BROWSE BY TOPIC
Stories of Interest
- Barclays and Deutsche Bank to Lag U.S. Trading Peers
- NY AG Schneiderman Seeks to Close Loophole That Could Let Trump Pardons Block State Charges
- 'Fearless Girl' is Moving to NYSE After Year Staring Down 'Charging Bull'
- What's In Your Wallet - American Express Shares Soar After Earnings Release
- Deutsche Bank's Executive Departures Continue Following Change in CEO
- Reflections of an Economist Commissioner (SEC's Piwowar)
- Billionaire HF Manager and The Fed Chair Runner-Up are Investing in New Cryptocurrency
- Court Finds 2 Brokers Liable for Fraud Involving Mortgage-Backed Securities
- One FINRA: An Organization’s Commitment to Diversity and Inclusion
- 2018 GASB Accounting Support Fee to Fund the Governmental Accounting Standards Board
- Barclays Eyes Move Into Cryptocurrency Trading
- Goldman Breaks From Wall Street Pack with Bond-Trading Boom
- Janney Montgomery Scott CEO Joins FINRA Board of Governors
- SEC Encourages Investors to Do Background Checks on Investor.gov
- The Martin Act: Wall Street Titan Takes Aim at Law That Tripped Him Up
- Bank of America’s Cost-Cutting Drive Pushes Profit to Record
- Larry Fink: Wall Street’s $6 Trillion Man Finally Worth $1Bn
- Activist Investor Wants Barclays Investment Banking Overhaul (Video)
- House Passes Bill to Streamline 'Volcker Rule'
- CEO Charged with Penny Stock Fraud - SEC
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
Financialish TakeAways - CCO Culpability for Weak WSPs Related to Microcap Stocks
[Photo and T-Shirts: Spreadshirt.com]
by Howard Haykin
When a broker-dealer has failed to develop and implement adequate policies and supervisory procedures (“WSPs”), should that firm’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) be faulted for having failed to anticipate business or regulatory risks associated with specific types of transactions and activities?
That’s the question was raised in the Financialish article, “Revere Securities and Ex-BOM Settle FINRA Microcap/AML Charges,” where FINRA fined the firm for not having adequate policies and procedures in place for dealing with suspicious activity related to microcap stocks – specifically, the deposit and liquidation of millions of shares of microcap stocks (FINRA AWC #2014039396101).
The ex-branch manager (“BOM”) got a $5K fine and a 2-month principal suspension for having approved customers’ microcap activities without recognizing the attendant risks and then elevating them to the firm’s AML Compliance Officer ("AMLCO").
I set out to determine if Revere’s CCO was or should have also been sanctioned by FINRA, but was stymied because FINRA made no mention of the CCO and because Revere’s current CCO wasn’t around in 2013-2014, the relevant period of this case. So, I worked with the facts and circumstances provided in FINRA’s findings. And, based on that information, I concluded that the CCO should be excused in this case.
While I firmly believe that most firms should have standing policies and procedures for penny or microcap stocks – and their attendant business and (SEC and AML) regulatory risks, it appears that the Revere had dealt with microcap stocks prior to the arrival of a Registered Rep in April 2013. However, while the then-BOM knew from the outset that his new broker’s customers “regularly engaged in microcap stock transactions,” he apparently never shared that knowledge with compliance personnel.
Accordingly, one might only conclude that Revere’s CCO and/or AMLCO were “slow on the trigger” by not reacting to the microcap stock activities when they began hitting the firm’s records. However, before assigning fault, one would have to learn more about the personnel and hierarchical structures at Revere Securities - and, I don't have that information.
Be that as it may, responsible supervisory personnel – including BOMs, CCOs, and AMLCOs - should be alert to transactions and activities that potentially elevate regulatory risks at their firms. Failure to do so can and possibly should result in significant sanctions.
This case addressed in this article was reported in FINRA Disciplinary Actions for November 2017.
For details on this case, go to ... FINRA Disciplinary Actions Online, and refer to Case #2014039396101.