FINRA and other regulators have long
purported that substantial cooperation and self-reporting are given
favorable consideration during the disciplinary phase after an
investigation.
For over 15 years, FINRA (and its
predecessor agencies) have encouraged member firms and associated
persons to cooperate with them during exams and investigations in a
candid manner, promising at least some level of leniency for those
who do so. In July of this year, FINRA provided yet another public
notice on this topic, Regulatory Notice 19-23 (“RN 19-23”).
RN 19-23 reiterates that pursuant to
FINRA Rules 4530(b), 8210, and FINRA's Sanction Guidelines, a certain
level of cooperation is expected any time FINRA is performing an
examination, inquiry, or investigation. FINRA recognizes
“extraordinary cooperation” as cooperation that is beyond
“required cooperation” and does one or more of the following:
- Shows an acceptance of responsibility and an acknowledgment of the misconduct at issue prior to detection and intervention by a firm or regulator,
- Voluntarily employees initiatives to correct the issues prior to detection and intervention by a firm or regulator,
- Voluntarily attempts to remedy the misconduct by restitution or another appropriate remedies prior to detection and intervention by a firm or regulator,
- Voluntarily provides substantial assistance to FINRA during its examination and/or investigation of the misconduct at issue.
Per FINRA's Sanction Guidelines,
“Sanctions in disciplinary proceedings are intended to be remedial
and to prevent the recurrence of misconduct.” To the extent that
member firms and associated persons show initiative in meeting this
goal, FINRA states it will consider that fact when determining what,
if any, disciplinary action they issue for misconduct. RN 19-23
provides three examples of FINRA adjusting its disciplinary decision
based on what it deemed to be “extraordinary cooperation.”
FINRA also announces certain
initiatives from time to time to further its goals of “investor
protection and market integrity.” Once example of such an
initiative is their “529 Plan Share Class Initiative” where FINRA
encouraged member firms to review their 529 plan sales for common
supervisory issues. To encourage firms to do this and to report
their findings, FINRA stated they would issue settlement agreements
for misconduct with no fines to remedy any identified and reported
misconduct.
While there is always a risk when
self-reporting, there is also a substantial risk in not doing so.
Reviewing FINRA's RN 19-23 with counsel versed in securities
regulations would be a wise first step in determining if and how you
may wish to self-report or self-audit specific activity. Both member
firms and associated persons can find themselves in a position where
self-reporting should be considered. Taking that step can be
daunting. Cosgrove Law Group, LLC has the experience to offer
guidance and representation in such matters. Please give us a call!
No comments:
Post a Comment