Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Futures Association; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Amendments to the Interpretive Notice to NFA Compliance Rule 2-9: Enhanced Supervisory Requirements., 71347-71352 [E5-6558]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
V. Solicitation of Comments Concerning
Amendments No. 2 and 4
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning Amendments No.
2 and 4, including whether they are
consistent with the Act. Comments may
be submitted by any of the following
methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number SR–CBOE–2005–46 on the
subject line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
Station Place, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–9303.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2005–46. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if e-mail is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at
the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You
should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–CBOE–2005–46 and should
be submitted on or before December 19,
2005.
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,22 that the
proposed rule change (File No. SR–
CBOE–2005–46), as amended, is
approved, and that Amendments No. 2
and 4 thereto are approved on an
accelerated basis.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated
authority.23
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5–6559 Filed 11–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–52808; File No. SR–NFA–
2005–01]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
National Futures Association; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness
of Proposed Amendments to the
Interpretive Notice to NFA Compliance
Rule 2–9: Enhanced Supervisory
Requirements.
November 18, 2005.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Exchange Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–7
under the Exchange Act,2 notice is
hereby given that on September 19,
2005, National Futures Association
(‘‘NFA’’) filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or
‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change described in Items I, II, and III
below, which Items have been prepared
by NFA. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested
persons.
NFA also submitted the proposed rule
change to the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’) on
September 19, 2005 for approval. The
CFTC has not yet given such approval.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
Section 15A(k) of the Exchange Act 3
makes NFA a national securities
association for the limited purpose of
regulating the activities of Members
who are registered as brokers or dealers
in security futures products under
Section 15(b)(11) of the Exchange Act.4
NFA’s Interpretive Notice entitled
VI. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the
Commission finds that the proposed
rule change, as amended, is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
22 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
200.30–3(a)(12).
1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–7.
3 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(k).
4 15 U.S.C. 78o(b)(11).
23 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71347
‘‘Compliance Rule 2–9: Enhanced
Supervisory Requirements’’ (‘‘Notice’’)
applies to all Members who meet the
criteria and could apply to Members
registered under Section 15(b)(11).
The Notice requires a Member to
adopt certain enhanced supervisory
procedures (‘‘Requirements’’) if its sales
force includes a specified number of
associated persons (‘‘APs’’) who have
worked at Disciplined Firms. NFA’s
Special Committee to Study Customer
Protection Issues recently recommended
changes to the Notice to resolve some
emergent loopholes in the Requirements
and further prevent abusive sales
practices. The Board’s changes:
• Automatically reimpose the
Requirements on any firm that, having
already completed a term under the
Requirements, becomes subject to an
NFA or CFTC enforcement action
alleging sales practice abuses;
• Change the current obligation under
the Requirements so that a firm may
petition to have the Requirements lifted
or modified after two years rather than
automatically terminating;
• Add a provision designed to
address issues related to firms avoiding
the Requirements by making sham
changes to entities and personnel when
they become subject to the
Requirements;
• Include listed principals who have
previously worked for Disciplined
Firms in the population used to
calculate whether a Member firm has
triggered an obligation to operate under
the Requirements; and
• Exclude APs who worked at
Disciplined Firms for less than sixty
days more than five years ago from
having to be counted for purposes of
calculating whether a Member who
hires such an individual is required to
adopt the Requirements.
Below is the text of the proposed
amendments to the Notice. Proposed
new language is in italics; proposed
deletions are in [brackets].
*
*
*
*
*
Interpretive Notice
Compliance Rule 2–9: Enhanced
Supervisory Requirements
Over the years, NFA’s Board of
Directors has adopted strict and
effective rules to prohibit deceptive
sales practices, and those rules have
been vigorously enforced by NFA’s
Business Conduct Committees. The
Board notes, however, that by their very
nature, enforcement actions occur after
the customer abuse has taken place. The
Board recognizes that NFA’s goal must
be not only to punish such deception of
customers through enforcement actions
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
71348
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
but to prevent it, or minimize its
likelihood, through fair and effective
regulation.
One NFA rule designed to prevent
abusive sales practices is NFA
Compliance Rule 2–9. Subsection (a) of
this rule places a continuing
responsibility on every Member to
supervise diligently its employees and
agents in all aspects of their futures
activities, including sales practices.
Although NFA has not attempted to
prescribe a set of supervisory
procedures to be followed by all NFA
Members, NFA’s Board of Directors
believes that Member firms which are
identified as having a sales force that
has received questionable training in
sales practices should be required to
adopt specific supervisory procedures
designed to prevent sales practice abuse.
Subsection (b) authorizes the Board of
Directors to require Members, which
meet certain criteria established by the
Board, to adopt specific supervisory
procedures designed to prevent abusive
sales practices. Subsection (b) covers all
activities regulated by NFA, including
the off-exchange retail forex activities of
Members subject to NFA Compliance
Rule 2–36.
The Board believes that in order for
the criteria used to identify firms subject
to the enhanced supervisory
requirements to be useful, those criteria
must be specific, objective and readily
measurable. The Board also believes
that any supervisory requirements
imposed on a Member must be designed
to quickly identify potential problem
areas so that the Member will be able to
take corrective action before any
customer abuse occurs. The purpose of
this Interpretive Notice is to set forth the
criteria established by the Board and the
enhanced supervisory procedures which
are required of firms meeting these
criteria.
In developing the criteria, the Board
concluded that it would be helpful to
review Member firms which had been
closed through enforcement actions
taken by the CFTC or NFA for deceptive
sales practices. The Board’s purpose
was to identify factors common to these
Member firms and probative of their
sales practice problems, which could be
used to identify other Member firms
with potential sales practice problems.
One factor identified by the Board as
common to these firms and directly
related to their sales practice problems
is the employment history and training
of their sales forces. For many of these
Members, a significant portion of their
sales force was previously employed
and trained by one or more of the other
Member firms closed for fraud. The
Board believes that the employment
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
history of a Member’s sales force and
principals is a relevant factor to
consider in identifying firms with
potential sales practice problems. If a
Member firm is closed by NFA or the
CFTC for fraud related to widespread
telemarketing or promotional material
problems or a firm is closed by NASD
or the SEC for fraud related to its sales
practices regarding security futures
products as defined in Section 1a(32) of
the Commodity Exchange Act (‘‘Act’’), it
is reasonable to conclude that the
training and supervision of its sales
force was wholly inadequate or
inappropriate. It is also reasonable to
conclude that an AP who received
inadequate or inappropriate training
and supervision may have learned
improper sales tactics, which he will
carry with him to his next job.
Therefore, the Board believes that a
Member firm employing such a sales
force must have stringent supervision
procedures in place in order to ensure
that the improper training its APs have
previously received does not taint their
sales efforts on behalf of the Member.
The Board has determined that a
Member will be required to adopt the
specific supervisory procedures over its
sales practice activities if:
• For firms with less than five APs, 2
or more of its APs have been employed
by one or more Member firms which
have been disciplined by NFA or the
CFTC (or one or more firms disciplined
by any securities industry selfregulatory organization or the SEC in
matters involving security futures
products) for sales practice fraud
(‘‘Disciplined Firms’’);
• For firms with at least 5 but less
than 10 APs, 40 percent or more of its
APs have been employed by one or
more Disciplined Firms;
• For firms with at least 10 but less
than 20 APs, four or more of its APs
have been employed by one or more
Disciplined Firms; or
• For firms with at least 20 APs, 20
percent or more of its APs have been
employed by one or more Disciplined
Firms.
The Board also takes note that there
have been instances in which Members
and Associates have subverted the
Board’s purpose in imposing the
enhanced supervisory procedures by
closing a firm once it qualifies for those
procedures and opening another firm or
firms that have a mix of APs that does
not meet the criteria for adopting the
procedures. The new firms typically
have APs who have worked for
Disciplined Firms and who worked at
the original firm, but they are
redistributed so as to keep the AP mix
below the threshold for becoming
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
subject to the enhanced supervisory
procedures. This strategy deprives the
very APs whose questionable training
backgrounds gave rise to the creation of
the enhanced supervisory procedures of
the benefits of those procedures.
Therefore, the Board has determined to
further ensure that the benefits of the
enhanced supervisory procedures are
applied where they are of the greatest
effect. Once a Member firm triggers the
aforementioned criteria and becomes
obligated to adopt the enhanced
supervisory procedures, any other
Members of which the principals of that
Member firm are, or become, principals
must also adopt the enhanced
supervisory procedures or seek a waiver
therefrom. In addition, for purposes of
determining whether a Member will be
required to adopt the enhanced
supervisory procedures, principals of a
firm, who are not also APs of that firm
and who have been previously
employed as an AP by one or more
Disciplined Firms, shall be counted with
the firm’s APs in determining whether
the firm meets the aforementioned
criteria.
Additionally, for purposes of
determining whether a futures
commission merchant (‘‘FCM’’) Member
firm meets this requirement, an FCM
and its guaranteed introducing brokers
(‘‘GIBs’’) will be considered a single
firm. Therefore, for FCMs with GIBs, the
APs of its GIBs will be treated as APs
of the FCM for determining whether the
FCM meets the requirements. If the FCM
Member firm meets the requirements,
then the FCM and all its GIBs shall be
required to adopt the supervisory
procedures specified herein. Of course,
individual FCMs or GIBs will be
required to adopt the enhanced
supervisory procedures provided the
FCM or GIB meets the requirements on
its own.
The Board recognizes that there is a
group of APs who worked at Disciplined
Firms for only a short period of time
many years ago and who have not
worked at any Disciplined Firm since.
The Board’s review of the employment
and disciplinary histories of such
individuals suggests that APs who
served a very brief tenure with
Disciplined Firms more than [10] five
years in the past do not raise the same
concerns regarding their previous
supervision and training that are raised
by APs who have worked at Disciplined
Firms for longer periods or at a more
recent point in time. Therefore, the
Board has determined that APs who
have been previously employed by
Disciplined Firms for a cumulative total
of less than 60 days and who, in
addition, have not been employed by
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
any Disciplined Firm during the [10] 5
years preceding the determination of
whether a Member firm is required to
employ the enhanced supervisory
procedures established in this
Interpretive Notice shall not be counted
for purposes of calculating whether the
composition of a firm’s sales force
triggers enhanced supervisory
requirements.
For purposes of this requirement, a
Disciplined Firm is defined very
narrowly to include those firms that
meet the following three criteria:
1. the firm has been formally charged
by either the CFTC or NFA with
deceptive telemarketing practices or
promotional material;
2. those charges have been resolved;
and
3. the firm has been permanently
barred from the industry as a result of
those charges.
In addition, a Disciplined Firm shall
be defined to include any broker-dealer
that, in connection with sales practices
involving the offer, purchase, or sale of
any security futures product as defined
in Section 1a (32) of the Act has been
expelled from membership or
participation in any securities industry
self-regulatory organization or is subject
to an order of the SEC revoking its
registration as a broker-dealer.
Attached is a list of firms currently
meeting the definition of a Disciplined
Firm. Although this list is current as of
the date of this Interpretive Notice, NFA
[will provide] provides Members with
an updated [lists] list [as necessary] on
its website at www.nfa.futures.org.
Any Member firm meeting these
criteria will be required either to operate
pursuant to a guarantee agreement or
maintain an adjusted net capital of at
least $250,000 for the entire period
during which the Member is required to
tape record its sales solicitations. Any
Member opting to maintain the higher
level of adjusted net capital would also
be subject to the financial recordkeeping and reporting requirements
applicable to FCMs. Eligible guarantor
futures commission merchants are those
that meet the eligibility requirements for
executing a Supplemental Guarantor
Certification Statement pursuant to NFA
Registration Rule 504(a)(2)(B). The
Board believes that requiring these
Members to operate pursuant to a
guarantee agreement will likely improve
the overall level of supervision at these
firms.
Those Member firms meeting the
criteria will be required to tape record
all telephone conversations that occur
between their APs and both existing and
potential customers, including existing
and potential retail forex customers of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
Members subject to NFA Compliance
Rule 2–36. The Board believes that tape
recording these conversations provides
these Members with the best
opportunity to monitor closely the
activities of their APs and also provides
these Members with complete and
immediate feedback on each AP’s
method of soliciting customers.
Members that are required to tape their
conversations [meeting the criteria must
tape record these conversations for a
period of two years and] must retain
such tapes for a period of five years
from the date each tape is created and
the tapes shall be readily accessible
during the first two years of the fiveyear period. In retaining the tape
recorded conversations, Member firms
must catalog the tapes by AP and date.
Additionally, any Member firm meeting
the criteria must require all its APs to
maintain a daily log for sales
solicitations which reflects at a
minimum the identity of each customer
or prospective customer the AP spoke
with on each day. A Member firm must
be able to promptly produce, upon
request from NFA or the CFTC, all
conversations relating to a specific AP,
and only that AP, for a given date.
In addition, [for a period of two
years,] those Member firms meeting the
criteria will be required to file all
promotional material, as defined in NFA
Compliance Rule 2–29(i), with NFA at
least 10 days prior to its first use.
Those Members meeting the criteria
shall have written supervisory
procedures that include the titles,
registration status and locations of the
firm’s supervisory personnel as these
relate to the firm’s commodity futures
business, retail forex business, and
applicable securities laws and
regulations for the trading of security
futures products. Member firms shall
also maintain on an internal record the
names of all persons who are designated
as supervisory personnel and the dates
for which the designation is or was
effective. Additionally, a Member
meeting the criteria shall by the 30th
day of the month following the end of
each calendar quarter file with NFA’s
Compliance Department a report
relating to the Member firm’s
compliance with the supervisory
requirements contained herein. Member
firms shall retain the internal record and
report(s) for a period of five years, the
first two years in an easily accessible
place.
If an NFA Business Conduct
Committee disciplinary proceeding or
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission enforcement proceeding
has been filed against a Member firm
required to adopt these enhanced
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71349
supervisory procedures, then the
enhanced supervisory procedures will
remain in effect for the applicable time
period specified or until after the
disciplinary or enforcement proceeding
is closed and all appeals are completed
or the time for appeal has passed
without an appeal being filed or
perfected, whichever occurs latest. In
addition, any Member that: has
previously been required to adopt the
enhanced supervisory procedures; has,
in fact, fulfilled that requirement either
by adopting the enhanced supervisory
procedures for a prescribed period or by
receiving a full or partial waiver from
the enhanced supervisory procedures
from the Telemarketing Procedures
Waiver Committee; and subsequently
becomes subject to a Commodity
Futures Trading Commission or NFA
enforcement or disciplinary proceeding
alleging deceptive sales practices, shall,
within 30 days of being served with
notice of the action, initiate all of the
enhanced supervisory procedures and
may not seek a waiver therefrom. This
obligation shall continue until after the
disciplinary or enforcement proceeding
is closed and all appeals are completed
or the time for appeal has passed
without an appeal being filed or
perfected. Member firms shall be
required to retain tapes for the five-year
period as specified above.
Any Member required to adopt these
enhanced procedures may seek a waiver
of the enhanced supervisory
requirements by filing a petition with
the Telemarketing Procedures Waiver
Committee within 30 days of the date of
being notified by NFA that it is required
to adopt the enhanced procedures. NFA
may grant such a waiver upon a
satisfactory showing that the Member’s
current supervisory procedures provide
effective supervision over its employees,
including enabling the Member to
identify potential problem areas before
customer abuse occurs. Additionally, if
a Member meets the criteria and trades
security futures products, then the
Member firm must also make a
satisfactory showing that the Member’s
supervisory procedures ensure
compliance with all applicable
securities laws and regulations. Should
a Member fail to file a petition seeking
a waiver within 30 days or should it file
a petition that is denied by the
Telemarketing Procedures Waiver
Committee, either in whole or in part,
the Member may not petition for a full
or partial waiver again until at least two
years have elapsed since the Member
adopted the required enhanced
procedures.
Some of the factors that the threemember Waiver Committee may
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
71350
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
consider in evaluating a waiver request
include:
• The total number of APs sponsored
by the Member;
• Number of branch offices and GIBs
operated by the Member;
• The experience and background of
the Member’s supervisory personnel;
• The number of the Member’s APs
who had received training from firms
which have been closed for fraud, the
length of time those APs worked for
those firms and the amount of time
which has elapsed since those APs
worked for the disciplined firms;
• The results of any previous NFA
examinations; and
• The cost effectiveness of the taping
requirement in light of the firm’s net
worth, operating income and related
telemarketing expenses.
Conditions that the Telemarketing
Procedures Waiver Committee shall
impose on any Member to which it
grants a full or partial waiver include
requirements that the firm: Notify NFA
of any action charging the firm with a
violation of Commodity Futures Trading
Commission or Self Regulatory
Organization (‘‘SRO’’) regulations or
rules; notify NFA of any customer
complaint involving sales practices or
promotional material; not change
ownership; not have any material
deficiencies noted during any SRO
examination; not hire additional APs
from Disciplined Firms; execute a
written acknowledgement that the firm
understands the conditions of the
waiver; and may include any other
conditions deemed by the Committee to
be appropriate in furtherance of the
effectiveness of the enhanced
supervisory procedures. Violation of any
of those conditions may serve as cause
for the Telemarketing Procedures
Waiver Committee to review and amend
or revoke the waiver.
A Member firm that does not comply
with this Interpretive Notice will violate
NFA Compliance Rule 2–9(b) and will
be subject to disciplinary action.
*
*
*
*
*
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission,
NFA has prepared statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for,
the proposed rule change, burdens on
competition, and comments received
from Members, participants, and others.
The text of these statements may be
examined at the places specified in Item
IV below. NFA has prepared summaries,
set forth in Sections A, B, and C below,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
of the most significant aspects of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
a. Reimposing the Requirements on
Members That Have Previously Satisfied
an Obligation to Abide by Those
Requirements and are Subsequently
Charged in a CFTC or NFA Enforcement
Action
In 1996, NFA’s Board amended the
Notice to provide that, if a Member that
is currently subject to the Requirements
becomes subject to a CFTC or NFA
enforcement proceeding, the
Requirements will remain in place for
two years or until after the disciplinary
or enforcement proceeding is
concluded, whichever is longer. This
provision does not, however, apply to
Members that have already served full
two-year tenures under the
Requirements when one of those firms
is subsequently charged in an
enforcement action by the CFTC or
NFA.
The practical effect of the current
system is that some Members, with a
number of APs from Disciplined Firms,
that are charged by the CFTC or NFA in
actions alleging fraudulent sales
practices have a significant window of
time during the pendency of the action
to continue soliciting the public without
any requirement to adopt additional
prophylactic measures such as taping.
Of course, in appropriate cases,
prophylactic measures may be imposed
as part of the ultimate resolution of the
CFTC’s or NFA’s action, but it can take
many months, or even years in cases
that go through multiple layers of
appeals, to resolve such actions.
There are at least three current NFA
Members that served full terms under
the Requirements and were
subsequently charged in enforcement
proceedings. It is worth noting that each
of those firms still retains a sales force
with histories at Disciplined Firms such
that they would require the adoption of
the Requirements but for the fact that
they have already served the term of
their obligation under the Notice. In
fact, at one time, one of these firms
actually featured its purported
immunity from further taping
requirements as an inducement in a
recruitment advertisement contained in
a South Florida newspaper.
A review of one firm’s history
illustrates the differences in the
operations of the present system and the
system being proposed. This firm has
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
been an introducing broker (‘‘IB’’) NFA
Member since August 1994. The NFA
required the Member to adopt the
Requirements from February 1995
through February 1997, when it was
automatically discharged of the
Requirements.
NFA then issued a Complaint alleging
deceptive sales practices against the
firm in April 1998. A settled Decision
was issued at that same time which,
among other penalties, required the firm
to tape all solicitations from April 1998
through April 2000. NFA issued a
second deceptive sales practice
Complaint against the firm in January
2002, which was resolved in March
2003.
Because the firm had already fulfilled
its obligation under the Notice from
1995 to 1997, it was not required under
the current system to tape conversations
with customers during the pendency of
NFA’s 2002 Complaint. This gave the
firm a 14-month window to solicit the
public without any obligation under the
Notice to adopt the enhanced
supervisory procedures—including
taping. Incidentally, during this time,
the firm continued to have a mix of APs
that otherwise would have triggered the
Requirements. The proposed
amendments to the Notice would have
required the firm to observe all of the
Telemarketing Requirements, including
taping all customer solicitations, from
the time that the 2002 Complaint was
initiated until that Complaint was
completely resolved in March 2003.
The guiding principle in creating and
refining the Requirements has always
been to improve the overall level of
supervision at those few Member firms
which are likely to cause sales practice
problems. When a firm that has already
operated under the Requirements for
two years because of the questionable
backgrounds of its APs subsequently
becomes subject to an NFA or CFTC
enforcement action for sales practice
abuses, there is a clear indication that
the firm is, indeed, part of the group
that is likely to cause sales practice
problems and that it is prudent to
require the firm to improve its level of
supervision.
The proposed amendments to the
Notice provide that any firm that has
previously been required to abide by the
Requirements but has fulfilled its
obligation—either by abiding by the
Requirements under the Notice as it
currently stands or by successfully
petitioning the Telemarketing
Procedures Waiver Committee (‘‘Waiver
Committee’’) to have the Requirements
lifted or modified—would again become
subject to the Requirements during the
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
pendency and through appeals of a new
CFTC or NFA enforcement action.
b. Requiring Telemarketing Firms To
Abide by the Telemarketing
Requirements Until They are Granted a
Complete or Partial Waiver by the
Telemarketing Procedures Waiver
Committee
Currently, the obligation to abide by
the enhanced procedures runs for two
years, at which time it terminates
automatically in most circumstances.
The proposed amendments make it
more likely that firms that continue to
pose problems would remain subject to
the Requirements for longer than the
current two-year tenure provided for in
the Notice. The modification puts the
burden on Member Firms triggering the
criteria to demonstrate that a waiver
from the Requirements is warranted
after two years rather than automatically
discharging the obligation to abide by
the Requirements once the two years
has passed.
The amendments also provide that a
Member firm has 30 days to seek a
waiver from the Waiver Committee after
it first employs an AP mix that would
trigger the Requirements.5 If the Waiver
Committee denies the initial petition or
no petition is filed, the firm would not
be eligible to petition for a waiver again
until it had served a full two years
under the Requirements. Any waiver
would be subject to conditions that, if
violated, could subject the firm to
revocation of the waiver by the Waiver
Committee.6 This additional component
gives the Waiver Committee the
flexibility to revisit the issue of whether
a waiver is still warranted when there
is a material change in the firm’s
organization or regulatory status.
5 The Notice provides that some of the factors that
the Waiver Committee may consider in evaluating
a Member’s waiver request include: The number of
APs; the number of branch offices and GIBs; the
experience and background of supervisory
personnel; the number of APs who received training
at Disciplined Firms, the time those APs worked for
those firms and the amount of time which has
passed since they worked for Disciplined Firms;
The results of previous NFA examinations; and the
cost effectiveness of taping.
6 The conditions include requirements that the
firm: Notify NFA of any action charging the firm
with a violation of CFTC or SRO regulations or
rules; Notify NFA of any customer complaint
involving sales practices or promotional material;
not change ownership; not have any material
deficiencies noted during any SRO examination;
not hire additional APs from Disciplined Firms; and
execute a written acknowledgement that the firm
understands the conditions of the waiver, and may
include any other conditions deemed by the Waiver
Committee to be appropriate in furtherance of the
effectiveness of the enhanced supervisory
procedures.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
c. Combating Sham Transactions and
Including Principals Who Have Worked
at Disciplined Firms in Calculating
Whether a Member Firm has Qualified
Under the Requirements
The principals of several firms that
have triggered the Requirements have
avoided them by simply closing their
firms and opening other firms that have
a mix of APs that do not trigger an
obligation to abide by the Requirements.
The new firms typically have APs from
the closed firm who have worked at
Disciplined Firms, but their ratios to the
overall AP population of the new firms
are below the triggering point for
imposing the Requirements.
For example, one firm, which had
been an NFA Member IB since 1987,
met the Requirements in March 2004.
One particular individual had been the
firm’s principal and an AP of the firm
since May 1987. The firm petitioned the
Waiver Committee for a complete
waiver from any obligation to abide by
the Requirements. Although that Waiver
Committee gave the firm a partial
waiver by reducing the firm’s required
minimum adjusted net capital from
$250,000 to $100,000, it did not waive
the taping or other obligations.
Rather than having the firm abide by
the Requirements, the individual simply
withdrew the firm from NFA
membership and created two new firms.
Neither of those firms triggered the
Requirements because the individual
kept their AP populations below the
triggering points by judiciously splitting
APs from Disciplined Firms between the
two firms. In addition, while the
individual is a principal of both firms,
he did not register as an AP of either of
them. By so doing, he was able to avoid
being personally counted as an AP from
a Disciplined Firm for purposes of
determining whether either firm had an
AP population that triggered the
Requirements.
The firm’s use of a sham
reorganization to avoid triggering the
Requirements is not unique. NFA is
aware of several other firms that have
used similar tactics to avoid the
Requirements.
NFA has developed a twofold
approach to combat sham
reorganizations and transfers designed
to avoid the Requirements. First, once a
firm has triggered the Requirements,
then any other firms of which the
principals of the qualifying firm are also
principals would become subject to the
Requirements.
Second, individuals who are listed
principals, but who are not APs of the
firm, will be included in the calculation
for purposes of determining whether a
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71351
firm has triggered the Requirements if
such individuals have previously
worked as an AP at a Disciplined Firm.
Principals who have not previously
worked at a Disciplined Firm will not be
included in the calculation. Otherwise,
a firm could name ‘‘straw man’’
principals, thereby increasing the firm’s
overall calculation population and
diluting the impact of the number of
individuals who have worked at
Disciplined Firms.
Counting non-AP principals who have
been APs at Disciplined Firms in the
past will cause eight current Member
firms to trigger the Requirements.
Collectively those firms have 12
individuals who are listed as principals
but are not currently registered as APs
of their respective firms. Those non-AP
principals have worked as APs at 14
different Disciplined Firms in the past,
and several of them have been
personally named in CFTC and NFA
actions. At least three other former
Members would have been added
during the past few years under the
proposed amendments to the Notice,
except that the CFTC took injunctive
actions against them for sales practice
violations and their NFA memberships
were withdrawn.
Both of the successor firms resulting
from the sham reorganization described
above would trigger the Requirements
under either of NFA’s proposed
amendments to the Notice. Since the
principal of the original firm is also a
principal of the two successor firms,
that fact would automatically trigger the
Requirements for those two firms. In
addition, since the individual
previously worked at a Disciplined Firm
and is a non-AP principal of both
successor firms, he would be included
in the calculation of whether the AP
mix at these two firms triggered the
Requirements, which would result in a
ratio that would trigger the
Requirements for both successor firms.
d. Individuals Who Had Brief Tenures at
a Disciplined Firm a Number of Years
Ago
In 2003, the Board amended the
calculation of APs that would trigger the
Requirements to exclude APs who had
worked at Disciplined Firms for less
than 60 days more than 10 years ago.
The proposed amendments to the Notice
decrease the required time away from
Disciplined Firms to five years while
retaining the requirement that the
individual must have worked a total of
less than 60 days at Disciplined Firms.
Although their impact has been
limited in terms of numbers, the 2003
modifications have had the desired
effect of allowing a few firms that hire
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
71352
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 227 / Monday, November 28, 2005 / Notices
APs who worked at Disciplined Firms
for less than 60 days more than ten
years ago to avoid triggering the
Requirements. In fact, only two firms
would have triggered the Requirements
under the former method but were not
so classified because of the 2003
modification, and neither has been
subject of any regulatory action. In its
latest review of the Requirements, NFA
revisited the question of whether further
modifications can be prudently made to
decrease the potential burden on NFA’s
membership and the Waiver Committee.
NFA studied data to examine the effect
of keeping the less than sixty days at a
Disciplined Firm requirement while
reducing the time away from
Disciplined Firms from ten to five years.
NFA’s analysis showed that reducing
the required period from 10 years to five
years while maintaining the less 60 days
cumulative tenure at Disciplined Firms
requirement yielded a population that is
of no more cause for concern than the
present system. Approximately 1,280
individuals are exempted from being
counted under the current system.
Reducing the required length of time
away from a Disciplined Firm to five
years would add approximately 275 APs
who would not have to be counted in
determining if a firm triggered the
Requirements. As was the case with the
group that has been exempted under the
current ten-year test, the number of
additional APs who would be exempted
under the proposed modification who
have been subject to any kind of
regulatory action is small.7
Based upon this data, NFA believes
that the triggering criteria as currently
set out in the Notice can be further
refined to reduce the burden on the
membership while still imposing
supervisory enhancements on firms that
pose a concern given the background of
their APs and principals at Disciplined
Firms. Not including APs and principals
who served less than sixty cumulative
days with Disciplined Firms more than
five years ago in calculating whether a
Member is subject to enhanced
supervision would also serve the
efficiency and fairness of the Waiver
Committee’s function by removing a few
7 Ten
individuals who have been subject to
actions by NFA or the CFTC are exempted from
being included in the calculation of whether a
Member has become a Telemarketing Firm under
the Notice’s current 10-year provision. The
proposed modification to reduce the required time
away from a Disciplined Firm to more than five
years would exempt six additional individuals who
have been subject to actions by NFA or the CFTC.
All charges against those individuals have been
resolved. None of the individuals has been
permanently barred from the industry and none of
them are currently registered.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 25, 2005
Jkt 208001
non-problematic firms from the waiver
process.
2. Statutory Basis
The rule change is authorized by, and
consistent with, Section 15A(k) of the
Exchange Act.8
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
The rule change will not impose any
burden on competition that is not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Exchange Act and
the Commodity Exchange Act.9
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants, or Others
NFA discussed the proposed rule
change with its Special Committee to
Study Customer Protection Issues,
which voted to recommend the
proposed rule change. NFA did not
publish the proposed rule change to the
membership for comment. NFA did not
receive comment letters concerning the
proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The proposed rule change is not
effective because the CFTC has not
approved the proposed rule change.
Within 60 days of the date of
effectiveness of the proposed rule
change, the Commission, after
consultation with the CFTC, may
summarily abrogate the proposed rule
change and require that the proposed
rule change be refiled in accordance
with the provisions of Section 19(b)(1)
of the Exchange Act.10
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
No. SR–NFA–2005–01 on the subject
line.
Paper Comments
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549–9303.
All submissions should refer to File
No. SR–NFA–2005–01. This file number
should be included on the subject line
U.S.C. 78o–3(k).
U.S.C. 1.
10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
if e-mail is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for inspection and copying in
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room. Copies of such filing will also be
available for inspection and copying at
the principal office of the NFA. All
comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You
should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No.
SR–NFA–2005–01 and should be
submitted on or before December 19,
2005.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated
authority.11
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5–6558 Filed 11–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–52807; File No. SR–NSX–
2005–06]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
National Stock Exchange; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change, and
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto, To
Amend the Exchange’s Customer
Priority Rule To Require Designated
Dealers To Implement and Maintain
Automated Compliance Systems
November 18, 2005.
I. Introduction
On July 19, 2005, the National Stock
ExchangeSM (‘‘NSX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’)
filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule
8 15
97
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
11 17
1 15
Sfmt 4703
CFR 200.30–3(a)(75).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 227 (Monday, November 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71347-71352]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-6558]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-52808; File No. SR-NFA-2005-01]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Futures Association;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Amendments to
the Interpretive Notice to NFA Compliance Rule 2-9: Enhanced
Supervisory Requirements.
November 18, 2005.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-7 under the Exchange Act,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on September 19, 2005, National Futures
Association (``NFA'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change described in Items
I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by NFA. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NFA also submitted the proposed rule change to the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC'') on September 19, 2005 for
approval. The CFTC has not yet given such approval.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
Section 15A(k) of the Exchange Act \3\ makes NFA a national
securities association for the limited purpose of regulating the
activities of Members who are registered as brokers or dealers in
security futures products under Section 15(b)(11) of the Exchange
Act.\4\ NFA's Interpretive Notice entitled ``Compliance Rule 2-9:
Enhanced Supervisory Requirements'' (``Notice'') applies to all Members
who meet the criteria and could apply to Members registered under
Section 15(b)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(k).
\4\ 15 U.S.C. 78o(b)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Notice requires a Member to adopt certain enhanced supervisory
procedures (``Requirements'') if its sales force includes a specified
number of associated persons (``APs'') who have worked at Disciplined
Firms. NFA's Special Committee to Study Customer Protection Issues
recently recommended changes to the Notice to resolve some emergent
loopholes in the Requirements and further prevent abusive sales
practices. The Board's changes:
Automatically reimpose the Requirements on any firm that,
having already completed a term under the Requirements, becomes subject
to an NFA or CFTC enforcement action alleging sales practice abuses;
Change the current obligation under the Requirements so
that a firm may petition to have the Requirements lifted or modified
after two years rather than automatically terminating;
Add a provision designed to address issues related to
firms avoiding the Requirements by making sham changes to entities and
personnel when they become subject to the Requirements;
Include listed principals who have previously worked for
Disciplined Firms in the population used to calculate whether a Member
firm has triggered an obligation to operate under the Requirements; and
Exclude APs who worked at Disciplined Firms for less than
sixty days more than five years ago from having to be counted for
purposes of calculating whether a Member who hires such an individual
is required to adopt the Requirements.
Below is the text of the proposed amendments to the Notice.
Proposed new language is in italics; proposed deletions are in
[brackets].
* * * * *
Interpretive Notice
Compliance Rule 2-9: Enhanced Supervisory Requirements
Over the years, NFA's Board of Directors has adopted strict and
effective rules to prohibit deceptive sales practices, and those rules
have been vigorously enforced by NFA's Business Conduct Committees. The
Board notes, however, that by their very nature, enforcement actions
occur after the customer abuse has taken place. The Board recognizes
that NFA's goal must be not only to punish such deception of customers
through enforcement actions
[[Page 71348]]
but to prevent it, or minimize its likelihood, through fair and
effective regulation.
One NFA rule designed to prevent abusive sales practices is NFA
Compliance Rule 2-9. Subsection (a) of this rule places a continuing
responsibility on every Member to supervise diligently its employees
and agents in all aspects of their futures activities, including sales
practices. Although NFA has not attempted to prescribe a set of
supervisory procedures to be followed by all NFA Members, NFA's Board
of Directors believes that Member firms which are identified as having
a sales force that has received questionable training in sales
practices should be required to adopt specific supervisory procedures
designed to prevent sales practice abuse. Subsection (b) authorizes the
Board of Directors to require Members, which meet certain criteria
established by the Board, to adopt specific supervisory procedures
designed to prevent abusive sales practices. Subsection (b) covers all
activities regulated by NFA, including the off-exchange retail forex
activities of Members subject to NFA Compliance Rule 2-36.
The Board believes that in order for the criteria used to identify
firms subject to the enhanced supervisory requirements to be useful,
those criteria must be specific, objective and readily measurable. The
Board also believes that any supervisory requirements imposed on a
Member must be designed to quickly identify potential problem areas so
that the Member will be able to take corrective action before any
customer abuse occurs. The purpose of this Interpretive Notice is to
set forth the criteria established by the Board and the enhanced
supervisory procedures which are required of firms meeting these
criteria.
In developing the criteria, the Board concluded that it would be
helpful to review Member firms which had been closed through
enforcement actions taken by the CFTC or NFA for deceptive sales
practices. The Board's purpose was to identify factors common to these
Member firms and probative of their sales practice problems, which
could be used to identify other Member firms with potential sales
practice problems.
One factor identified by the Board as common to these firms and
directly related to their sales practice problems is the employment
history and training of their sales forces. For many of these Members,
a significant portion of their sales force was previously employed and
trained by one or more of the other Member firms closed for fraud. The
Board believes that the employment history of a Member's sales force
and principals is a relevant factor to consider in identifying firms
with potential sales practice problems. If a Member firm is closed by
NFA or the CFTC for fraud related to widespread telemarketing or
promotional material problems or a firm is closed by NASD or the SEC
for fraud related to its sales practices regarding security futures
products as defined in Section 1a(32) of the Commodity Exchange Act
(``Act''), it is reasonable to conclude that the training and
supervision of its sales force was wholly inadequate or inappropriate.
It is also reasonable to conclude that an AP who received inadequate or
inappropriate training and supervision may have learned improper sales
tactics, which he will carry with him to his next job. Therefore, the
Board believes that a Member firm employing such a sales force must
have stringent supervision procedures in place in order to ensure that
the improper training its APs have previously received does not taint
their sales efforts on behalf of the Member.
The Board has determined that a Member will be required to adopt
the specific supervisory procedures over its sales practice activities
if:
For firms with less than five APs, 2 or more of its APs
have been employed by one or more Member firms which have been
disciplined by NFA or the CFTC (or one or more firms disciplined by any
securities industry self-regulatory organization or the SEC in matters
involving security futures products) for sales practice fraud
(``Disciplined Firms'');
For firms with at least 5 but less than 10 APs, 40 percent
or more of its APs have been employed by one or more Disciplined Firms;
For firms with at least 10 but less than 20 APs, four or
more of its APs have been employed by one or more Disciplined Firms; or
For firms with at least 20 APs, 20 percent or more of its
APs have been employed by one or more Disciplined Firms.
The Board also takes note that there have been instances in which
Members and Associates have subverted the Board's purpose in imposing
the enhanced supervisory procedures by closing a firm once it qualifies
for those procedures and opening another firm or firms that have a mix
of APs that does not meet the criteria for adopting the procedures. The
new firms typically have APs who have worked for Disciplined Firms and
who worked at the original firm, but they are redistributed so as to
keep the AP mix below the threshold for becoming subject to the
enhanced supervisory procedures. This strategy deprives the very APs
whose questionable training backgrounds gave rise to the creation of
the enhanced supervisory procedures of the benefits of those
procedures. Therefore, the Board has determined to further ensure that
the benefits of the enhanced supervisory procedures are applied where
they are of the greatest effect. Once a Member firm triggers the
aforementioned criteria and becomes obligated to adopt the enhanced
supervisory procedures, any other Members of which the principals of
that Member firm are, or become, principals must also adopt the
enhanced supervisory procedures or seek a waiver therefrom. In
addition, for purposes of determining whether a Member will be required
to adopt the enhanced supervisory procedures, principals of a firm, who
are not also APs of that firm and who have been previously employed as
an AP by one or more Disciplined Firms, shall be counted with the
firm's APs in determining whether the firm meets the aforementioned
criteria.
Additionally, for purposes of determining whether a futures
commission merchant (``FCM'') Member firm meets this requirement, an
FCM and its guaranteed introducing brokers (``GIBs'') will be
considered a single firm. Therefore, for FCMs with GIBs, the APs of its
GIBs will be treated as APs of the FCM for determining whether the FCM
meets the requirements. If the FCM Member firm meets the requirements,
then the FCM and all its GIBs shall be required to adopt the
supervisory procedures specified herein. Of course, individual FCMs or
GIBs will be required to adopt the enhanced supervisory procedures
provided the FCM or GIB meets the requirements on its own.
The Board recognizes that there is a group of APs who worked at
Disciplined Firms for only a short period of time many years ago and
who have not worked at any Disciplined Firm since. The Board's review
of the employment and disciplinary histories of such individuals
suggests that APs who served a very brief tenure with Disciplined Firms
more than [10] five years in the past do not raise the same concerns
regarding their previous supervision and training that are raised by
APs who have worked at Disciplined Firms for longer periods or at a
more recent point in time. Therefore, the Board has determined that APs
who have been previously employed by Disciplined Firms for a cumulative
total of less than 60 days and who, in addition, have not been employed
by
[[Page 71349]]
any Disciplined Firm during the [10] 5 years preceding the
determination of whether a Member firm is required to employ the
enhanced supervisory procedures established in this Interpretive Notice
shall not be counted for purposes of calculating whether the
composition of a firm's sales force triggers enhanced supervisory
requirements.
For purposes of this requirement, a Disciplined Firm is defined
very narrowly to include those firms that meet the following three
criteria:
1. the firm has been formally charged by either the CFTC or NFA
with deceptive telemarketing practices or promotional material;
2. those charges have been resolved; and
3. the firm has been permanently barred from the industry as a
result of those charges.
In addition, a Disciplined Firm shall be defined to include any
broker-dealer that, in connection with sales practices involving the
offer, purchase, or sale of any security futures product as defined in
Section 1a (32) of the Act has been expelled from membership or
participation in any securities industry self-regulatory organization
or is subject to an order of the SEC revoking its registration as a
broker-dealer.
Attached is a list of firms currently meeting the definition of a
Disciplined Firm. Although this list is current as of the date of this
Interpretive Notice, NFA [will provide] provides Members with an
updated [lists] list [as necessary] on its website at
www.nfa.futures.org.
Any Member firm meeting these criteria will be required either to
operate pursuant to a guarantee agreement or maintain an adjusted net
capital of at least $250,000 for the entire period during which the
Member is required to tape record its sales solicitations. Any Member
opting to maintain the higher level of adjusted net capital would also
be subject to the financial record-keeping and reporting requirements
applicable to FCMs. Eligible guarantor futures commission merchants are
those that meet the eligibility requirements for executing a
Supplemental Guarantor Certification Statement pursuant to NFA
Registration Rule 504(a)(2)(B). The Board believes that requiring these
Members to operate pursuant to a guarantee agreement will likely
improve the overall level of supervision at these firms.
Those Member firms meeting the criteria will be required to tape
record all telephone conversations that occur between their APs and
both existing and potential customers, including existing and potential
retail forex customers of Members subject to NFA Compliance Rule 2-36.
The Board believes that tape recording these conversations provides
these Members with the best opportunity to monitor closely the
activities of their APs and also provides these Members with complete
and immediate feedback on each AP's method of soliciting customers.
Members that are required to tape their conversations [meeting the
criteria must tape record these conversations for a period of two years
and] must retain such tapes for a period of five years from the date
each tape is created and the tapes shall be readily accessible during
the first two years of the five-year period. In retaining the tape
recorded conversations, Member firms must catalog the tapes by AP and
date. Additionally, any Member firm meeting the criteria must require
all its APs to maintain a daily log for sales solicitations which
reflects at a minimum the identity of each customer or prospective
customer the AP spoke with on each day. A Member firm must be able to
promptly produce, upon request from NFA or the CFTC, all conversations
relating to a specific AP, and only that AP, for a given date.
In addition, [for a period of two years,] those Member firms
meeting the criteria will be required to file all promotional material,
as defined in NFA Compliance Rule 2-29(i), with NFA at least 10 days
prior to its first use.
Those Members meeting the criteria shall have written supervisory
procedures that include the titles, registration status and locations
of the firm's supervisory personnel as these relate to the firm's
commodity futures business, retail forex business, and applicable
securities laws and regulations for the trading of security futures
products. Member firms shall also maintain on an internal record the
names of all persons who are designated as supervisory personnel and
the dates for which the designation is or was effective. Additionally,
a Member meeting the criteria shall by the 30th day of the month
following the end of each calendar quarter file with NFA's Compliance
Department a report relating to the Member firm's compliance with the
supervisory requirements contained herein. Member firms shall retain
the internal record and report(s) for a period of five years, the first
two years in an easily accessible place.
If an NFA Business Conduct Committee disciplinary proceeding or
Commodity Futures Trading Commission enforcement proceeding has been
filed against a Member firm required to adopt these enhanced
supervisory procedures, then the enhanced supervisory procedures will
remain in effect for the applicable time period specified or until
after the disciplinary or enforcement proceeding is closed and all
appeals are completed or the time for appeal has passed without an
appeal being filed or perfected, whichever occurs latest. In addition,
any Member that: has previously been required to adopt the enhanced
supervisory procedures; has, in fact, fulfilled that requirement either
by adopting the enhanced supervisory procedures for a prescribed period
or by receiving a full or partial waiver from the enhanced supervisory
procedures from the Telemarketing Procedures Waiver Committee; and
subsequently becomes subject to a Commodity Futures Trading Commission
or NFA enforcement or disciplinary proceeding alleging deceptive sales
practices, shall, within 30 days of being served with notice of the
action, initiate all of the enhanced supervisory procedures and may not
seek a waiver therefrom. This obligation shall continue until after the
disciplinary or enforcement proceeding is closed and all appeals are
completed or the time for appeal has passed without an appeal being
filed or perfected. Member firms shall be required to retain tapes for
the five-year period as specified above.
Any Member required to adopt these enhanced procedures may seek a
waiver of the enhanced supervisory requirements by filing a petition
with the Telemarketing Procedures Waiver Committee within 30 days of
the date of being notified by NFA that it is required to adopt the
enhanced procedures. NFA may grant such a waiver upon a satisfactory
showing that the Member's current supervisory procedures provide
effective supervision over its employees, including enabling the Member
to identify potential problem areas before customer abuse occurs.
Additionally, if a Member meets the criteria and trades security
futures products, then the Member firm must also make a satisfactory
showing that the Member's supervisory procedures ensure compliance with
all applicable securities laws and regulations. Should a Member fail to
file a petition seeking a waiver within 30 days or should it file a
petition that is denied by the Telemarketing Procedures Waiver
Committee, either in whole or in part, the Member may not petition for
a full or partial waiver again until at least two years have elapsed
since the Member adopted the required enhanced procedures.
Some of the factors that the three-member Waiver Committee may
[[Page 71350]]
consider in evaluating a waiver request include:
The total number of APs sponsored by the Member;
Number of branch offices and GIBs operated by the Member;
The experience and background of the Member's supervisory
personnel;
The number of the Member's APs who had received training
from firms which have been closed for fraud, the length of time those
APs worked for those firms and the amount of time which has elapsed
since those APs worked for the disciplined firms;
The results of any previous NFA examinations; and
The cost effectiveness of the taping requirement in light
of the firm's net worth, operating income and related telemarketing
expenses.
Conditions that the Telemarketing Procedures Waiver Committee shall
impose on any Member to which it grants a full or partial waiver
include requirements that the firm: Notify NFA of any action charging
the firm with a violation of Commodity Futures Trading Commission or
Self Regulatory Organization (``SRO'') regulations or rules; notify NFA
of any customer complaint involving sales practices or promotional
material; not change ownership; not have any material deficiencies
noted during any SRO examination; not hire additional APs from
Disciplined Firms; execute a written acknowledgement that the firm
understands the conditions of the waiver; and may include any other
conditions deemed by the Committee to be appropriate in furtherance of
the effectiveness of the enhanced supervisory procedures. Violation of
any of those conditions may serve as cause for the Telemarketing
Procedures Waiver Committee to review and amend or revoke the waiver.
A Member firm that does not comply with this Interpretive Notice
will violate NFA Compliance Rule 2-9(b) and will be subject to
disciplinary action.
* * * * *
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, NFA has prepared statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change,
burdens on competition, and comments received from Members,
participants, and others. The text of these statements may be examined
at the places specified in Item IV below. NFA has prepared summaries,
set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
1. Purpose
a. Reimposing the Requirements on Members That Have Previously
Satisfied an Obligation to Abide by Those Requirements and are
Subsequently Charged in a CFTC or NFA Enforcement Action
In 1996, NFA's Board amended the Notice to provide that, if a
Member that is currently subject to the Requirements becomes subject to
a CFTC or NFA enforcement proceeding, the Requirements will remain in
place for two years or until after the disciplinary or enforcement
proceeding is concluded, whichever is longer. This provision does not,
however, apply to Members that have already served full two-year
tenures under the Requirements when one of those firms is subsequently
charged in an enforcement action by the CFTC or NFA.
The practical effect of the current system is that some Members,
with a number of APs from Disciplined Firms, that are charged by the
CFTC or NFA in actions alleging fraudulent sales practices have a
significant window of time during the pendency of the action to
continue soliciting the public without any requirement to adopt
additional prophylactic measures such as taping. Of course, in
appropriate cases, prophylactic measures may be imposed as part of the
ultimate resolution of the CFTC's or NFA's action, but it can take many
months, or even years in cases that go through multiple layers of
appeals, to resolve such actions.
There are at least three current NFA Members that served full terms
under the Requirements and were subsequently charged in enforcement
proceedings. It is worth noting that each of those firms still retains
a sales force with histories at Disciplined Firms such that they would
require the adoption of the Requirements but for the fact that they
have already served the term of their obligation under the Notice. In
fact, at one time, one of these firms actually featured its purported
immunity from further taping requirements as an inducement in a
recruitment advertisement contained in a South Florida newspaper.
A review of one firm's history illustrates the differences in the
operations of the present system and the system being proposed. This
firm has been an introducing broker (``IB'') NFA Member since August
1994. The NFA required the Member to adopt the Requirements from
February 1995 through February 1997, when it was automatically
discharged of the Requirements.
NFA then issued a Complaint alleging deceptive sales practices
against the firm in April 1998. A settled Decision was issued at that
same time which, among other penalties, required the firm to tape all
solicitations from April 1998 through April 2000. NFA issued a second
deceptive sales practice Complaint against the firm in January 2002,
which was resolved in March 2003.
Because the firm had already fulfilled its obligation under the
Notice from 1995 to 1997, it was not required under the current system
to tape conversations with customers during the pendency of NFA's 2002
Complaint. This gave the firm a 14-month window to solicit the public
without any obligation under the Notice to adopt the enhanced
supervisory procedures--including taping. Incidentally, during this
time, the firm continued to have a mix of APs that otherwise would have
triggered the Requirements. The proposed amendments to the Notice would
have required the firm to observe all of the Telemarketing
Requirements, including taping all customer solicitations, from the
time that the 2002 Complaint was initiated until that Complaint was
completely resolved in March 2003.
The guiding principle in creating and refining the Requirements has
always been to improve the overall level of supervision at those few
Member firms which are likely to cause sales practice problems. When a
firm that has already operated under the Requirements for two years
because of the questionable backgrounds of its APs subsequently becomes
subject to an NFA or CFTC enforcement action for sales practice abuses,
there is a clear indication that the firm is, indeed, part of the group
that is likely to cause sales practice problems and that it is prudent
to require the firm to improve its level of supervision.
The proposed amendments to the Notice provide that any firm that
has previously been required to abide by the Requirements but has
fulfilled its obligation--either by abiding by the Requirements under
the Notice as it currently stands or by successfully petitioning the
Telemarketing Procedures Waiver Committee (``Waiver Committee'') to
have the Requirements lifted or modified--would again become subject to
the Requirements during the
[[Page 71351]]
pendency and through appeals of a new CFTC or NFA enforcement action.
b. Requiring Telemarketing Firms To Abide by the Telemarketing
Requirements Until They are Granted a Complete or Partial Waiver by the
Telemarketing Procedures Waiver Committee
Currently, the obligation to abide by the enhanced procedures runs
for two years, at which time it terminates automatically in most
circumstances. The proposed amendments make it more likely that firms
that continue to pose problems would remain subject to the Requirements
for longer than the current two-year tenure provided for in the Notice.
The modification puts the burden on Member Firms triggering the
criteria to demonstrate that a waiver from the Requirements is
warranted after two years rather than automatically discharging the
obligation to abide by the Requirements once the two years has passed.
The amendments also provide that a Member firm has 30 days to seek
a waiver from the Waiver Committee after it first employs an AP mix
that would trigger the Requirements.\5\ If the Waiver Committee denies
the initial petition or no petition is filed, the firm would not be
eligible to petition for a waiver again until it had served a full two
years under the Requirements. Any waiver would be subject to conditions
that, if violated, could subject the firm to revocation of the waiver
by the Waiver Committee.\6\ This additional component gives the Waiver
Committee the flexibility to revisit the issue of whether a waiver is
still warranted when there is a material change in the firm's
organization or regulatory status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The Notice provides that some of the factors that the Waiver
Committee may consider in evaluating a Member's waiver request
include: The number of APs; the number of branch offices and GIBs;
the experience and background of supervisory personnel; the number
of APs who received training at Disciplined Firms, the time those
APs worked for those firms and the amount of time which has passed
since they worked for Disciplined Firms; The results of previous NFA
examinations; and the cost effectiveness of taping.
\6\ The conditions include requirements that the firm: Notify
NFA of any action charging the firm with a violation of CFTC or SRO
regulations or rules; Notify NFA of any customer complaint involving
sales practices or promotional material; not change ownership; not
have any material deficiencies noted during any SRO examination; not
hire additional APs from Disciplined Firms; and execute a written
acknowledgement that the firm understands the conditions of the
waiver, and may include any other conditions deemed by the Waiver
Committee to be appropriate in furtherance of the effectiveness of
the enhanced supervisory procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Combating Sham Transactions and Including Principals Who Have Worked
at Disciplined Firms in Calculating Whether a Member Firm has Qualified
Under the Requirements
The principals of several firms that have triggered the
Requirements have avoided them by simply closing their firms and
opening other firms that have a mix of APs that do not trigger an
obligation to abide by the Requirements. The new firms typically have
APs from the closed firm who have worked at Disciplined Firms, but
their ratios to the overall AP population of the new firms are below
the triggering point for imposing the Requirements.
For example, one firm, which had been an NFA Member IB since 1987,
met the Requirements in March 2004. One particular individual had been
the firm's principal and an AP of the firm since May 1987. The firm
petitioned the Waiver Committee for a complete waiver from any
obligation to abide by the Requirements. Although that Waiver Committee
gave the firm a partial waiver by reducing the firm's required minimum
adjusted net capital from $250,000 to $100,000, it did not waive the
taping or other obligations.
Rather than having the firm abide by the Requirements, the
individual simply withdrew the firm from NFA membership and created two
new firms. Neither of those firms triggered the Requirements because
the individual kept their AP populations below the triggering points by
judiciously splitting APs from Disciplined Firms between the two firms.
In addition, while the individual is a principal of both firms, he did
not register as an AP of either of them. By so doing, he was able to
avoid being personally counted as an AP from a Disciplined Firm for
purposes of determining whether either firm had an AP population that
triggered the Requirements.
The firm's use of a sham reorganization to avoid triggering the
Requirements is not unique. NFA is aware of several other firms that
have used similar tactics to avoid the Requirements.
NFA has developed a twofold approach to combat sham reorganizations
and transfers designed to avoid the Requirements. First, once a firm
has triggered the Requirements, then any other firms of which the
principals of the qualifying firm are also principals would become
subject to the Requirements.
Second, individuals who are listed principals, but who are not APs
of the firm, will be included in the calculation for purposes of
determining whether a firm has triggered the Requirements if such
individuals have previously worked as an AP at a Disciplined Firm.
Principals who have not previously worked at a Disciplined Firm will
not be included in the calculation. Otherwise, a firm could name
``straw man'' principals, thereby increasing the firm's overall
calculation population and diluting the impact of the number of
individuals who have worked at Disciplined Firms.
Counting non-AP principals who have been APs at Disciplined Firms
in the past will cause eight current Member firms to trigger the
Requirements. Collectively those firms have 12 individuals who are
listed as principals but are not currently registered as APs of their
respective firms. Those non-AP principals have worked as APs at 14
different Disciplined Firms in the past, and several of them have been
personally named in CFTC and NFA actions. At least three other former
Members would have been added during the past few years under the
proposed amendments to the Notice, except that the CFTC took injunctive
actions against them for sales practice violations and their NFA
memberships were withdrawn.
Both of the successor firms resulting from the sham reorganization
described above would trigger the Requirements under either of NFA's
proposed amendments to the Notice. Since the principal of the original
firm is also a principal of the two successor firms, that fact would
automatically trigger the Requirements for those two firms. In
addition, since the individual previously worked at a Disciplined Firm
and is a non-AP principal of both successor firms, he would be included
in the calculation of whether the AP mix at these two firms triggered
the Requirements, which would result in a ratio that would trigger the
Requirements for both successor firms.
d. Individuals Who Had Brief Tenures at a Disciplined Firm a Number of
Years Ago
In 2003, the Board amended the calculation of APs that would
trigger the Requirements to exclude APs who had worked at Disciplined
Firms for less than 60 days more than 10 years ago. The proposed
amendments to the Notice decrease the required time away from
Disciplined Firms to five years while retaining the requirement that
the individual must have worked a total of less than 60 days at
Disciplined Firms.
Although their impact has been limited in terms of numbers, the
2003 modifications have had the desired effect of allowing a few firms
that hire
[[Page 71352]]
APs who worked at Disciplined Firms for less than 60 days more than ten
years ago to avoid triggering the Requirements. In fact, only two firms
would have triggered the Requirements under the former method but were
not so classified because of the 2003 modification, and neither has
been subject of any regulatory action. In its latest review of the
Requirements, NFA revisited the question of whether further
modifications can be prudently made to decrease the potential burden on
NFA's membership and the Waiver Committee. NFA studied data to examine
the effect of keeping the less than sixty days at a Disciplined Firm
requirement while reducing the time away from Disciplined Firms from
ten to five years.
NFA's analysis showed that reducing the required period from 10
years to five years while maintaining the less 60 days cumulative
tenure at Disciplined Firms requirement yielded a population that is of
no more cause for concern than the present system. Approximately 1,280
individuals are exempted from being counted under the current system.
Reducing the required length of time away from a Disciplined Firm to
five years would add approximately 275 APs who would not have to be
counted in determining if a firm triggered the Requirements. As was the
case with the group that has been exempted under the current ten-year
test, the number of additional APs who would be exempted under the
proposed modification who have been subject to any kind of regulatory
action is small.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Ten individuals who have been subject to actions by NFA or
the CFTC are exempted from being included in the calculation of
whether a Member has become a Telemarketing Firm under the Notice's
current 10-year provision. The proposed modification to reduce the
required time away from a Disciplined Firm to more than five years
would exempt six additional individuals who have been subject to
actions by NFA or the CFTC. All charges against those individuals
have been resolved. None of the individuals has been permanently
barred from the industry and none of them are currently registered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon this data, NFA believes that the triggering criteria as
currently set out in the Notice can be further refined to reduce the
burden on the membership while still imposing supervisory enhancements
on firms that pose a concern given the background of their APs and
principals at Disciplined Firms. Not including APs and principals who
served less than sixty cumulative days with Disciplined Firms more than
five years ago in calculating whether a Member is subject to enhanced
supervision would also serve the efficiency and fairness of the Waiver
Committee's function by removing a few non-problematic firms from the
waiver process.
2. Statutory Basis
The rule change is authorized by, and consistent with, Section
15A(k) of the Exchange Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
The rule change will not impose any burden on competition that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the
Exchange Act and the Commodity Exchange Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 7 U.S.C. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others
NFA discussed the proposed rule change with its Special Committee
to Study Customer Protection Issues, which voted to recommend the
proposed rule change. NFA did not publish the proposed rule change to
the membership for comment. NFA did not receive comment letters
concerning the proposed rule change.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
The proposed rule change is not effective because the CFTC has not
approved the proposed rule change. Within 60 days of the date of
effectiveness of the proposed rule change, the Commission, after
consultation with the CFTC, may summarily abrogate the proposed rule
change and require that the proposed rule change be refiled in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Exchange
Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an e-mail to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File No. SR-NFA-2005-01 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.
All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NFA-2005-01. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the NFA. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File No. SR-NFA-2005-01 and should be submitted on or before December
19, 2005.
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(75).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-6558 Filed 11-25-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P