Financial Services Weekly News - January 2017 #2

by Goodwin


Editor's Note

In This Issue.The SEC and FINRA released their examination priorities for 2017; the SEC’s Division of Investment Management issued an interpretative letter that would permit brokers to charge their own sales loads externally from a fund; and the Department of Labor issued a second round of frequently asked questions pertaining to its fiduciary rule. These and other developments are discussed below.

Regulatory Developments

SEC Announces 2017 Examination Priorities

On January 12, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced the 2017 examination priorities for its Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE). The main areas of the OCIE’s focus include (1) risks to retail investors, (2) risks specific to elderly and retiring investors, and (3) market-wide risks. Under the retail investor category, the OCIE will concentrate on registered investment advisers and broker-dealers that offer investment advice through automated or digital platforms, investment advisers and broker-dealers associated with wrap fee programs, regulatory compliance of exchange-traded funds, newly registered or never-before examined advisers, and investment advisers that provide advisory services from multiple locations, among others. Under the focus on senior investors, the OCIE will especially scrutinize public pension plan advisers, sales of variable insurance products and management of target date funds, as well as registrants’ supervisory programs and controls relating to products and services directed at senior investors. Under the market-wide risks category, the OCIE will examine structural risks and trends that may involve multiple firms or entire industries, specifically looking at money market funds, systemically important clearing agencies, cybersecurity compliance and anti-money laundering programs that address money laundering and terrorist financing risks.

SEC IM Staff Releases 22(d) Interpretive Letter

On January 11, the SEC Division of Investment Management released an interpretive letter concerning the distribution of fund shares. The Division had been asked to consider whether the restrictions of Section 22(d) of the 1940 Act apply to a broker when 1) the broker acts as agent on behalf of its customers and 2) the broker charges its customers commissions for effecting transactions in a class of shares of a fund without any front-end load, deferred sales charge, or other asset-based fee for sales or distribution (“Clean Shares”). Section 22(d) prohibits a fund from selling its securities except at “a current public offering price described in the prospectus” to any person other than to or through a principal underwriter for distribution. In its interpretive letter, the Division stated that the restrictions of Section 22(d) of the 1940 Act do not apply to a broker under circumstances where:

  • The broker will represent in its selling agreement with the fund’s underwriter that it is acting solely on an agency basis for the sale of Clean Shares;
  • The Clean Shares sold by the broker will not include any form of distribution-related payment to the broker;
  • The fund’s prospectus will disclose that an investor transacting in Clean Shares may be required to pay a commission to a broker, and if applicable, that shares of the fund are available in other share classes that have different fees and expenses;
  • The nature and amount of the commissions and the times at which they would be collected would be determined by the broker consistent with the broker’s obligations under applicable law, including but not limited to applicable FINRA and Department of Labor rules; and
  • Purchases and redemptions of Clean Shares are made at net asset value established by the fund (before imposition of a commission).

FINRA 2017 Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter

On January 4, FINRA published its Annual Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter to highlight issues of importance to FINRA’s regulatory programs. The Letter provides information about areas FINRA plans to review in its 2017 exams and focuses on core issues of compliance, supervision and risk management. Focus areas include (1) supervisory and compliance controls of firms that hire high-risk and recidivist brokers, (2) sales practices, particularly with respect to senior investors, suitability, excessive concentration in securities exposed to an industry sector, excessive and short-term trading in long-term products, firms’ obligations to monitor their registered representatives’ outside business activities and private securities transactions and social media and electronic communications, (3) management of financial risks, particularly with respect to liquidity and firms’ written policies and procedures designed to comply with FINRA’s 2016 amendments to Rule 4210 establishing margin requirements for covered agency transactions, (4) operational risks and measures firms take to mitigate those risks and (5) market integrity, particularly focusing on enhancing its surveillance programs designed to detect and deter manipulation. FINRA also intends to advance a number of its initiatives, including its Audit Trail Reporting Early Remediation Initiative, Tick Size Pilot, compliance with the Market Access Rule, a pilot trading examination program and its fixed income surveillance program. Firms may find the Letter useful in reviewing their compliance and supervisory programs and framing issues to address in their internal training and communications. In his cover letter, FINRA CEO Robert Cook said that FINRA will for the first time this year publish a summary report that outlines key findings from examinations in selected areas, and develop additional compliance tools for firms, including a “compliance calendar” and a directory of compliance service providers.

DOL Publishes Second Round of Fiduciary Rule FAQs

On January 13, the Department of Labor (DOL) released a second set of frequently asked questions on its final rule redefining who counts as a fiduciary under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and Internal Revenue Code. Specific areas of focus include exemptions regarding investment recommendations, investment education, general communications, independent fiduciaries and platform providers.

Gov. Cuomo Proposes to Ban Bad Actors from Financial Services Industry

On January 8, New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo called for new legislation adding a section to New York's Financial Services Law disqualifying certain “bad actors” from the banking or insurance industries if, after a hearing, the Superintendent of Financial Services finds they have done something so severe as to have a direct bearing on their fitness or ability to continue participating in the industry. The proposal would strengthen the ability of the NY Department of Financial Services to bring enforcement actions protecting consumers from egregious or deceptive behavior.

OCC Issues Revised Management Interlocks Booklet

On January 12, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued the “Management Interlocks” booklet of the Comptroller’s Licensing Manual, which replaces the booklet of the same title issued in October 2009. The revised booklet incorporates updated requirements following the integration of the Office of Thrift Supervision into the OCC in 2011 and clarifies guidance for both national banks and federal savings associations.

Agencies Extend Comment Period for Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Enhanced Cyber Risk Management Standards

On January 13, the OCC, the Federal Reserve Board, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation extended until February 17, 2017, the comment period for the advance notice of proposed rulemaking on enhanced cyber risk management standards for large and interconnected entities under their supervision and those entities’ service providers (the ANPR). The ANPR previously was discussed in the October 26 edition of the Roundup.

Client Alert: Financial Regulatory Reform in the Trump Administration

With the inauguration of President-elect Trump less than a week away, there is considerable speculation regarding what legal changes are in store for the financial services industry in the next administration. During his campaign, President-elect Trump consistently emphasized that financial regulatory reform is a critical component of his plan to increase economic growth and create jobs. He has expressly stated that his team would be working to “dismantle the Dodd-Frank Act and replace it with new policies to encourage economic growth and job creation.” Similarly, Treasury Secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin has said that the new administration wants to “strip back part of Dodd-Frank” and that such a rollback would be the administration’s “number one priority on the regulatory side.” But while financial regulatory reform is widely expected to be a priority in a Trump administration, few concrete proposals have been put forward. In order to anticipate the types of reform proposals that may emerge in the coming months, it may be useful to revisit recent proposals that have garnered widespread Republican support, but were never enacted. One such proposal, the Financial CHOICE Act (the CHOICE Act), passed the House Financial Services Committee on September 13, 2016, and was amended on December 20, 2016. For more information, view the client alert issued by Goodwin’s Financial Industry Practice.

Enforcement & Litigation

SCOTUS Hears Arguments in NY Credit Card Surcharge Case

On January 10, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Expressions Hair Design et al. v. Schneiderman et al., a case reviewing a New York law regulating how credit card surcharges are communicated to consumers. N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 518 prohibits retailers from telling consumers they will pay a surcharge  to use a credit card, but permits them to tell consumers they will get a discount for using cash. At issue is whether the law constitutes a price control or a potential limitation on free speech. In 2015, the Second Circuit ruled that the law regulated commerce and conduct, not speech, overturning a 2013 U.S. District Court decision that the law violated the First Amendment. The Supreme Court is now considering whether to apply a stricter scrutiny standard required by the First Amendment, or treat the law as a dispute over price controls, warranting less scrutiny. Justices Alito and Breyer indicated that the case should move forward in the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court. Justices Roberts, Ginsburg and Kennedy appeared to agree that the law was a violation of the First Amendment. Specifically, Kennedy noted that the law does not make surcharges illegal, but rather it regulates how the pricing structure is communicated to consumers. Breyer expressed concern that using the First Amendment to invalidate a business regulation would later permit businesses to challenge other regulations they do not like. Several justices including Breyer and Sotomayor requested more clarity from New York state, indicating it was not a judge’s place to substitute for state regulators. The U.S. Supreme Court has not yet rendered a decision.

FINRA Fines 12 Firms A Total of $14.4 Million For Failing To Protect Records From Alteration

On December 21, FINRA announced that it had imposed a fine totaling $14.4 million against 12 financial services firms for deficiencies in the retention of electronic records. As a result of its investigation, FINRA determined that these firms had not maintained their records in the “write once, read many” (WORM) format that is required by SEC Rule 17a-4(f) and related FINRA rules. The rules require electronic records to be held in WORM format in order to avoid any potentially misleading subsequent adjustment. The penalties ranged from $500,000 to $4 million.

Federal Court Certifies To The Ninth Circuit The CFPB’s Challenge To Alleged “Rent-A-Tribe” Scheme

On January 3, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California certified for appellate review its August 31, 2016, Order finding that a California-based payday lending company used a “rent-a-tribe” scheme to avoid state usury laws, in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA). View the Enforcement Watch blog post.

FTC Secures $19.4 Million In Judgments Over Mortgage Relief Scheme

On January 11, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it had agreed to two stipulated orders (available here and here) with individuals who participated in an alleged fraudulent mortgage relief scheme. According to the FTC, the individuals promised consumers “at least $75,000” or complete relief on their mortgages through a “mass joinder lawsuit.” View the Enforcement Watch blog post.

CFPB Orders Medical Debt Collection Law Firms To Pay Over $600,000 For Alleged Misrepresentations

On January 9, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced that it entered into a consent order with two affiliated medical debt collection law firms over allegations that the law firms used deceptive collection letters and illegally notarized collection affidavits. The consent order alleges that the law firms would send debtors collection notices purporting to be from an attorney or law firm even though no attorney or law firm had reviewed the consumer’s account. View the Enforcement Watch blog post.

FTC Files Lawsuit Against Seller Of Fake Payday Loans

On January 9, the FTC announced that it had filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas against one individual and affiliated companies, alleging that they sold portfolios of nonexistent payday loans to debt collectors. The complaint alleges that the companies fabricated lenders and loan providers to whom consumers supposedly owed money, and that debt collectors would then try to collect money from these consumers. View the Enforcement Watch blog post.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Goodwin | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Goodwin on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.