Fake Pre-IPO Share Scam
- SEC Testimony: Oversight of the SEC Division of Enforcement
- FINRA Modifies 'Agency Debt Security' in Rule 6710
- Is Jamie Dimon Doing a U-Turn on Bitcoin?
- After New Yorker's Racist Rant Goes Viral, His Law Firm Gets Pummeled with 1-Star Yelp Reviews
- Bill O’Donnell is New CFO at MetLife
- Trump Still Owes Deutsche Bank, Others as Much as $480Mn
- Wells Fargo Scandals Hurt Its Retirement Business
- Michigan State to Pay $500Mn to Victims of Larry Nassar's Abuse
- Top Lawyer at Novartis Leaving Over $1.2Mn Contract with Michael Cohen's Consulting Firm
- Cadwalader Adds Mark Chorazak to its Financial Regulation Practice
- Deutsche Bank: It's A Short According to Eisman of ‘The Big Short’ Fame
- Up In Smoke: Bank of Montreal Goes All-In on Pot Deals
- RBS to Pay $4.9Bn to Settle Toxic MBS Probe with U.S.
- Apple and Goldman Sachs Team Up to Release New Credit Card
- Robinhood, A Stock, Trading App Rejected by 75 Investors, Now Worth $5.6Bn
- Wells Fargo Reportedly Pocketed Fire And Police Department Pension Fund Fee Rebates
- Trading App Robinhood Surpasses E*Trade In User Numbers
We seek to provide information, insights and direction that may enable the Financial Community to effectively and efficiently operate in a regulatory risk-free environment by curating content from all over the web.
Stay Informed with the latest fanancialish news.
NEWSLETTERS & ALERTS
B/D's Muni Bond Sales Were in Violation of MSRB Rules
by Howard Haykin
FMSbonds, Inc., agreed to pay a $210K fine and to offer rescission to customers to settle FINRA charges it effected customer transactions in a municipal security in an amount lower than the minimum denomination of the issue that were not subject to an exception under the rule.
BACKGROUND. Boca Raton, FL-based FMSbonds has been a FINRA member since 1979. In 2013, the firm agreed to settle FINRA charges that it had violated MSRB Rule G-17.
FINRA FINDINGS. For the period, 8/1/13 through 12/31/15, FINRA’s Market Regulation's Muni Securities Bonds Team and FINRA’s Member Regulation reviewed the firm's compliance with MSRB Rule G-15(f).
MSRB Rule G-15(f)(i) prohibits a broker, dealer, or municipal securities dealer from effecting a customer transaction in municipal securities issued after June 1,2002 in an amount lower than the minimum denomination of the issue.
Issuers set minimum denominations for the purchase or sale of municipal securities and disclose those minimum denominations in Official Statements, which are documents prepared by or on behalf of the issuer of municipal securities in connection with a primary offering. Minimum denominations generally range from $5,000 to $100,000.
An issuer may set a minimum denomination at $100,000 or higher to qualify for one of several exemptions from Securities Exchange Act Rule 15c2-12, which is designed to ensure production of certain disclosure documents in the primary and secondary markets. In addition, an issuer may set high minimum denominations because of a concern that the offered securities may not be appropriate for retail investors who are likely to purchase securities in relatively small amounts.
FMSbonds effected 170 customer transactions in a municipal security in an amount lower than the minimum denomination of the issue which were not subject to an exception under the rule. Some of those violative transactions involved sales to customers in sizes ranging up to $90,000 – which would indicate minimum denominations of $100,000. Such conduct would be in violation of MSRB Rule G-15(f).
FMSbonds also failed to disclose all material facts concerning 51 municipal securities transactions at or prior to the time of trade: (i) that the muni securities transaction was in an amount below the minimum denomination of the issue, or (ii) that the municipal securities contained a resale restriction which could affect the liquidity of the customer's position. Such conduct would be in violation of MSRB Rule G-17 and MSRB Rule G-47.
This case was reported in FINRA Disciplinary Actions for May 2017.
For details on this case, go to ... FINRA Disciplinary Actions Online, and refer to Case #2015043950501.